How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Shore Health & Rehab Center
26181 Parksley Road, Parksley, VA 23421 (opens Google Maps) · Accomack County · (757) 665-5133· 136 certified beds · avg 126 residents/day · certified since Nov 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: SABER HEALTHCARE GROUP (126 facilities, chain avg rating 2.9★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jul 26, 2024
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.06
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: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5 · 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.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 34 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
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 appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. F-0690
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.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Jul 26, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Jul 26, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Jul 26, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Jul 26, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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 |
| Jul 26, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not treat residents with respect and dignity, or did not let them keep and use their own personal belongings. · F-0557 |
| Jul 26, 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 |
| Jul 26, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Jul 26, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids. · F-0685 |
| Jul 26, 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. · F-0695 |
| Jul 26, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Jul 26, 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 |
| Mar 12, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Mar 12, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0686 |
| Mar 12, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 12, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide or arrange dental services for its residents. Nursing homes are responsible for making sure residents can get dental care. · F-0791 |
| Mar 12, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Mar 12, 2021 | C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not give residents important notices in a format and language they can understand — for example, translated documents or accessible formats for those with vision or hearing loss. · F-0574 |
| Oct 18, 2019 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · F-0925 |
| Oct 18, 2019 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not give residents important notices in a format and language they can understand — for example, translated documents or accessible formats for those with vision or hearing loss. · F-0574 |
| Oct 18, 2019 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave. · F-0625 |
| Oct 18, 2019 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Oct 18, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility transferred or discharged a resident without a valid reason, or failed to provide the required documentation and information when moving a resident out. · F-0622 |
| Oct 18, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Oct 18, 2019 | 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. · F-0641 |
| Oct 18, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need. · F-0644 |
| Oct 18, 2019 | 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. · F-0655 |
| Oct 18, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal 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 |
| Oct 18, 2019 | 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 |
| Oct 18, 2019 | 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. · F-0695 |
| Oct 18, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0727 |
| Oct 18, 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 |
| Oct 18, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Oct 18, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide timely, quality laboratory tests to meet residents' needs. · F-0770 |
| Oct 18, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (6 → 11).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2019
All citations: 17
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2021
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 11
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 17 | 0 | F |
| 2021 | 6 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 11 | 0 | E |
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 facilityVirginia averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.06
Virginia average: 3.67
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.40
Virginia average: 0.66
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 2.78
Virginia average: 3.21
U.S. average: 3.50
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) | 3.06 | 3.67 | 3.95 | bottom 28% in Virginia; bottom 16% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.40 | 0.66 | 0.69 | bottom 26% in Virginia; bottom 23% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 2.78 | 3.21 | 3.50 | bottom 38% in Virginia; bottom 20% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.32 | 0.46 | 0.48 | bottom 45% in Virginia; bottom 36% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 28.1 | 48.1 | 45.8 | top 9% in Virginia; top 11% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 21.4 | 48.2 | 42.9 | top 8% in Virginia; top 16% 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 3.28, RN 0.43, weekend 2.97.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.28 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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · 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 Shore Health & Rehab 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 - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Benjamin N. Volpe Family Dynasty Trust (dated December 29, 2020) | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| BNV Dynasty LLC | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Decanted William I. Weisberg Family Dynasty Trust (dated Sept 30, 2020 | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Saber Healthcare Holdings LLC | Organization | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2018 |
| Wiw Dynasty LLC | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Baral, Sarad | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2018 |
| Benjamin N. Volpe Family Dynasty Trust (dated December 29, 2020) | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| BNV Dynasty LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Cibc Bank USA | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/26/2021 |
| Citrin Cooperman Advisors LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2018 |
| Decanted William I. Weisberg Family Dynasty Trust (dated Sept 30, 2020 | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Jackson, Ashley | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/28/2022 |
| Jackson, Ashley | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/28/2022 |
| Nicoluzakis, Gregory | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2019 |
| Nicoluzakis, Gregory | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2019 |
| Nottingham, Lisa | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/06/2018 |
| Nottingham, Lisa | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/06/2018 |
| Saber Governance LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2019 |
| Saber Healthcare Group LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2018 |
| SHG Management LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2019 |
Showing 20 of 34 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 14 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Saber Healthcare Group — 126 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.
- South Boston Health & Rehab Center — South Boston, VA · overall 1/5
- Stratford Healthcare Center — Danville, VA · overall 5/5
- Tyler's Retreat at Iron Bridge — Chester, VA · overall 3/5
- Waddell Nursing and Rehab Center — Galax, VA · overall 5/5
- Waterside Health & Rehab Center — Norfolk, VA · overall 3/5
- New Castle Health and Rehabilitation Center — New Castle, DE · overall 2/5SFF
- Grey Stone Health and Rehabilitation Center — Fort Wayne, IN · overall 1/5
- Autumn Care of Biscoe — Biscoe, NC · overall 4/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 125 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "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?"
- "How do you care for residents with incontinence or catheters, and what do you do to prevent urinary tract infections?"
- "What systems do you use to prevent medication errors, and what happens when one occurs?"
- "How do you train staff to treat residents with dignity, and how do you protect residents' personal belongings?"
- "Can you give me examples of how you adjust daily routines and room setups to fit each resident's preferences?"
- "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
- "How do you arrange eye and hearing care for residents, including appointments and equipment like glasses or hearing aids?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Virginia 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 28% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 34 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 (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alice Byrd Tawes Nursing Home | 20.6 mi | Crisfield, MD | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Hartley Nursing and Rehab | 21.7 mi | Pocomoke City, MD | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Nassawadox Rehabilitation and Nursing | 23.6 mi | Nassawadox, VA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Snow Hill Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center | 31.3 mi | Snow Hill, MD | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Manokin Nursing and Rehab | 31.4 mi | Princess Anne, MD | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuseSFF |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 495334.