160 Kendal Drive, Lexington, VA 24450 (opens Google Maps) · Lexington City County · (540) 463-1910· 60 certified beds · avg 40 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1967 · 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: KENDAL (5 facilities, chain avg rating 4.4★)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5 · how star ratings work →
⚠ The most recent standard health inspection was more than 2 years ago — conditions may have changed.
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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Apr 24, 2024 · 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 (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: Jun 7, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 23 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. F-0689
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
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
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 24, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual 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 |
| Apr 24, 2024 | 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. · F-0880 |
| Apr 24, 2024 | 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 |
| Apr 24, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective. · F-0881 |
| Apr 24, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. · F-0558 |
| Apr 24, 2024 | 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. · F-0607 |
| Apr 24, 2024 | 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 24, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · F-0658 |
| Apr 24, 2024 | 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. · F-0677 |
| Apr 24, 2024 | 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. · F-0695 |
| Apr 24, 2024 | 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 |
| Apr 24, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits. · F-0758 |
| Apr 24, 2024 | 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 |
| Apr 24, 2024 | 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 |
| Apr 24, 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 |
| Nov 17, 2021 | 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. · F-0689 |
| Nov 17, 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 |
| Nov 17, 2021 | 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 |
| Nov 17, 2021 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The 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 |
| Apr 4, 2019 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 4, 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 4, 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 4, 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 |
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (4 → 15).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 4 | 0 | E |
| 2021 | 4 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 15 | 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.
How to file a complaint about care →
1 fine totaling $10,033.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 24, 2024 | Fine | $10,033 |
What these staffing numbers mean →
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) | 5.74 | 3.67 | 3.95 | top 6% in Virginia; top 5% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 1.36 | 0.66 | 0.69 | top 7% in Virginia; top 6% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.96 | 3.21 | 3.50 | top 7% in Virginia; top 7% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.79 | 0.46 | 0.48 | top 9% in Virginia; top 12% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 40.0 | 48.1 | 45.8 | top 30% in Virginia; top 36% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 28.6 | 48.2 | 42.9 | top 17% in Virginia; top 26% 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 4.88, RN 1.16, weekend 4.21.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.88 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 5/5.
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: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Kendal at Lexington. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
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.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
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 →
Non profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baker, Priscilla | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/27/2017 |
| Baroco, Patrick | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2023 |
| Baroco, Patrick | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2023 |
| Branner, Elizabeth | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/18/2023 |
| Brooke, George | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/16/2024 |
| Bryd, Vassar | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/09/2024 |
| Bryd, Vassar | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/09/2024 |
| Bush, Felicia | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2010 |
| Bush, Felicia | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/17/2006 |
| Bush, Felicia | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/17/2006 |
| Day, Adam | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/02/2025 |
| Day, Adam | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/02/2025 |
| Day, Adam | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/02/2025 |
| Feldbauer, Adam | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/06/2023 |
| Feldbauer, Adam | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/06/2023 |
| Gosse, Thomas | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/15/2025 |
| Grizzle, James | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/21/2020 |
| Guill, Noelle | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/16/2025 |
| Hare, Randolph | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/20/2022 |
| Hare, Randolph | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/15/2025 |
Showing 20 of 35 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 15 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
CMS lists this facility under the chain Kendal — 5 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.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heritage Hall Lexington | 1.1 mi | East Lexington, VA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Shenandoah Valley Health and Rehab | 6.4 mi | Buena Vista, VA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Alleghany Health and Rehab | 19.1 mi | Clifton Forge, VA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| The Woodlands Health and Rehab Center | 19.4 mi | Clifton Forge, VA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 495034.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details