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 →
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 Apr 9, 2026
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Apr 9, 2026
$4,119
Fines, last 3 years
3.54
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
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 · Apr 9, 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 6, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 18 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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 complaintF-0600
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not properly hold, secure, and manage residents' personal money that was deposited with it for safekeeping. Facilities holding residents' funds must keep careful, honest accounts. F-0568
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
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
View all 18 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
Apr 9, 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
Apr 9, 2026
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not properly hold, secure, and manage residents' personal money that was deposited with it for safekeeping. Facilities holding residents' funds must keep careful, honest accounts. · F-0568
Apr 9, 2026
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
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
Apr 9, 2026
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
Apr 9, 2026
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
Feb 3, 2026
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The 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 20, 2025
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. · from a complaint · F-0584
Feb 20, 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
Feb 20, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The 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. · from a complaint · F-0695
Feb 20, 2025
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. · from a complaint · F-0761
Feb 20, 2025
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. · from a complaint · F-0880
Aug 24, 2023
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
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
Aug 24, 2023
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. · from a complaint · F-0623
Aug 24, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not let a resident return after a hospital stay or approved leave that lasted longer than the facility's bed-hold policy allowed. Residents generally have the right to come back to the next available bed. · from a complaint · F-0626
Aug 24, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
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
Aug 24, 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. · F-0689
Aug 24, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842
Aug 24, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area. · F-0919
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (5 → 5).
Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations:
7
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2025
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
7
0
F
2025
5
0
D
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.
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.
Date
Type
Amount / length
Aug 24, 2023
Fine
$4,119
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityGeorgia averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility:
3.54
Georgia average:
3.54
U.S. average:
3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility:
0.09
Georgia average:
0.50
U.S. average:
0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility:
3.30
Georgia average:
3.09
U.S. average:
3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Measure
This facility
Georgia avg
U.S. avg
Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
3.54
3.54
3.95
top 43% in Georgia; bottom 39% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours
0.09
0.50
0.69
bottom 1% in Georgia; bottom 1% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing
3.30
3.09
3.50
top 27% in Georgia; bottom 47% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)
0.11
0.35
0.48
bottom 3% in Georgia; bottom 2% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)
34.6
46.0
45.8
top 21% in Georgia; top 23% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)
—
44.5
42.9
—
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 3.47, RN 0.09, weekend 3.23.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.47 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.
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Jeffersonville Care Center LLC. 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.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 115727.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).
The Care File
Visit checklist — Jeffersonville Care Center LLC
113 Spring Valley Road, Jeffersonville, GA 31044 · (478) 298-6700
Health inspection rating 2/5 · CMS overall 2/5 · ▲ FEDERAL ABUSE CITATION FLAG· Fines (3y): $4,119
Most serious findings on record:
▲ Apr 9, 2026 (F-0600, 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.
Questions for the administrator:
☐ "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
☐ "How do you manage residents' personal funds, and how often do families receive an accounting?"
☐ "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
☐ "How do you identify and arrange specialized services for residents with mental health conditions or disabilities?"
☐ "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
☐ "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
☐ "Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
☐ "How many aides are on each shift, and how do you make sure every resident gets timely help with bathing, dressing, and meals?"
☐ "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 35% 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?"
While you're there, notice:
☐ Smell and cleanliness in hallways, not just the lobby
☐ How staff speak to residents; call lights answered promptly
☐ Residents up, dressed, and engaged (visit mealtimes and a weekend if you can)
Data: CMS Provider Data Catalog, version 2026-08-01 · CCN 115727 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)