40 Lindsay Lane, Camden, SC 29020 (opens Google Maps) · Kershaw County · (803) 572-8999· 132 certified beds · avg 127 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1972 · 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 →
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5 · 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.
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Jul 21, 2025 · F-0760 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.
Why it matters: A serious medication error can cause real harm, hospitalization, or worse.
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 · Sep 25, 2023 · F-0760 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.
Why it matters: A serious medication error can cause real harm, hospitalization, or worse.
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: Sep 19, 2023 (Past Non-Compliance)
Showing the latest 3 of 10 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not treat residents with respect and dignity, or did not let them keep and use their own personal belongings. · from a complaint F-0557
The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · from a complaint F-0583
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
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jun 11, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not treat residents with respect and dignity, or did not let them keep and use their own personal belongings. · from a complaint · F-0557 |
| Jun 11, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · from a complaint · F-0583 |
| Jun 11, 2026 | 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 |
| Jun 11, 2026 | 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 |
| Jun 11, 2026 | 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 |
| Sep 11, 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. · F-0761 |
| Jul 21, 2025 | ▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated | The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · from a complaint · F-0760 |
| Jul 19, 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 |
| Jul 19, 2024 | 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 |
| Sep 25, 2023 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · from a complaint · F-0760 |
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (2 → 1).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 1 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2024 | 2 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 2 | 1 | J ▲ |
| 2026 | 5 | 0 | D |
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 $19,460.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 25, 2023 | Fine | $19,460 |
What these staffing numbers mean →
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | South Carolina avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 4.52 | 4.08 | 3.95 | top 23% in South Carolina; top 23% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 1.02 | 0.67 | 0.69 | top 14% in South Carolina; top 15% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.97 | 3.55 | 3.50 | top 21% in South Carolina; top 24% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.74 | 0.41 | 0.48 | top 13% in South Carolina; top 14% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 28.8 | 45.9 | 45.8 | top 10% in South Carolina; top 12% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 10.3 | 42.1 | 42.9 | top 2% in South Carolina; top 4% 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 4.06, RN 0.92, weekend 3.57.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.06 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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Kershaw Health Karesh Long Term Care. 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 →
Government - County
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership Data Not Available |
All 1 owning or managing party CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Springdale Healthcare Center | 4.6 mi | Camden, SC | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Pruitthealth- Ridgeway | 8.9 mi | Ridgeway, SC | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Ridgeway Manor Healthcare Center | 17.2 mi | Ridgeway, SC | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 425080.
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details