Nans Pointe Rehabilitation and Nursing
200 West Constance Road, Suffolk, VA 23434 · Suffolk City County · 148 certified beds · avg 121 residents/day · certified since Jun 28, 1991
Part of chain: EASTERN HEALTHCARE GROUP (18 facilities, chain avg rating 1.5★)
1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
1
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.72
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5
⚠ The most recent standard health inspection was more than 2 years ago — conditions may have changed.
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)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Jul 12, 2022 · F-0697
The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.
Why it matters: Untreated pain causes needless suffering and can lead to depression, poor sleep, and declining health.
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: Aug 19, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (51)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 25, 2026 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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 |
| Apr 25, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents. · from a complaint |
| Apr 25, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not have a proper governing body legally responsible for its policies and operations, or that body failed to appoint a properly licensed administrator to manage the facility. · from a complaint |
| Apr 25, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Oct 23, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not make its inspection results easy for residents to see, or made it hard for residents to contact advocacy agencies like the ombudsman. · from a complaint |
| Oct 23, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Oct 23, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide or obtain laboratory tests when a doctor ordered them, or did not promptly report the results back to the doctor who ordered them. · from a complaint |
| Oct 23, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide or arrange specialized rehabilitation services — such as physical, occupational, or speech therapy — for residents who needed them. · from a complaint |
| Oct 23, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Jul 12, 2022 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. |
| Jul 12, 2022 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. |
| Jul 12, 2022 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Jul 12, 2022 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly. |
| Jul 12, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. |
| Jul 12, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. |
| Jul 12, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. |
| Jul 12, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not bring in qualified outside professionals to provide a required service when it didn't have a qualified professional on staff. |
| Jul 12, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility's quality committee — the internal group responsible for finding and fixing care problems — did not have the required members or did not meet at least every three months. |
| Jul 12, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. |
| Jul 12, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not perform required COVID-19 testing on residents and staff. |
| Jul 12, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. |
| Jul 12, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. |
| Jul 12, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jul 12, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility required residents to give up Medicare or Medicaid benefits or pay privately as a condition of moving in, or failed to tell residents which types of care it does not provide. Both practices are against the rules. |
| Jul 12, 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. |
| Jul 12, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services. |
| Jul 12, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jul 12, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jul 12, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing. |
| Jul 12, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them. |
| Jul 12, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective. |
| Jul 12, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not designate a qualified infection preventionist — a trained person responsible for running the infection prevention and control program. |
| Jul 12, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not report COVID-19 data to residents and their families as required. Facilities must keep residents and families informed about COVID-19 cases. |
| May 16, 2019 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| May 16, 2019 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| May 16, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. |
| May 16, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility transferred or discharged a resident without a valid reason, or failed to provide the required documentation and information when moving a resident out. |
| May 16, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services. |
| May 16, 2019 | 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. |
| May 16, 2019 | 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. |
| May 16, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| May 16, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not make sure residents actually saw their doctor face-to-face at all required visits. Doctors must examine nursing home residents in person on a regular schedule. |
| May 16, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing. |
| May 16, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective. |
| Aug 10, 2017 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not make sure each resident's health assessment was accurate and done by a qualified health professional. |
| Aug 10, 2017 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not keep residents safe from serious medication errors. |
| Aug 10, 2017 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not protect residents from mistreatment, neglect, or having their personal belongings or money taken or misused. |
| Aug 10, 2017 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not coordinate its resident assessments with the required state screening program for people with mental illness or intellectual disabilities. This screening helps confirm a nursing home is the right placement and identifies special services a person needs. |
| Aug 10, 2017 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility gave residents urinary catheters when they weren't medically necessary, or failed to give residents with bladder control problems the care needed to prevent urinary tract infections and help restore normal bladder function. |
| Aug 10, 2017 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep proper drug records or correctly label medications according to professional standards. Accurate records and labels are how staff know what each medicine is, whose it is, and how to give it safely. |
| Aug 10, 2017 | B · Minimal risk, repeated | The facility did not make the results of its most recent government inspection easy for residents to find and read. Inspection results must be posted where anyone can see them. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (11 → 24).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 7 | 0 | E |
| 2019 | 11 | 0 | E |
| 2022 | 24 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2025 | 5 | 0 | D |
| 2026 | 4 | 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)
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
| Measure | This facility | Virginia avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 3.72 | 3.67 | 3.95 | top 28% in Virginia; bottom 48% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.31 | 0.66 | 0.69 | bottom 8% in Virginia; bottom 11% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.27 | 3.21 | 3.50 | top 30% in Virginia; bottom 45% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.16 | 0.46 | 0.48 | bottom 10% in Virginia; bottom 7% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 62.7 | 48.1 | 45.8 | bottom 17% in Virginia; bottom 13% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 80.0 | 48.2 | 42.9 | bottom 7% in Virginia; bottom 6% 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 3.81, RN 0.32, weekend 3.34. 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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5
Who owns this facility
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JJ United Tr | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 50% | 01/31/2024 |
| VA SNF Operations Holdings LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 01/31/2024 |
| Bryant, Tameika | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/03/2023 |
| Shapiro, Akiva | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2022 |
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "How do you assess and manage residents' pain, especially for those who have trouble communicating?"
- "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?"
- "Who owns and governs this facility, and how long has the current administrator been here?"
- "How does your quality committee work, and can you give an example of a problem it recently identified and fixed?"
- "Where do you post your latest state inspection results and the ombudsman's contact information?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "When a doctor orders lab work, how quickly is it done and how are results communicated back?"
- "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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Autumn Care of Suffolk | 2.1 mi | Suffolk, VA | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Lake Prince Woods, INC | 4.0 mi | Suffolk, VA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Windsor Grove Health and Rehabilitation | 10.7 mi | Windsor, VA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Northern Cardinal Rehabilitation and Nursing | 12.5 mi | Suffolk, VA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Portside Health & Rehab Center | 12.9 mi | Portsmouth, VA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Deep Creek Health & Rehabilitation | 13.8 mi | Chesapeake, VA | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Autumn Care of Portsmouth | 14.5 mi | Portsmouth, VA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Portsmouth Health and Rehab | 16.8 mi | Portsmouth, VA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Riverside Lifelong Health & Rehab Smithfield | 17.0 mi | Smithfield, VA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Signature Healthcare of Norfolk | 17.9 mi | Norfolk, VA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Harbor's Edge | 18.0 mi | Norfolk, VA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Chesapeake Health and Rehabilitation Center | 18.7 mi | Chesapeake, VA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 495247.