North CarolinaMint Hill

Clear Creek Nursing & Rehabilitation Center

10506 Clear Creek Commerce Drive, Mint Hill, NC 28227 · Mecklenburg County · 120 certified beds · avg 112 residents/day · certified since Nov 7, 2013

Part of chain: PRINCIPLE LONG TERM CARE (40 facilities, chain avg rating 3.0★)

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
4
Serious findings on record
$105,396
Fines, last 3 years
5.04
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5

The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and self-reported quality measures.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, repeated · Aug 11, 2023 · F-0690 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections.

Why it matters: Poor continence and catheter care leads to infections, skin breakdown, and loss of dignity.

Severity (K): A life-threatening or extremely dangerous situation affected several residents. Among the most serious findings an inspection can produce.

Corrected: Sep 20, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Nov 17, 2023 · F-0600

The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors.

Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.

Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Dec 27, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Aug 11, 2023 · F-0600 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors.

Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.

Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Sep 20, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Aug 11, 2023 · F-0607 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection.

Why it matters: Without working prevention policies, mistreatment is more likely to happen and less likely to be caught.

Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Sep 20, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (32)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
May 15, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
May 15, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving.
May 15, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock.
May 15, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives.
May 15, 2026B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.
Mar 21, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council.
Mar 21, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.
Mar 21, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide.
Mar 21, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need.
Mar 21, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · from a complaint
Mar 21, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it.
Mar 21, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required.
Nov 17, 2023▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors.
Nov 17, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them.
Nov 17, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide.
Nov 17, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not designate a qualified infection preventionist — a trained person responsible for running the infection prevention and control program.
Nov 17, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not allow residents to take their own medications when a clinical review showed they could do so safely. Residents have this right if their care team determines it's appropriate.
Nov 17, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council.
Nov 17, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it.
Nov 17, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock.
Nov 17, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide special eating equipment and utensils — like adaptive cups or easy-grip silverware — for residents who need them, along with appropriate help at meals.
Nov 17, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care.
Nov 17, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not honor residents' right to voice complaints without discrimination or retaliation, or did not have a working complaint process that resolves issues promptly.
Nov 17, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection.
Nov 17, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines.
Nov 17, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own.
Nov 17, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Nov 17, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives.
Nov 17, 2023B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility did not provide residents with enough to drink, or with drinks matching their needs and preferences, to keep them properly hydrated.
Aug 11, 2023▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, repeatedThe facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · from a complaint
Aug 11, 2023▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint
Aug 11, 2023▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · from a complaint

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (7 → 5).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2023204K ▲
202570E
202650E

Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.

Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)

2 fines totaling $105,396, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.

DateTypeAmount / length
Apr 23, 2024Fine$16,801
Nov 17, 2023Fine$88,595
Nov 17, 2023Payment Denial7 days from Dec 20, 2023

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

MeasureThis facilityNorth Carolina avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)5.044.013.95top 12% in North Carolina; top 13% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.760.640.69top 22% in North Carolina; top 30% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing4.803.563.50top 10% in North Carolina; top 8% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.460.410.48top 29% in North Carolina; top 39% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)56.149.045.8bottom 33% in North Carolina; bottom 23% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)65.045.742.9bottom 21% in North Carolina; bottom 16% in the U.S.

Hours are per resident per day, case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 4.23, RN 0.64, weekend 4.02. Staffing rating: 4/5.

Self-reported quality measures

Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.

Quality measures rating: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 2/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Hill, RaymondIndividualDirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2011
Hill, RobertIndividualDirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2011
Hill, StephenIndividualDirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2011
Boice, GaleIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE03/05/2018
Boice, GaleIndividualIndividual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/12/2026
Boice, GaleIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/05/2018
Hill, RaymondIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2011
Hill, RobertIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2011
Hill, StephenIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2011
Johnson, DianneIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE09/19/2013
Johnson, RobertIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/15/2025
Johnson, RobertIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/13/2025
Long, WilliamIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2025
Long, WilliamIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE05/16/2025
Principle Long Term Care, INC.OrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2011
Principle Long Term Care, INC.OrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/09/2025

Questions to ask on your visit

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Wilora Lake Healthcare6.2 miCharlotte, NC★★☆☆☆2/5abuse
Redwood Health & Rehab6.4 miCharlotte, NC★★★☆☆3/5
Asbury Health and Rehabilitation Center7.5 miCharlotte, NC★★☆☆☆2/5
Royal Park Rehabilitation & Health Center7.5 miMatthews, NC★★☆☆☆2/5
Willowbrooke Court SC Ctr at Matthews Glen7.5 miMatthews, NC★★★★★4/5
Pruitthealth-Town Center8.0 miHarrisburg, NC★★★☆☆3/5
Pine Crest Health & Rehabilitation8.3 miCharlotte, NC★☆☆☆☆1/5
White Oak Manor - Charlotte8.4 miCharlotte, NC★☆☆☆☆1/5
Peak Resources - Charlotte8.6 miCharlotte, NC★★★☆☆3/5
Matthews Health & Rehab Center8.7 miMatthews, NC★★☆☆☆2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Mint Hill →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 345562.