Longleaf Neuro-Medical Treatment Center
4761 Ward Boulevard, Wilson, NC 27893 · Wilson County · 248 certified beds · avg 81 residents/day · certified since Jan 8, 1979
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5
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, repeated · Mar 14, 2024 · F-0610 · triggered by a complaint
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.
Why it matters: When allegations aren't investigated, harm to residents can continue unchecked.
Severity (K): A life-threatening or extremely dangerous situation affected several residents. Among the most serious findings an inspection can produce.
Corrected: Mar 15, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, one-off · Mar 14, 2024 · 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: Feb 21, 2024 (Past Non-Compliance)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, repeated · Sep 9, 2022 · F-0689
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 (K): A life-threatening or extremely dangerous situation affected several residents. Among the most serious findings an inspection can produce.
Corrected: Oct 28, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, repeated · Sep 9, 2022 · F-0835
The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents.
Why it matters: Poor administration often shows up as understaffing, supply shortages, and care problems across the whole facility.
Severity (K): A life-threatening or extremely dangerous situation affected several residents. Among the most serious findings an inspection can produce.
Corrected: Oct 28, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · May 14, 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: Jul 7, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Dec 8, 2025 · 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: Jan 9, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (21)
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Jun 17, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| May 14, 2026 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | 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 |
| May 14, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Dec 8, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | 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 |
| Mar 14, 2024 | ▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, repeated | 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. · from a complaint |
| Mar 14, 2024 | ▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, one-off | 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. · from a complaint |
| Mar 14, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. |
| Mar 14, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. · from a complaint |
| Mar 14, 2024 | C · Minimal risk, facility-wide | The facility did not have an agreement with at least one Medicare- or Medicaid-certified hospital to ensure residents can be transferred quickly when they need hospital care. · from a complaint |
| Sep 9, 2022 | ▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, repeated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| Sep 9, 2022 | ▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, repeated | The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents. |
| Sep 9, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems. |
| Sep 9, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits. |
| Sep 9, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. |
| Sep 9, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Sep 9, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. |
| Sep 9, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Sep 9, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. |
| Sep 9, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Sep 9, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. |
| Sep 9, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. |
Inspection trend by year
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 12 | 2 | K ▲ |
| 2024 | 5 | 2 | K ▲ |
| 2025 | 1 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2026 | 3 | 1 | G ▲ |
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)
3 fines totaling $158,403, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| May 14, 2026 | Fine | $20,440 |
| Dec 8, 2025 | Fine | $12,948 |
| Dec 8, 2025 | Payment Denial | 6 days from Jan 3, 2026 |
| Mar 14, 2024 | Fine | $125,015 |
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
| Measure | This facility | North Carolina avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 13.53 | 4.01 | 3.95 | top 1% in North Carolina; top 1% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 2.47 | 0.64 | 0.69 | top 1% in North Carolina; top 1% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 10.93 | 3.56 | 3.50 | top 1% in North Carolina; top 1% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 1.36 | 0.41 | 0.48 | top 2% in North Carolina; top 2% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 25.9 | 49.0 | 45.8 | top 6% in North Carolina; top 8% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 20.0 | 45.7 | 42.9 | top 12% in North Carolina; top 13% in the U.S. |
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 12.52, RN 2.28, weekend 10.11. Staffing rating: 5/5.
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: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 2/5 · short-stay residents: —/5
Who owns this facility
Government - State
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership Data Not Available |
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "If someone reports suspected abuse or neglect here, what happens in the first 24 hours?"
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "What were the findings behind this administration citation, and what has leadership changed since?"
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "How does your quality committee work, and can you give an example of a problem it recently identified and fixed?"
- "What specific steps do you take to prevent abuse and neglect, and how are staff trained on them?"
- "Which hospital do you partner with for transfers, and how quickly can a resident be moved in an emergency?"
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"
Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wilson Rehabilitation and Nursing Center | 0.8 mi | Wilson, NC | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Wilson Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center | 2.7 mi | Wilson, NC | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Wilson Pines Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | 2.7 mi | Wilson, NC | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Harmony Park at Wilson | 3.2 mi | Wilson, NC | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Rocky Mount Rehabilitation Center | 16.5 mi | Rocky Mount, NC | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Autumn Care of Nash | 17.1 mi | Nashville, NC | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| The Lodge at Rocky Mount Health and Rehabilitation | 17.5 mi | Rocky Mount, NC | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| The Carrolton of Nash | 18.3 mi | Rocky Mount, NC | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Pruitthealth-Farmville | 19.8 mi | Farmville, NC | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 345192.