Deep Creek Health & Rehabilitation

1017 George Washington Highway North, Chesapeake, VA 23323 (opens Google Maps) · Chesapeake City County · (757) 485-5500· 120 certified beds · avg 104 residents/day · certified since Aug 1, 1998 · Medicare and Medicaid certified

Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →

Part of chain: ARK POST ACUTE NETWORK (4 facilities, chain avg rating 1.7★)

3/5

Health inspection rating (on-site)

inspected Sep 19, 2025

Serious findings on record

Fines, last 3 years

3.05

Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

New to these records? How to read an inspection report →

Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5 · how star ratings work →

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 quality measures from resident assessments and claims.

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 44 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

Sep 19, 2025F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The 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. · from a complaint F-0880
Sep 19, 2025F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · from a complaint F-0925
Sep 19, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint F-0689

View all 44 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.

Date	Severity	What the facility was cited for
Sep 19, 2025	F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread	The 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. · from a complaint · F-0880
Sep 19, 2025	F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread	The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · from a complaint · F-0925
Sep 19, 2025	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Sep 19, 2025	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems. · F-0756
Sep 19, 2025	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents. · from a complaint · F-0835
Sep 19, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. · from a complaint · F-0582
Sep 19, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services. · F-0645
Sep 19, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The 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. · F-0656
Sep 19, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The 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. · from a complaint · F-0677
Nov 16, 2023	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Jul 22, 2021	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The 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. · F-0578
Jul 22, 2021	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not update each resident's care assessment at least once every 3 months. These regular check-ins keep the resident's care plan matched to their current condition. · F-0638
Jul 22, 2021	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require. · F-0640
Jul 22, 2021	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing. · F-0727
Jul 22, 2021	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · F-0550
Jul 22, 2021	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not make its inspection results easy for residents to see, or made it hard for residents to contact advocacy agencies like the ombudsman. · F-0577
Jul 22, 2021	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. · F-0582
Jul 22, 2021	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility transferred or discharged a resident without a valid reason, or failed to provide the required documentation and information when moving a resident out. · F-0622
Jul 22, 2021	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal. · F-0623
Jul 22, 2021	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave. · F-0625
Jul 22, 2021	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not reassess a resident after a significant change in their condition, such as a sudden decline in health. A full new assessment is required when a resident's condition changes in a major way. · F-0637
Jul 22, 2021	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · F-0657
Jul 22, 2021	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The 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. · F-0686
Jul 22, 2021	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Jul 22, 2021	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The 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. · F-0761
Jul 22, 2021	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly. · F-0814
Jul 22, 2021	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. · F-0947
Apr 16, 2019	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility transferred or discharged a resident without a valid reason, or failed to provide the required documentation and information when moving a resident out. · F-0622
Apr 16, 2019	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal. · F-0623
Apr 16, 2019	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave. · F-0625
Apr 16, 2019	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services. · F-0645
Apr 16, 2019	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing. · F-0727
Apr 16, 2019	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not provide timely, quality laboratory tests to meet residents' needs. · F-0770
Apr 16, 2019	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. · F-0582
Apr 16, 2019	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641
Apr 16, 2019	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · F-0657
Apr 16, 2019	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684
Apr 16, 2019	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The 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. · F-0686
Apr 16, 2019	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide proper foot care for residents. Foot care includes routine care like nail trimming and attention to foot problems, which matter greatly for older adults. · F-0687
Apr 16, 2019	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697
Apr 16, 2019	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755
Apr 16, 2019	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The 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. · F-0810
Apr 16, 2019	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The 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. · F-0880
Apr 16, 2019	B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require. · F-0640

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (17 → 6).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01

All citationsSerious citations (G–L)

2019

2021

2023

2025

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

Year	Citations	Worst severity that year
2019	17	E
2021	17	E
2023	1	D
2025	9	F

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)

How to file a complaint about care →

No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.

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

What these staffing numbers mean →

Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01

This facilityVirginia averageU.S. average

Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)

3.05

3.67

3.95

Registered Nurse hours

0.46

0.66

0.69

Weekend total nurse staffing

2.59

3.21

3.50

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

Measure	This facility	Virginia avg	U.S. avg	Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)	3.05	3.67	3.95	bottom 27% in Virginia; bottom 16% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours	0.46	0.66	0.69	bottom 39% in Virginia; bottom 32% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing	2.59	3.21	3.50	bottom 24% in Virginia; bottom 12% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)	0.18	0.46	0.48	bottom 15% in Virginia; bottom 10% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)	65.9	48.1	45.8	bottom 11% in Virginia; bottom 9% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)	63.6	48.2	42.9	bottom 23% in Virginia; bottom 17% in the U.S.

Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — 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 3.05, RN 0.46, weekend 2.60.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.05 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 1/5.

Quality measures: assessments & claims

Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.

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

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Deep Creek Health & Rehabilitation. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.

Calculate a stay from a quote you receive

Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.

Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.

Before you compare prices

Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.

Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price

Who owns this facility

How to read ownership records →

Ownership records as published by CMS on 2026-08-01. CMS records when an owner joined but not when they left. Listed here and no longer involved? Tell us →

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / manager	Type	Role	Stake	Since
West Coast Commonwealth LLC	Organization	5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest	96%	03/01/2020
Bridges, Roy	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	04/01/2018
Bryant, Tameika	Individual	W-2 Managing Employee	NOT APPLICABLE	07/15/2015
Justiniano, Kimberly	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	03/01/2020

All 4 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.

Other facilities in the same chain

CMS lists this facility under the chain Ark Post Acute Network — 4 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.

The Canyons Post-Acute — Colton, CA · overall 2/5
Pines Retirement Center of Baton Rouge — Baton Rouge, LA · overall 1/5
White Oak Post Acute Care — Baton Rouge, LA · overall —/5SFF

Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking.

Questions to ask on your visit

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

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

"Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
"How is pest control handled here, and when was the last treatment or inspection?"
"What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
"Does a pharmacist review every resident's medications and chart monthly, and how are their concerns acted on?"
"What were the findings behind this administration citation, and what has leadership changed since?"
"Before any service that isn't covered by Medicare or Medicaid, how will you notify us and get our agreement?"
"How do you screen new residents for mental health and disability-related needs, and how do you provide the specialized services they require?"
"Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"

Also worth asking anywhere

"Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Virginia midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
"Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
"CMS reports 66% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
"Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

Nearby facilities (12 closest of 37 within 20 miles)

Facility	Distance	City	Overall	Inspection	Flags
Portside Health & Rehab Center	2.1 mi	Portsmouth, VA	★★★☆☆	2/5
Autumn Care of Portsmouth	3.3 mi	Portsmouth, VA	★★★★☆	3/5
Portsmouth Health and Rehab	4.4 mi	Portsmouth, VA	★☆☆☆☆	1/5
Chesapeake Health and Rehabilitation Center	5.7 mi	Chesapeake, VA	★☆☆☆☆	1/5
Harbor's Edge	5.7 mi	Norfolk, VA	★★★★★	5/5
Oak Grove Health & Rehab Center, LLC	5.9 mi	Chesapeake, VA	★★★★★	4/5
Signature Healthcare of Norfolk	6.4 mi	Norfolk, VA	★★★☆☆	2/5
Norfolk Health Care Center	6.5 mi	Norfolk, VA	★☆☆☆☆	1/5
Maimonides Health Center of Virginia Beach	7.2 mi	Virginia Beach, VA	★★☆☆☆	2/5	abuse
Northern Cardinal Rehabilitation and Nursing	7.7 mi	Suffolk, VA	★☆☆☆☆	2/5
Ghent Health and Rehabilitation	7.8 mi	Norfolk, VA	★☆☆☆☆	1/5	abuse
Autumn Care of Chesapeake	8.0 mi	Chesapeake, VA	★★★☆☆	3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Chesapeake →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 495330.