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 →
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jun 18, 2025
6
Serious findings on record
most recent May 14, 2026
$158,403
Fines, last 3 years
13.53
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
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)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, pattern · 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): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was a pattern: more than a limited occurrence, without being widespread. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Mar 15, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · 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): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. 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.
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): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was a pattern: more than a limited occurrence, without being widespread. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Oct 28, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
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): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was a pattern: more than a limited occurrence, without being widespread. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Oct 28, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · 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): 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: Jul 7, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · 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): 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: Jan 9, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 21 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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. · from a complaintF-0689
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 complaintF-0689
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 complaintF-0684
View all 21 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
Jun 17, 2026
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. · from a complaint · F-0689
May 14, 2026
▲ 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 14, 2026
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
Dec 8, 2025
▲ 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
Mar 14, 2024
▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, 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. · from a complaint · F-0610
Mar 14, 2024
▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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. · from a complaint · F-0600
Mar 14, 2024
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
Mar 14, 2024
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. · from a complaint · F-0607
Mar 14, 2024
C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread
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 · F-0843
Sep 9, 2022
▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, pattern
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Sep 9, 2022
▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, pattern
The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents. · F-0835
Sep 9, 2022
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
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. · F-0756
Sep 9, 2022
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
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. · F-0758
Sep 9, 2022
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
Sep 9, 2022
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
Sep 9, 2022
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
Sep 9, 2022
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
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
Sep 9, 2022
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
Sep 9, 2022
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
Sep 9, 2022
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883
Sep 9, 2022
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
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. · F-0947
Inspection trend by year
Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2022
All citations:
12
Serious citations (G–L):
2
2024
All citations:
5
Serious citations (G–L):
2
2025
All citations:
1
Serious citations (G–L):
1
2026
All citations:
3
Serious citations (G–L):
1
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
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.
3 fines totaling $158,403, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.
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
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)
Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityNorth Carolina averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility:
13.53
North Carolina average:
4.01
U.S. average:
3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility:
2.47
North Carolina average:
0.64
U.S. average:
0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility:
10.93
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)
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 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 12.52, RN 2.28, weekend 10.11.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (12.52 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 5/5.
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.
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Longleaf Neuro-Medical Treatment 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.