How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Lake Way Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center
2607 Main Street, Benton, KY 42025 (opens Google Maps) · Marshall County · (270) 527-3296· 96 certified beds · avg 86 residents/day · certified since Apr 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: PRINCIPLE LONG TERM CARE (40 facilities, chain avg rating 3.0★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jul 9, 2025
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Jan 10, 2019
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.30
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
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: ★★★★☆4/5 · 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.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jan 10, 2019 · F-0600
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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jan 10, 2019 · F-0600
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: Feb 23, 2019 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 23 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not designate a qualified infection preventionist — a trained person responsible for running the infection prevention and control program. F-0882
The facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. F-0602
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
View all 23 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jul 9, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not designate a qualified infection preventionist — a trained person responsible for running the infection prevention and control program. · F-0882 |
| Oct 8, 2020 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. · F-0602 |
| Oct 8, 2020 | 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 |
| Oct 8, 2020 | 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 |
| Jan 10, 2019 | ▲ 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. · F-0600 |
| Jan 10, 2019 | 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 |
| Jan 10, 2019 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Jan 10, 2019 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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 |
| Jan 10, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time. · F-0561 |
| Jan 10, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0656 |
| Jan 10, 2019 | 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 |
| Jan 10, 2019 | 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 |
| Jan 10, 2019 | 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 |
| Jan 10, 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 |
| Jan 10, 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 |
| Jan 10, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline. · F-0688 |
| Jan 10, 2019 | 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 |
| Jan 10, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Jan 10, 2019 | 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 |
| Jan 10, 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 |
| Jan 10, 2019 | C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. · F-0582 |
| Jan 10, 2019 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0623 |
| Jan 10, 2019 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave. · F-0625 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (3 → 1).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2019
All citations: 19
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2020
All citations: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 19 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2020 | 3 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 1 | 0 | F |
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)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityKentucky averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.30
Kentucky average: 3.71
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.83
Kentucky average: 0.74
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 2.83
Kentucky average: 3.27
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | Kentucky avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 3.30 | 3.71 | 3.95 | bottom 46% in Kentucky; bottom 26% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.83 | 0.74 | 0.69 | top 26% in Kentucky; top 25% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 2.83 | 3.27 | 3.50 | bottom 39% in Kentucky; bottom 22% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.65 | 0.53 | 0.48 | top 23% in Kentucky; top 19% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 51.2 | 46.4 | 45.8 | bottom 31% in Kentucky; bottom 34% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 40.0 | 41.8 | 42.9 | bottom 48% in Kentucky; top 46% 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 3.50, RN 0.88, weekend 3.00.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.50 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 2/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Lake Way Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center. 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 / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Boice, Gale | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/05/2018 |
| Boice, Gale | Individual | Individual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/12/2025 |
| 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 |
| Hood, Lynn | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/08/2017 |
| Johnson, Dianne | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2011 |
| McClellan, Randall | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2025 |
| Principle Long Term Care, INC. | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2011 |
| Zetter, David | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2023 |
All 11 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 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.
- Somerwoods Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center — Somerset, KY · overall 1/5
- Ayden Court Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Ayden, NC · overall 1/5
- Barbour Court Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Smithfield, NC · overall 4/5
- Bethany Woods Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Albemarle, NC · overall 3/5
- Carolina Rivers Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Jacksonville, NC · overall 4/5
- Cherry Point Bay Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Havelock, NC · overall 2/5
- Chowan River Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Edenton, NC · overall 4/5
- Clear Creek Nursing & Rehabilitation Center — Mint Hill, NC · overall 2/5
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.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "Who is your infection preventionist, and what training do they have?"
- "What safeguards do you have to protect residents' money and belongings, and what happens when something goes missing?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "How do you keep residents' medical records accurate, complete, and secure?"
- "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?"
- "If someone reports suspected abuse or neglect here, what happens in the first 24 hours?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Kentucky midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 51% 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?"
Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Calvert City Convalescent Center | 13.1 mi | Calvert City, KY | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Oakview Nursing & Rehabilitation Center | 13.2 mi | Calvert City, KY | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Spring Creek Post-Acute Rehabilitation Center | 17.0 mi | Murray, KY | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Green Acres Healthcare | 17.6 mi | Mayfield, KY | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Mills Nursing & Rehabilitation | 18.9 mi | Mayfield, KY | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| River's Bend Retirement Community | 20.0 mi | Kuttawa, KY | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 185258.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).