How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Linden Place Center for Nursing and Rehabilitation
1201 Carolina Street, Greensboro, NC 27401 (opens Google Maps) · Guilford County · (336) 522-5700· 105 certified beds · avg 89 residents/day · certified since Dec 1, 1980 · 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: ALLIANCE HEALTH GROUP (12 facilities, chain avg rating 1.5★)
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jan 10, 2026
1
Serious findings on record
most recent May 26, 2023
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.82
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: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5 · 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 · May 26, 2023 · 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 · May 26, 2023 · 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: Aug 22, 2022 (Past Non-Compliance)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 30 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint F-0584
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
The facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council. F-0565
View all 30 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jan 10, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584 |
| Jan 10, 2026 | 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 |
| Jan 10, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council. · F-0565 |
| Jan 10, 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 10, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Jan 10, 2026 | 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, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0677 |
| Jan 10, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0686 |
| Jan 10, 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 10, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. · from a complaint · F-0759 |
| Jan 10, 2026 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). · F-0628 |
| Jan 10, 2026 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require. · F-0640 |
| Sep 12, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0561 |
| Sep 12, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · from a complaint · F-0580 |
| Sep 12, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0684 |
| Jun 18, 2024 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584 |
| Jun 18, 2024 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · from a complaint · F-0925 |
| May 6, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0656 |
| May 6, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0867 |
| May 26, 2023 | ▲ 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 |
| May 26, 2023 | E · Potential for more than 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 |
| May 26, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · F-0867 |
| May 26, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · F-0925 |
| May 26, 2023 | 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 |
| May 26, 2023 | 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 |
| May 26, 2023 | 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 |
| May 26, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. · F-0757 |
| May 26, 2023 | 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 |
| May 26, 2023 | 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 |
| May 26, 2023 | 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 increased between the last two inspection cycles (3 → 12).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2024
All citations: 7
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 12
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 11 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2024 | 7 | 0 | D |
| 2026 | 12 | 0 | E |
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 facilityNorth Carolina averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.82
North Carolina average: 4.01
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.31
North Carolina average: 0.64
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.45
North Carolina average: 3.56
U.S. average: 3.50
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) | 3.82 | 4.01 | 3.95 | top 40% in North Carolina; top 48% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.31 | 0.64 | 0.69 | bottom 10% in North Carolina; bottom 11% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.45 | 3.56 | 3.50 | top 37% in North Carolina; top 45% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.13 | 0.41 | 0.48 | bottom 4% in North Carolina; bottom 3% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 36.0 | 49.0 | 45.8 | top 19% in North Carolina; top 26% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 36.4 | 45.7 | 42.9 | top 34% in North Carolina; top 40% 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 3.66, RN 0.30, weekend 3.31.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.66 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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: —/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Linden Place Center for Nursing and Rehabilitation. 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 - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alliance Health Group LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/16/2025 |
| Alliance Health Group LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/16/2025 |
| Coalition Group LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/16/2025 |
| Emanuel, Yosef | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2024 |
| Simpson, Malik | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2024 |
All 5 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 Alliance Health Group — 12 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.
- Magnolia Gardens Center for Nursing and Rehabilita — Thomasville, NC · overall 3/5
- Mill Creek Center for Nursing and Rehabilitation — Winston-Salem, NC · overall 2/5
- Piedmont Hills Center for Nursing and Rehab — Greensboro, NC · overall 1/5
- Pine Acres Center for Nursing and Rehabilitation — Lexington, NC · overall 1/5
- Senior Citizens Home — Henderson, NC · overall 1/5
- Willow Valley Center for Nursing and Rehabilitatio — Winston-Salem, NC · overall 1/5abuse
- Camellia Gardens Center for Nursing and Rehab — Henderson, NC · overall 1/5
- Cedar Hills Center for Nursing and Rehabilitation — Clemmons, NC · overall 1/5SFF
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 11 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?"
- "Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "Does your facility have an active resident council, and how does management respond to its concerns?"
- "How do you record and honor each resident's treatment wishes and advance directives, and how do staff know about them?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "How many aides are on each shift, and how do you make sure every resident gets timely help with bathing, dressing, and meals?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 36% 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 (12 closest of 30 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heartland Living & Rehab at the Moses H Cone Memor | 0.4 mi | Greensboro, NC | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Blumenthal Health and Rehabilitation Center | 2.9 mi | Greensboro, NC | —/5 | abuseSFF | |
| Kindred Hospital East Greensboro | 2.9 mi | Greensboro, NC | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Maple Grove Health and Rehabilitation Center | 3.5 mi | Greensboro, NC | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Piedmont Hills Center for Nursing and Rehab | 3.5 mi | Greensboro, NC | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Whitestone a Masonic and Eastern Star Community | 3.7 mi | Greensboro, NC | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Guilford Health Care Center | 3.7 mi | Greensboro, NC | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Greenhaven Health and Rehabilitation Center | 4.7 mi | Greensboro, NC | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Friends Homes at Guilford | 5.6 mi | Greensboro, NC | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Camden Health and Rehabilitation | 5.8 mi | Greensboro, NC | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Ashton Health and Rehabilitation | 6.9 mi | McLeansville, NC | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Adams Farm Living & Rehabilitation | 7.9 mi | Jamestown, NC | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Guilford, NC — 20 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Maryfield Nursing Home — High Point, NC · overall 5/5
- Meridian Center — High Point, NC · overall 1/5
- River Landing at Sandy Ridge — Colfax, NC · overall 5/5
- The Shannon Gray Rehabilitation & Recovery Center — Jamestown, NC · overall 3/5
- Westchester Manor at Providence Place — High Point, NC · overall 3/5
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 345014.