How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Graham Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center
811 Snowbird Road, Robbinsville, NC 28771 (opens Google Maps) · Graham County · (828) 479-8421· 80 certified beds · avg 57 residents/day · certified since Feb 5, 1991 · 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 →
Abuse citation flag (CMS)
Part of chain: PRINCIPLE LONG TERM CARE (40 facilities, chain avg rating 3.0★)
The abuse flag means inspectors cited this facility for abuse that caused harm to a resident within the past year, or potential for harm in each of the last two years. Source: CMS.
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Mar 5, 2026
1
Serious findings on record
most recent May 28, 2026
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.44
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
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: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · 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.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 28, 2026 · 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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 28, 2026 · 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): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: May 7, 2026 (Past Non-Compliance)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 16 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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. · from a complaint F-0600
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. · from a complaint F-0607
The facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. F-0757
View all 16 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 |
|---|---|---|
| May 28, 2026 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0600 |
| May 28, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0607 |
| Mar 5, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. · F-0757 |
| Mar 5, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Mar 5, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0644 |
| Mar 5, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Dec 19, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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. · F-0644 |
| Dec 19, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Dec 19, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Dec 19, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not educate residents and staff about COVID-19 vaccination, offer the vaccine to those eligible after that education, or properly document everyone's vaccination status. · F-0887 |
| Jul 18, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. · from a complaint · F-0602 |
| Jul 20, 2023 | 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 20, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584 |
| Jul 20, 2023 | 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 |
| Jul 20, 2023 | 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 |
| Jul 20, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · F-0867 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (4 → 4).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 5
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 5
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 1
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 5 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 5 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 6 | 1 | G ▲ |
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)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityNorth Carolina averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 4.44
North Carolina average: 4.01
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.74
North Carolina average: 0.64
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.03
North Carolina average: 3.56
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | North Carolina avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 4.44 | 4.01 | 3.95 | top 20% in North Carolina; top 25% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.74 | 0.64 | 0.69 | top 24% in North Carolina; top 33% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.03 | 3.56 | 3.50 | top 17% in North Carolina; top 22% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.60 | 0.41 | 0.48 | top 15% in North Carolina; top 23% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 70.0 | 49.0 | 45.8 | bottom 9% in North Carolina; bottom 6% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 60.0 | 45.7 | 42.9 | bottom 30% in North Carolina; bottom 22% 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 3.67, RN 0.61, weekend 3.33.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.67 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Graham Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center. 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 - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Boice, Gale | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/05/2018 |
| Boice, Gale | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/05/2018 |
| Hill, Raymond | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2011 |
| Hill, Robert | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2011 |
| Hill, Stephen | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2011 |
| Johnson, Dianne | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2011 |
| Principle Long Term Care, INC. | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2016 |
| Stephens, Donna | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/04/2025 |
| Stephens, Donna | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/07/2025 |
| Stover, Lani | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2021 |
All 10 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 Principle Long Term Care — 40 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.
- Grantsbrook Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Grantsboro, NC · overall 5/5
- Greendale Forest Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Snow Hill, NC · overall 1/5
- Greenhaven Health and Rehabilitation Center — Greensboro, NC · overall 3/5abuse
- Harmony Hall Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Kinston, NC · overall 3/5
- Harnett Woods Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Dunn, NC · overall 5/5
- Jacob's Creek Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Madison, NC · overall 5/5
- Kerr Lake Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Henderson, NC · overall 4/5
- Lake Park Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Indian Trail, NC · overall 4/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 39 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "What specific steps do you take to prevent abuse and neglect, and how are staff trained on them?"
- "How often is each resident's medication list reviewed, and who decides when a drug can be reduced or stopped?"
- "How do you record and honor each resident's treatment wishes and advance directives, and how do staff know about them?"
- "How do you identify and arrange specialized services for residents with mental health conditions or disabilities?"
- "Does a pharmacist review every resident's medications and chart monthly, and how are their concerns acted on?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 70% 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 (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Valley View Care and Rehabilitation | 8.1 mi | Andrews, NC | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Clay County Health and Rehabilitation | 18.6 mi | Hayesville, NC | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 345355.