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: NATIONAL HEALTHCARE CORPORATION (69 facilities, chain avg rating 4.0★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Mar 18, 2026
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Nov 4, 2025
$16,153
Fines, last 3 years
3.61
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, isolated · Nov 4, 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 (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.
Corrected: Dec 17, 2024 (Past Non-Compliance)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 16 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
J · Immediate jeopardy, 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
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
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. · from a complaintF-0657
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
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. F-0558
View all 16 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
Nov 4, 2025
▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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
Nov 4, 2025
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
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. · from a complaint · F-0657
Jun 8, 2022
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
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. · F-0558
Jun 8, 2022
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not give residents important notices in a format and language they can understand — for example, translated documents or accessible formats for those with vision or hearing loss. · F-0574
Jun 8, 2022
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
Jun 8, 2022
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. · F-0677
Jun 8, 2022
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
Jun 8, 2022
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
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
Jun 8, 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
Jun 8, 2022
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921
Jul 11, 2019
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not update each resident's care assessment at least once every 3 months. These regular check-ins keep the resident's care plan matched to their current condition. · F-0638
Jul 11, 2019
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
Jul 11, 2019
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · F-0690
Jul 11, 2019
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
Jul 11, 2019
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not make sure the resident's doctor reviewed their care and wrote, signed, and dated progress notes and orders at each required visit. · F-0711
Jul 11, 2019
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
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. · F-0712
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)
2019
All citations:
6
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2022
All citations:
8
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2025
All citations:
2
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
2019
6
0
D
2022
8
0
D
2025
2
1
J ▲
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.
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
Nov 4, 2025
Fine
$16,153
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 facilityTennessee averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility:
3.61
Tennessee average:
3.62
U.S. average:
3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility:
0.52
Tennessee average:
0.57
U.S. average:
0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility:
3.27
Tennessee average:
3.15
U.S. average:
3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Measure
This facility
Tennessee avg
U.S. avg
Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
3.61
3.62
3.95
top 39% in Tennessee; bottom 42% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours
0.52
0.57
0.69
top 48% in Tennessee; bottom 41% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing
3.27
3.15
3.50
top 32% in Tennessee; bottom 46% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)
0.28
0.39
0.48
bottom 35% in Tennessee; bottom 27% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)
42.6
48.9
45.8
top 32% in Tennessee; top 43% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)
50.0
43.2
42.9
bottom 37% in Tennessee; bottom 39% 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 3.54, RN 0.51, weekend 3.21.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.54 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.
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for NHC Healthcare, Hendersonville. 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.
All 20 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 National Healthcare Corporation — 69 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.
CMS records place this facility in Sumner, TN — 6 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 445191.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).
The Care File
Visit checklist — NHC Healthcare, Hendersonville
370 Old Shackle Island Rd, Hendersonville, TN 37075 · (615) 824-0720
Health inspection rating 3/5 · CMS overall 3/5· Fines (3y): $16,153
Most serious findings on record:
▲ Nov 4, 2025 (F-0689, Immediate jeopardy, isolated): The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Questions for the administrator:
☐ "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
☐ "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
☐ "Can you give me examples of how you adjust daily routines and room setups to fit each resident's preferences?"
☐ "How do you communicate important notices to residents who speak another language or have trouble seeing or hearing?"
☐ "How many aides are on each shift, and how do you make sure every resident gets timely help with bathing, dressing, and meals?"
☐ "How many residents here use oxygen or breathing equipment, and who checks that equipment each shift?"
☐ "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
☐ "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
☐ "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 43% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
☐ "The ownership record on file lists 20 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
☐ "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
While you're there, notice:
☐ Smell and cleanliness in hallways, not just the lobby
☐ How staff speak to residents; call lights answered promptly
☐ Residents up, dressed, and engaged (visit mealtimes and a weekend if you can)
Data: CMS Provider Data Catalog, version 2026-08-01 · CCN 445191 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)