Tennessee ›Nashville

Green Hills Center for Rehabilitation and Healing

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

3939 Hillsboro Circle, Nashville, TN 37215 (opens Google Maps) · Davidson County · (615) 297-2100· 150 certified beds · avg 139 residents/day · certified since May 9, 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 →

Part of chain: CARERITE CENTERS (34 facilities, chain avg rating 3.6★)

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Apr 29, 2026
7
Serious findings on record
most recent Feb 6, 2024
$16,801
Fines, last 3 years
3.56
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: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5 · 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)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Feb 5, 2024 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.

Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.

Severity (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. 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: Mar 5, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Feb 7, 2020 · F-0656

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.

Why it matters: Without a complete, working care plan, important needs can slip through the cracks and no one is accountable for results.

Severity (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. 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.

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Feb 7, 2020 · F-0689

The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.

Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.

Severity (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. 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.

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Feb 6, 2024 · 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: Mar 5, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Feb 6, 2024 · F-0656 · triggered by a complaint

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.

Why it matters: Without a complete, working care plan, important needs can slip through the cracks and no one is accountable for results.

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: Mar 5, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Feb 6, 2024 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.

Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.

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: Mar 5, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Feb 6, 2024 · F-0697 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.

Why it matters: Untreated pain causes needless suffering and can lead to depression, poor sleep, and declining health.

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: Mar 5, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 35 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    The facility did not properly notify residents about the balance of money it holds for them, or failed to return those funds when a resident was discharged, evicted, or died. F-0569

  2. E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern

    The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. F-0812

  3. 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

View all 35 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.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Apr 29, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not properly notify residents about the balance of money it holds for them, or failed to return those funds when a resident was discharged, evicted, or died. · F-0569
Feb 4, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812
Feb 4, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 4, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · F-0583
Feb 4, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 4, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. · F-0676
Feb 4, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 4, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Feb 4, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0690
Feb 4, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 4, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 6, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 6, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0656
Feb 6, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 6, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · from a complaint · F-0697
Feb 6, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Feb 6, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0550
Feb 6, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint · F-0609
Feb 6, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · from a complaint · F-0610
Feb 6, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility transferred or discharged a resident without a valid reason, or failed to provide the required documentation and information when moving a resident out. · from a complaint · F-0622
Feb 6, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684
Feb 6, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · from a complaint · F-0867
Feb 5, 2024▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolatedThe 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
Feb 7, 2020▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolatedThe 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
Feb 7, 2020▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Feb 7, 2020F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents. · F-0835
Feb 7, 2020E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · F-0610
Feb 7, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 7, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · F-0609
Feb 7, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 7, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0690
Feb 7, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · F-0726
Feb 7, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day. · F-0732
Feb 7, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804
Feb 7, 2020D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (10 → 1).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2020
All citations: 12
Serious citations (G–L): 2
2024
All citations: 12
Serious citations (G–L): 5
2025
All citations: 10
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0

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

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2020122J ▲
2024125J ▲
2025100E
202610D

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 →

2 fines totaling $16,801, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.

Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.

DateTypeAmount / length
Feb 5, 2024Fine$8,400
Feb 5, 2024Fine$8,401
Feb 5, 2024Payment Denial6 days from Feb 28, 2024

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 facilityTennessee averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.56
Tennessee average: 3.62
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.47
Tennessee average: 0.57
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.22
Tennessee average: 3.15
U.S. average: 3.50

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

MeasureThis facilityTennessee avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)3.563.623.95top 42% in Tennessee; bottom 40% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.470.570.69bottom 42% in Tennessee; bottom 34% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.223.153.50top 35% in Tennessee; bottom 43% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.290.390.48bottom 41% in Tennessee; bottom 31% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)61.248.945.8bottom 17% in Tennessee; bottom 15% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)36.843.242.9top 39% in Tennessee; top 41% 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 4.01, RN 0.53, weekend 3.62.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.01 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.

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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Green Hills Center for Rehabilitation and Healing. 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 / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
MD Friedman Family 2017 TrustOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest39%08/01/2019
Neal Einhorn Family 2017 TrustOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest39%08/01/2019
Schwartz, EliezerIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest7%08/01/2019
Cannon, MackenzieIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE11/10/2025
Cannon, MackenzieIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/10/2025
Einhorn, NealIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE08/01/2019
Friedman, MarkIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE08/01/2019
Friedman, MarkIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE08/01/2019
MD Friedman Family 2017 TrustOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE08/01/2019
Neal Einhorn Family 2017 TrustOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE08/01/2019
Rossi, AlexandriaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE12/14/2024
Rossi, AlexandriaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/14/2024
Schwartz, EliezerIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE08/01/2019
Williams, JohnIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE05/06/1997
Williams, JohnIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE05/06/1997
Zucker, YossieIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE08/01/2019

All 16 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 Carerite Centers — 34 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.

Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 33 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.

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.

  • "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
  • "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
  • "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
  • "How do you assess and manage residents' pain, especially for those who have trouble communicating?"
  • "If you manage my family member's personal funds, how often will we get statements and how quickly are funds returned?"
  • "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
  • "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
  • "How do you protect residents' privacy, both in their medical records and in day-to-day care?"

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 61% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 16 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
  • "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

Nearby facilities (12 closest of 29 within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Woodcrest at Blakeford0.7 miNashville, TN★★★★☆3/5
The Health Center at Richland Place1.6 miNashville, TN★★★☆☆2/5
Nashville Center for Rehabilitation and Healing LL3.0 miNashville, TN★★☆☆☆2/5
Advanced Health Care of Nashville4.0 miNashville, TN—/5
West Meade Place4.0 miNashville, TN★★★★★4/5
Trevecca Center for Rehabilitation and Healing LLC4.8 miNashville, TN★★★☆☆3/5
Bethany Center for Rehabilitation and Healing LLC6.9 miNashville, TN★☆☆☆☆2/5
Somerfield at the Heritage7.2 miBrentwood, TN★★★★★5/5
Eaton Creek Post Acute7.4 miNashville, TN—/5SFF
The Meadows8.7 miNashville, TN★★★☆☆2/5
NHC Place at the Trace9.4 miNashville, TN★★★★★4/5
Whites Creek Wellness and Rehabilitation Center9.5 miWhites Creek, TN★★★☆☆3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Davidson, TN — 20 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.

Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.

All facilities in Nashville →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 445267.

Your research

Viewed & saved homes

Kept in this browser tab for this session. Choose to remember them only on a device you trust. Opening a record or comparison sends its usual page request.

Selected for comparison

Recently viewed

Prices entered in a cost worksheet stay on that page and are not saved. Privacy details