North CarolinaWashington

Ridgewood Living & Rehabilitation Center

1624 Highland Drive, Washington, NC 27889 · Beaufort County · 128 certified beds · avg 114 residents/day · certified since Nov 23, 1982

Part of chain: CCH HEALTHCARE (33 facilities, chain avg rating 2.5★)

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
1
Serious findings on record
$10,868
Fines, last 3 years
3.82
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5

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)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Sep 5, 2025 · 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 (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 23, 2025 (Past Non-Compliance)

All citations in the current public record (30)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Sep 5, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Sep 5, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not educate residents and staff about COVID-19 vaccination, offer the vaccine to those eligible after that education, or properly document everyone's vaccination status.
Sep 5, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention.
Sep 5, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. · from a complaint
Sep 5, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Sep 5, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 5, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Sep 5, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility used bed rails without first trying safer alternatives, or without assessing the resident's safety risk, discussing the risks and benefits with the resident or family, getting consent, and installing the rails correctly.
Sep 5, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 5, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
Sep 5, 2025B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
Jan 17, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · from a complaint
Jun 12, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Jun 12, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Jun 12, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. · from a complaint
Jun 12, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 12, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline. · from a complaint
Jun 12, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
Jun 12, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes.
Jun 12, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician.
Jun 12, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.
Jun 12, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
May 24, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time.
May 24, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council.
May 24, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care.
May 24, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights.
May 24, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential.
May 24, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
May 24, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
May 24, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (10 → 11).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202380E
2024100E
2025121G ▲

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)

1 fine totaling $10,868.

DateTypeAmount / length
Sep 5, 2025Fine$10,868

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

MeasureThis facilityNorth Carolina avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)3.824.013.95top 39% in North Carolina; top 47% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.480.640.69bottom 42% in North Carolina; bottom 35% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.473.563.50top 36% in North Carolina; top 44% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.240.410.48bottom 32% in North Carolina; bottom 20% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)38.249.045.8top 25% in North Carolina; top 32% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)9.145.742.9top 4% in North Carolina; top 3% 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 3.47, RN 0.44, weekend 3.15. Staffing rating: 4/5.

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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
10-26 Nationwide TrOrganizationDirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2016
NCNH Holdings LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest96%06/01/2016
NCNH J-Dek LLCOrganizationDirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2016
NCNH J-Dek LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest24%06/01/2016
Starlight Healthcare LLCOrganizationDirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2016
Starlight Healthcare LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest36%06/01/2016
10-26 Nationwide TrOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2016
CCH Healthcare LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2016
CCH Healthcare LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/11/2026
Forbright BankOrganization5% or Greater Security InterestNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2016
Forbright BankOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/11/2026
Hartley, LisaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2020
Hartley, LisaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2020
Lewis, DavidIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2025
Lewis, DavidIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2025
NCNH J-Dek LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2016
NCNH Propco Holding LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2016
Ridgewood Propco LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2016
Starlight Healthcare LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2016
Stern, JacobIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2016

Questions to ask on your visit

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
River Trace Nursing and Rehabilitation Center0.9 miWashington, NC★☆☆☆☆1/5
The Carrolton of Williamston13.2 miWilliamston, NC★★☆☆☆2/5
Cypress Glen Retirement Community18.6 miGreenville, NC★★★★★5/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Washington →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 345228.