South CarolinaSeneca

Lila Doyle Post Acute

101 Lila Doyle Drive, Seneca, SC 29672 · Oconee County · 120 certified beds · avg 94 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1971 · 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: THE ENSIGN GROUP (342 facilities, chain avg rating 3.2★)

3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
2
Serious findings on record
$22,838
Fines, last 3 years
3.67
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5

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 self-reported quality measures.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, one-off · Nov 5, 2023 · 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 (J): Inspectors found a situation that put a resident's life or safety in immediate danger, affecting one or a few residents. The facility must fix it immediately — these citations often come with large fines.

Corrected: Nov 24, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Feb 4, 2026 · 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): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Feb 25, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (8)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Feb 4, 2026▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Nov 5, 2023▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, one-offThe 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
Nov 5, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Jul 13, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jul 13, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jul 13, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jul 13, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Jul 13, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations.

Inspection trend by year

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202371J ▲
202611G ▲

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)

2 fines totaling $22,838.

DateTypeAmount / length
Feb 4, 2026Fine$13,520
Nov 5, 2023Fine$9,318

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

MeasureThis facilitySouth Carolina avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)3.674.083.95bottom 38% in South Carolina; bottom 45% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.500.670.69bottom 41% in South Carolina; bottom 38% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.223.553.50bottom 44% in South Carolina; bottom 43% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.390.410.48top 38% in South Carolina; bottom 50% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)0.045.945.8
RN turnover (%)0.042.142.9

Hours are per resident per day, 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 3.71, RN 0.51, weekend 3.26. Staffing rating: 2/5.

Self-reported quality measures

Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.

Quality measures rating: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Burnam, SoonIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2022
Hartwell Health Holdings LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2022
Peterson, ForrestIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2022
Sato, AmiIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE09/09/2024
Smith, StephenIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE11/28/2023
Smith, StephenIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/09/2025
Standard Bearer Healthcare Op LPOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2022
Thatcher, BrentIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2022
Thatcher, BrentIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2022
Thatcher, BrentIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2022
Thatcher, BrentIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/09/2025
The Ensign Group INCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2022

Questions to ask on your visit

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Seneca Health & Rehabilitation Center3.0 miSeneca, SC★★★☆☆3/5
Pruitthealth - Pickens12.8 miSix Mile, SC★★★★★4/5

Compare this facility with the 2 closest →

All facilities in Seneca →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 425075.