3315 Faith Church Road, Indian Trail, NC 28079 (opens Google Maps) · Union County · (704) 882-3420· 120 certified beds · avg 104 residents/day · certified since Jun 7, 2000 · 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: PRINCIPLE LONG TERM CARE (40 facilities, chain avg rating 3.0★)
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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Apr 24, 2025 · F-0686 · triggered by a complaint
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.
Why it matters: Bedsores are painful, can become deeply infected, and in serious cases can be life-threatening.
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 16, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Nov 3, 2023 · 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: Nov 27, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 5, 2023 · F-0697
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: Jun 2, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 5, 2023 · F-0725
The facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care.
Why it matters: Understaffing means longer waits for help, missed care, and higher risk of falls and other harm.
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 2, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 22 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
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
The facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council. F-0565
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jan 22, 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 |
| Jan 22, 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. · F-0695 |
| Jan 22, 2026 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council. · F-0565 |
| Apr 24, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual 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. · from a complaint · F-0686 |
| Oct 24, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · F-0583 |
| Oct 24, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · F-0679 |
| Oct 24, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide proper foot care for residents. Foot care includes routine care like nail trimming and attention to foot problems, which matter greatly for older adults. · F-0687 |
| Oct 24, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · from a complaint · F-0804 |
| Oct 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. · from a complaint · F-0812 |
| Oct 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 |
| Oct 24, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · from a complaint · F-0692 |
| Oct 24, 2024 | C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| Oct 24, 2024 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Oct 24, 2024 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · F-0655 |
| Nov 3, 2023 | ▲ 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. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| May 5, 2023 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697 |
| May 5, 2023 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · F-0725 |
| May 5, 2023 | 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 |
| May 5, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · F-0552 |
| May 5, 2023 | 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 |
| May 5, 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 |
| May 5, 2023 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council. · F-0565 |
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (10 → 3).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 8 | 3 | G ▲ |
| 2024 | 10 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 1 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2026 | 3 | 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 →
2 fines totaling $34,624.
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, 2025 | Fine | $25,879 |
| Nov 3, 2023 | Fine | $8,745 |
What these staffing numbers mean →
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) | 4.66 | 4.01 | 3.95 | top 16% in North Carolina; top 19% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 1.02 | 0.64 | 0.69 | top 11% in North Carolina; top 15% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.25 | 3.56 | 3.50 | top 14% in North Carolina; top 16% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.59 | 0.41 | 0.48 | top 16% in North Carolina; top 24% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 34.5 | 49.0 | 45.8 | top 17% in North Carolina; top 23% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 33.3 | 45.7 | 42.9 | top 28% in North Carolina; top 33% 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 4.02, RN 0.88, weekend 3.66.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.02 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 Lake Park Nursing and Rehabilitation Center. 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 →
For profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Barnabei, Robert | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2022 |
| 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 |
| Jackson, Rafael | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/24/2024 |
| Jackson, Rafael | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/03/2025 |
| Johnson, Dianne | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2011 |
| Principle Long Term Care, INC. | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2011 |
All 10 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
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.
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.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Royal Park Rehabilitation & Health Center | 4.2 mi | Matthews, NC | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Willowbrooke Court SC Ctr at Matthews Glen | 4.2 mi | Matthews, NC | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Matthews Health & Rehab Center | 6.0 mi | Matthews, NC | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Pruitthealth-Union Pointe | 6.1 mi | Monroe, NC | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Brookdale Carriage Club Providence | 9.3 mi | Charlotte, NC | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Jesse Helms Nursing Center | 9.3 mi | Monroe, NC | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Clear Creek Nursing & Rehabilitation Center | 9.5 mi | Mint Hill, NC | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Monroe Rehabilitation Center | 9.5 mi | Monroe, NC | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Sardis Oaks | 10.4 mi | Charlotte, NC | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Stratford Manor Health & Rehab | 10.6 mi | Monroe, NC | ★★★☆☆ | 4/5 | |
| Redwood Health & Rehab | 10.8 mi | Charlotte, NC | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Wilora Lake Healthcare | 11.2 mi | Charlotte, NC | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
CMS records place this facility in Union, NC — 7 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.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 345502.
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details