How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
4355 Pheasant Ridge Road, Roanoke, VA 24014 (opens Google Maps) · Roanoke City County · (540) 725-8210· 101 certified beds · avg 88 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1998 · 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: AVARDIS HEALTH (38 facilities, chain avg rating 2.0★)
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 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 quality measures from resident assessments and claims.
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Nov 21, 2024 · F-0684 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Why it matters: Care that strays from doctor's orders or ignores the resident's wishes can lead to declining health and avoidable harm.
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: Feb 18, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 7, 2026 · F-0658 · triggered by a complaint
The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Why it matters: Care that falls below professional standards can directly harm a resident's health and recovery.
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: Jun 17, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has plan of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 7, 2026 · F-0692 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
Why it matters: Malnutrition and dehydration can quickly weaken a resident and lead to serious complications.
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: Jun 17, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has plan of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 7, 2026 · F-0697 · triggered by a complaint
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): 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: Jun 17, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has plan of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 7, 2026 · F-0776 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not provide timely, approved x-ray services or have an agreement with an approved provider to supply them.
Why it matters: Delayed x-rays can postpone the diagnosis of fractures, pneumonia, and other urgent conditions.
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: Jun 17, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has plan of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 32 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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 F-0658
The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · from a complaint F-0692
The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · from a complaint F-0697
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 |
|---|---|---|
| May 7, 2026 | ▲ G · Actual 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. · from a complaint · F-0658 |
| May 7, 2026 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · from a complaint · F-0692 |
| May 7, 2026 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · from a complaint · F-0697 |
| May 7, 2026 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not provide timely, approved x-ray services or have an agreement with an approved provider to supply them. · from a complaint · F-0776 |
| May 7, 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 |
| May 7, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0773 |
| May 7, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0842 |
| Nov 21, 2024 | ▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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 |
| Nov 21, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · from a complaint · F-0711 |
| Nov 21, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not let a resident or their legal representative see or buy copies of the resident's own records. · from a complaint · F-0573 |
| Nov 21, 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 |
| Nov 21, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have doctor's orders in place for a resident's immediate care at the time the resident was admitted. · from a complaint · F-0635 |
| Nov 21, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · from a complaint · F-0655 |
| Nov 21, 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 |
| Nov 21, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0695 |
| Nov 21, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · from a complaint · F-0755 |
| Nov 21, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0842 |
| Jan 19, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| Jan 19, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0580 |
| Jan 19, 2024 | 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 |
| Jan 19, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0641 |
| Jan 19, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | When a resident had a planned discharge, the facility did not make sure the necessary information was communicated to the resident and to the doctors or facility taking over their care. · from a complaint · F-0661 |
| Jan 19, 2024 | 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 |
| Jan 19, 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. · F-0684 |
| Jan 19, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Jan 19, 2024 | 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 |
| Jan 19, 2024 | C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day. · F-0732 |
| Aug 3, 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 |
| Aug 3, 2022 | 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. · F-0689 |
| Aug 3, 2022 | 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 |
| Aug 3, 2022 | 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 |
| Apr 8, 2021 | 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. · F-0684 |
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (4 → 10).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2022 | 4 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 20 | 1 | J ▲ |
| 2026 | 7 | 4 | 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.
How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
What these staffing numbers mean →
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | Virginia avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 3.45 | 3.67 | 3.95 | top 43% in Virginia; bottom 34% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.67 | 0.66 | 0.69 | top 25% in Virginia; top 39% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.02 | 3.21 | 3.50 | top 44% in Virginia; bottom 32% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.43 | 0.46 | 0.48 | top 30% in Virginia; top 44% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 53.8 | 48.1 | 45.8 | bottom 37% in Virginia; bottom 28% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 53.3 | 48.2 | 42.9 | bottom 41% in Virginia; bottom 31% 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 3.27, RN 0.64, weekend 2.86.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.27 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.
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: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Pheasant Ridge Nursing and Rehabilitation. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
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.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mill Mountain Holdco LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 05/01/2025 |
| SW Roanoke Parentco LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 05/01/2025 |
| Vaop Holdco LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 05/01/2025 |
| Brandt, Karen | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/05/2025 |
| Brandt, Karen | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/05/2025 |
| Clark, Alyssa | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2025 |
| Clark, Alyssa | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2025 |
| Clark, Alyssa | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2025 |
| Forren, Holly | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2025 |
| Forren, Holly | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2025 |
| Hoback, Tiffany | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2025 |
| Hoback, Tiffany | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2025 |
| Hoback, Tiffany | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2025 |
| Jones, Tequilla | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2025 |
| Jones, Tequilla | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2025 |
| SNF Mgr LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2025 |
| SNF Mgr LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/17/2025 |
| Tompkins, Paul | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2025 |
| Tompkins, Paul | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2025 |
All 19 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
CMS lists this facility under the chain Avardis Health — 38 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.
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 37 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| South Roanoke Nursing and Rehabilitation | 0.9 mi | Roanoke, VA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Friendship Health and Rehab Center - South | 1.9 mi | Roanoke, VA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Old Southwest Health and Rehabilitation | 2.7 mi | Roanoke, VA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Raleigh Court Health and Rehabilitation Center | 2.9 mi | Roanoke, VA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Brandon Oaks Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | 4.0 mi | Roanoke, VA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Our Lady of the Valley | 4.0 mi | Roanoke, VA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Davis and McDaniel Veterans Care Center | 4.8 mi | Roanoke, VA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Salem Health & Rehabilitation | 4.9 mi | Salem, VA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Berkshire Health & Rehabilitation Center | 5.4 mi | Vinton, VA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Star City Rehabilitation and Nursing | 6.0 mi | Roanoke, VA | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Springtree Healthcare & Rehab Center | 6.7 mi | Roanoke, VA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Friendship Health and Rehab Center | 7.0 mi | Roanoke, VA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 495325.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details