How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Robertsdale Rehabilitation & Healthcare Ctr
18700 U S Highway 90, Robertsdale, AL 36567 (opens Google Maps) · Baldwin County · (251) 947-1911· 152 certified beds · avg 118 residents/day · certified since Mar 16, 2001 · 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: BALL HEALTHCARE SERVICES (9 facilities, chain avg rating 2.4★)
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Aug 8, 2024
4
Serious findings on record
most recent Aug 23, 2018
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.26
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
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: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5 · 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 · Aug 23, 2018 · F-0600
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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Aug 23, 2018 · F-0600
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: Sep 27, 2018 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Aug 23, 2018 · F-0656
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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Aug 23, 2018 · F-0656
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.
Why it matters: Without a complete, working care plan, important needs can slip through the cracks and no one is accountable for results.
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: Sep 27, 2018 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Aug 23, 2018 · F-0658
The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Aug 23, 2018 · F-0658
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: Sep 27, 2018 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Aug 23, 2018 · F-0689
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Aug 23, 2018 · 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): 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: Sep 27, 2018 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 14 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal. F-0623
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. · from a complaint F-0600
The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. F-0883
View all 14 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Aug 8, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal. · F-0623 |
| Aug 8, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · from a complaint · F-0600 |
| Aug 8, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883 |
| Aug 8, 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 |
| Aug 8, 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. · from a complaint · F-0677 |
| Aug 8, 2024 | 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 |
| Aug 8, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Jun 6, 2019 | 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. · F-0755 |
| Jun 6, 2019 | 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 |
| Aug 23, 2018 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | 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. · F-0600 |
| Aug 23, 2018 | ▲ G · Actual 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. · F-0656 |
| Aug 23, 2018 | ▲ 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. · F-0658 |
| Aug 23, 2018 | ▲ G · Actual 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 23, 2018 | 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 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (2 → 7).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2018
All citations: 5
Serious citations (G–L): 4
2019
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 7
Serious citations (G–L): 0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | 5 | 4 | G ▲ |
| 2019 | 2 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 7 | 0 | F |
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)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityAlabama averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 4.26
Alabama average: 4.43
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.58
Alabama average: 0.74
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.55
Alabama average: 3.73
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | Alabama avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 4.26 | 4.43 | 3.95 | bottom 39% in Alabama; top 30% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.58 | 0.74 | 0.69 | bottom 27% in Alabama; bottom 50% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.55 | 3.73 | 3.50 | bottom 35% in Alabama; top 40% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.34 | 0.36 | 0.48 | top 47% in Alabama; bottom 41% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 44.8 | 46.9 | 45.8 | top 43% in Alabama; top 50% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 43.5 | 39.5 | 42.9 | bottom 44% in Alabama; bottom 46% 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 4.64, RN 0.64, weekend 3.87.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.64 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.
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: 3/5 · 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 Robertsdale Rehabilitation & Healthcare Ctr. 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 - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ball, Clarence | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 10/22/1998 |
| Ball Healthcare Service, INC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/22/1998 |
| Ball, Clarence | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/22/1998 |
| Hall, Matthew | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2014 |
| Skelton, Frederick | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/20/2022 |
All 5 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 Ball Healthcare Services — 9 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.
- Twin Oaks Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center — Mobile, AL · overall 4/5
- Arlington Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center — Birmingham, AL · overall 4/5
- Cherry Hill Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center — Birmingham, AL · overall 2/5
- Lighthouse Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center — Selma, AL · overall 2/5abuse
- Magnolia Haven Health and Rehabilitation Center — Tuskegee, AL · overall 1/5
- Monroe Manor Health & Rehabilitation Center — Monroeville, AL · overall 1/5
- Orchard Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center — Hayneville, AL · overall 4/5
- Roanoke Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center — Roanoke, AL · overall 2/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "If you ever planned to discharge or transfer my family member, how much written notice would we receive and how could we appeal?"
- "What percentage of your residents and staff are vaccinated against flu and pneumonia, and how do you offer the vaccines?"
- "Can you give me examples of how you adjust daily routines and room setups to fit each resident's preferences?"
- "How many aides are on each shift, and how do you make sure every resident gets timely help with bathing, dressing, and meals?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Alabama 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 45% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Diversicare of Foley | 10.4 mi | Foley, AL | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Altera Health and Rehabilitation Center | 16.0 mi | Fairhope, AL | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Fairhope Health & Rehab | 16.6 mi | Fairhope, AL | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Eastern Shore Rehabilitation and Health Center | 16.7 mi | Daphne, AL | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Willowbrooke Ct Skilled Care Ctr Westminster VLG | 18.3 mi | Spanish Fort, AL | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Baldwin, AL — 7 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Crowne Healthcare of North Baldwin — Bay Minette, AL · overall 3/5
Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 015443.