North Carolina ›Charlotte

Rockwell Park Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

1930 West Sugar Creek Road, Charlotte, NC 28262 (opens Google Maps) · Mecklenburg County · (704) 598-4480· 120 certified beds · avg 83 residents/day · certified since Nov 5, 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 →

SFF

What Special Focus status means →

Part of chain: YAD HEALTHCARE (13 facilities, chain avg rating 1.7★)

—/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Mar 27, 2026
8
Serious findings on record
most recent Jan 7, 2026
$338,513
Fines, last 3 years
3.64
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: —/5 · CMS overall rating: —/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)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Sep 5, 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.

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Jul 25, 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 (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: Jul 26, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Nov 27, 2024 · 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 (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 20, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Nov 27, 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: Dec 20, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Nov 27, 2024 · 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 20, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, pattern · Apr 29, 2024 · 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 (K): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was a pattern: more than a limited occurrence, without being widespread. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Mar 2, 2024 (Past Non-Compliance)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Apr 29, 2024 · F-0607 · triggered by a complaint

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.

Why it matters: Without working prevention policies, mistreatment is more likely to happen and less likely to be caught.

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 29, 2023 (Past Non-Compliance)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jan 7, 2026 · 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.

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 34 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    The 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

  2. 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. F-0656

  3. 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. · from a complaint F-0689

View all 34 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
Mar 27, 2026D · 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
Mar 27, 2026D · 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. · F-0656
Mar 27, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal 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
Mar 27, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 27, 2026D · 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. · F-0880
Jan 7, 2026▲ 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
Nov 20, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0561
Nov 20, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · F-0552
Nov 20, 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
Nov 20, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. · F-0759
Sep 5, 2025▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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
Jul 25, 2025▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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
May 23, 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
May 23, 2025D · 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. · F-0656
May 23, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0688
May 23, 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. · F-0842
May 23, 2025D · 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. · F-0880
May 23, 2025C · Potential for minimal harm, widespreadThe 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). · F-0628
Nov 27, 2024▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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
Nov 27, 2024▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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
Nov 27, 2024▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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 21, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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 21, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · from a complaint · F-0804
Jun 21, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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 21, 2024D · 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
Jun 21, 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 21, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not let a resident return after a hospital stay or approved leave that lasted longer than the facility's bed-hold policy allowed. Residents generally have the right to come back to the next available bed. · from a complaint · F-0626
Jun 21, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · from a complaint · F-0686
Jun 21, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits. · from a complaint · F-0758
Apr 29, 2024▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, patternThe 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 29, 2024▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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
Apr 29, 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
Apr 29, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · from a complaint · F-0867
Apr 29, 2024C · Potential for minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not conduct and document a facility-wide assessment of what staff, supplies, and resources it needs to care for its residents properly — during everyday operations, nights, weekends, and emergencies. · from a complaint · F-0838

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (4 → 5).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2024
All citations: 16
Serious citations (G–L): 5
2025
All citations: 12
Serious citations (G–L): 2
2026
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 1

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

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2024165K ▲
2025122J ▲
202661G ▲

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 →

7 fines totaling $338,513, 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
Mar 27, 2026Fine$23,397
Nov 20, 2025Fine$12,935
May 23, 2025Fine$93,236
Nov 27, 2024Fine$113,051
Jun 21, 2024Fine$78,793
Jun 21, 2024Payment Denial2 days from Jul 23, 2024
Apr 29, 2024Fine$6,899
Apr 29, 2024Fine$10,202

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: 3.64
North Carolina average: 4.01
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.61
North Carolina average: 0.64
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.24
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)3.644.013.95bottom 48% in North Carolina; bottom 43% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.610.640.69top 37% in North Carolina; top 46% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.243.563.50bottom 49% in North Carolina; bottom 44% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.340.410.48top 46% in North Carolina; bottom 40% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)60.249.045.8bottom 23% in North Carolina; bottom 16% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)50.045.742.9bottom 45% in North Carolina; 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 3.49, RN 0.59, weekend 3.11.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.49 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: —/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: —/5 · long-stay residents: —/5 · short-stay residents: —/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Rockwell Park Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center. 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 / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Alter, TzviIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—06/01/2024
Saturn Holdings I LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%06/01/2024
West NC Holdings LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—06/01/2024
1930 West Sugar Creek Road LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2024
Alter, TzviIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2024
Booker, TimberlyIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE08/01/2025
Childs, MarkIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE08/01/2025
Nelson, JohnIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2025
Nelson, JohnIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE08/05/2025
Trowell, KitIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2025

All 10 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 Yad Healthcare — 13 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 12 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.

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.

  • "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
  • "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
  • "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
  • "What specific steps do you take to prevent abuse and neglect, and how are staff trained on them?"
  • "Before a resident is discharged or transferred, how do you make sure the new place can actually meet their needs?"
  • "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
  • "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?"

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 60% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "CMS lists this facility under its Special Focus program — what is being done differently, and by when?"
  • "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

Nearby facilities (12 closest of 45 within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Crown Haven Health and Rehabilitation1.4 miCharlotte, NC★★☆☆☆1/5
University Place Nursing and Rehabilitation Center3.2 miCharlotte, NC★☆☆☆☆2/5
Pine Crest Health & Rehabilitation3.7 miCharlotte, NC★☆☆☆☆1/5
Asbury Health and Rehabilitation Center4.2 miCharlotte, NC★★☆☆☆2/5
Peak Resources - Charlotte5.0 miCharlotte, NC★★★☆☆3/5
Novant Health Presbyterian Medical Center-Snu5.6 miCharlotte, NC★★★★★5/5
Pelican Health at Charlotte5.9 miCharlotte, NC★★☆☆☆1/5SFF
Wilora Lake Healthcare6.1 miCharlotte, NC★★☆☆☆2/5abuse
Redwood Health & Rehab6.6 miCharlotte, NC★★★☆☆3/5
White Oak Manor - Charlotte7.2 miCharlotte, NC★☆☆☆☆1/5
Charlotte Health & Rehabilitation Center7.4 miCharlotte, NC★☆☆☆☆1/5
Huntersville Oaks7.6 miHuntersville, NC★★★☆☆4/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Mecklenburg, NC — 29 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 Charlotte →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 345489.

This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).

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