North Carolina ›Asheville

River Bend Health and Rehabilitation

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

213 Richmond Hill Drive, Asheville, NC 28806 (opens Google Maps) · Buncombe County · (828) 254-9675· 100 certified beds · avg 87 residents/day · certified since Feb 24, 1993 · 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 →

Abuse citation flag (CMS)

What the abuse flag means →

Part of chain: BRIGHTON HEALTHCARE (8 facilities, chain avg rating 1.5★)

The abuse flag means inspectors cited this facility for abuse that caused harm to a resident within the past year, or potential for harm in each of the last two years. Source: CMS.

1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jun 13, 2025
7
Serious findings on record
most recent Jun 13, 2025
$147,579
Fines, last 3 years
3.32
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

New to these records? How to read an inspection report →

Health inspection rating: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5 · how star ratings work →

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)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jun 13, 2025 · F-0580 · triggered by a complaint

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.

Why it matters: A family could learn about a serious injury or decline days later, after the chance to act has passed.

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 10, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jun 13, 2025 · 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 (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 10, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jun 13, 2025 · 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 (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 10, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jun 13, 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: Jul 10, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jun 13, 2025 · 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): 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 10, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jun 13, 2025 · F-0777

The facility did not provide or obtain x-rays and other imaging tests when ordered, or did not promptly tell the ordering doctor the results.

Why it matters: A missed or delayed x-ray can leave a fracture or illness untreated while a resident is in pain.

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 10, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Apr 25, 2025 · 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 (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 10, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 52 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern

    The 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 F-0602

View all 52 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.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Feb 26, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 26, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jan 30, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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 · F-0602
Jan 30, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 13, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 13, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 13, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 13, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 13, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697
Jun 13, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide or obtain x-rays and other imaging tests when ordered, or did not promptly tell the ordering doctor the results. · F-0777
Jun 13, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641
Jun 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not let a resident help develop and carry out their own plan of care — the written roadmap of the services and support they'll receive, built around their personal goals and preferences. · F-0553
Jun 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely. · from a complaint · F-0627
Jun 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). · from a complaint · F-0628
Jun 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0700
Jun 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide the social services residents need — such as counseling, help with adjustment, or connecting to outside resources — to achieve the best possible quality of life. · from a complaint · F-0745
Jun 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · from a complaint · F-0760
Jun 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure special medical diets — like low-sodium or diabetic diets — were properly ordered by the resident's doctor or managed by a qualified dietitian as state law allows. · F-0808
Jun 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint · F-0842
Jun 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883
Jun 13, 2025C · Potential for minimal harm, widespreadThe 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. · F-0577
Apr 25, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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
Apr 25, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 27, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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 · F-0602
Jun 27, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Jun 27, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0712
Jun 27, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0727
Jun 27, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0761
Jun 27, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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 · F-0880
Jun 27, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not let a resident help develop and carry out their own plan of care — the written roadmap of the services and support they'll receive, built around their personal goals and preferences. · F-0553
Jun 27, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · from a complaint · F-0583
Jun 27, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 27, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 27, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 27, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 27, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 27, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · from a complaint · F-0883
Jun 27, 2024C · Potential for minimal harm, widespreadThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0732
Jun 27, 2024B · Potential for minimal harm, patternThe 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
May 21, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Apr 23, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint · F-0609
Apr 23, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Sep 15, 2023F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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
Sep 15, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · from a complaint · F-0812
Sep 15, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · from a complaint · F-0867
Sep 15, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0550
Sep 15, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. · from a complaint · F-0582
Sep 15, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0880

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (16 → 21).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 19
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 23
Serious citations (G–L): 7
2026
All citations: 4
Serious citations (G–L): 0

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202360F
2024190E
2025237G ▲
202640E

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)

How to file a complaint about care →

6 fines totaling $147,579, 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.

DateTypeAmount / length
Jan 30, 2026Fine$4,254
Jan 30, 2026Fine$4,254
Apr 25, 2025Fine$104,670
Apr 25, 2025Payment Denial48 days from May 23, 2025
Apr 23, 2024Fine$5,346
Apr 23, 2024Fine$22,620
Sep 15, 2023Fine$6,435

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

What these staffing numbers mean →

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: 3.32
North Carolina average: 4.01
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.66
North Carolina average: 0.64
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.03
North Carolina average: 3.56
U.S. average: 3.50

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

MeasureThis facilityNorth Carolina avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)3.324.013.95bottom 23% in North Carolina; bottom 28% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.660.640.69top 30% in North Carolina; top 40% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.033.563.50bottom 30% in North Carolina; bottom 33% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.570.410.48top 18% in North Carolina; top 26% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)86.449.045.8bottom 1% in North Carolina; bottom 2% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)71.445.742.9bottom 14% in North Carolina; bottom 11% 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 3.13, RN 0.63, weekend 2.85.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.13 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.

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.

Quality measures rating: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 2/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for River Bend Health and Rehabilitation. 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.

Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price

Who owns this facility

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 - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Asheville Health and Rehabilitation SNF Holding LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%09/08/2023
Asheville NC Property Holdings, LLCOrganization5% or Greater Mortgage InterestNOT APPLICABLE09/08/2023
Asheville NC Property Holdings, LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/08/2023
Brand Sonnenschine LLPOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/08/2023
Brighton Management Two LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/08/2023
Fischer, DavidIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE09/08/2023
Fischer, DavidIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE09/08/2023
Fischer, DavidIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/08/2023
Forvis Mazars LLPOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/08/2023
Lefkowitz, ZevIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE09/08/2023
Lefkowitz, ZevIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/08/2023
Norman, AngelitaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE09/09/2024
Norman, AngelitaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/09/2024
Turbett, TimothyIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/08/2023

All 14 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 Brighton Healthcare — 8 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.

Questions to ask on your visit

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

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

  • "If my family member falls or their condition changes, exactly when and how will I be notified?"
  • "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
  • "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
  • "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
  • "How do you assess and manage residents' pain, especially for those who have trouble communicating?"
  • "If a doctor orders an x-ray, how soon does it happen and when does the doctor see the results?"
  • "What specific steps do you take to prevent abuse and neglect, and how are staff trained on them?"
  • "What safeguards do you have to protect residents' money and belongings, and what happens when something goes missing?"

Also worth asking anywhere

  • "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the North Carolina midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
  • "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
  • "CMS reports 86% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 14 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
  • "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

Nearby facilities (12 closest of 25 within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Emerald Ridge Health and Rehabilitation2.3 miAsheville, NC★☆☆☆☆1/5
Elevate Health and Rehabilitation3.1 miAsheville, NC★☆☆☆☆1/5
Aston Park Health Care Center3.5 miAsheville, NC★★★★★4/5
Stonecreek Health and Rehabilitation3.6 miAsheville, NC★★★☆☆2/5
Bear Mountain Health and Rehabilitation3.7 miAsheville, NC★★★☆☆3/5
The Laurels of Greentree Ridge4.5 miAsheville, NC★★★★★4/5
The Laurels of Summit Ridge5.7 miAsheville, NC★★★★☆3/5
Pisgah Manor Health Care Center5.8 miCandler, NC★★☆☆☆2/5
The Greens at Weaverville6.3 miWeaverville, NC★★★★☆4/5
Deerfield Episcopal Retirement7.8 miAsheville, NC★★★★★5/5
Swannanoa Valley Health and Rehabilitation8.2 miSwannanoa, NC★★★☆☆3/5
Givens Health Center8.6 miAsheville, NC★★★★★4/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Buncombe, NC — 19 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.

Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.

All facilities in Asheville →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 345432.

Your research

Viewed & saved homes

Kept in this browser tab for this session. Choose to remember them only on a device you trust. Opening a record or comparison sends its usual page request.

Selected for comparison

Recently viewed

Prices entered in a cost worksheet stay on that page and are not saved. Privacy details