Skyview Springs Rehab and Nursing Center

30 Montvue Drive, Luray, VA 22835 (opens Google Maps) · Page County · (540) 743-4571· 120 certified beds · avg 111 residents/day · certified since Sep 16, 1991 · 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: HILL VALLEY HEALTHCARE (43 facilities, chain avg rating 1.8★)

3/5

Health inspection rating (on-site)

inspected Nov 2, 2023

Serious findings on record

most recent Aug 14, 2023

Fines, last 3 years

2.74

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: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5 · 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.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, pattern · Nov 18, 2019 · 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 (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: Jan 8, 2020 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Aug 14, 2023 · 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 24, 2023 (Past Non-Compliance)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 51 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

Nov 2, 2023E · 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
Nov 2, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. F-0698
Nov 2, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The 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. F-0550

View all 51 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
Nov 2, 2023	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
Nov 2, 2023	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698
Nov 2, 2023	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The 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. · F-0550
Nov 2, 2023	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. · F-0578
Nov 2, 2023	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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. · F-0580
Nov 2, 2023	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services. · F-0645
Nov 2, 2023	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
Nov 2, 2023	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The 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
Nov 2, 2023	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
Nov 2, 2023	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
Nov 2, 2023	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
Nov 2, 2023	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The 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
Nov 2, 2023	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 14, 2023	▲ 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. · from a complaint · F-0600
Aug 14, 2023	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The 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. · from a complaint · F-0561
Feb 8, 2022	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
Feb 8, 2022	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697
Feb 8, 2022	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804
Feb 8, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not honor residents' right to voice complaints without discrimination or retaliation, or did not have a working complaint process that resolves issues promptly. · F-0585
Feb 8, 2022	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
Feb 8, 2022	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
Feb 8, 2022	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
Feb 8, 2022	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
Feb 8, 2022	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. · F-0689
Feb 8, 2022	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
Feb 8, 2022	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
Feb 8, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required. · F-0730
Feb 8, 2022	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
Feb 8, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883
Feb 8, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not make sure its staff were vaccinated for COVID-19 in accordance with the federal requirements in effect at the time. · F-0888
Feb 8, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not regularly inspect bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails for safety, or the rails and mattresses were not attached safely to the frames. · F-0909
Feb 8, 2022	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. · F-0947
Feb 8, 2022	C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread	The 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
Feb 8, 2022	C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread	The 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. · F-0732
Nov 18, 2019	▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, pattern	The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Nov 18, 2019	F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread	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
Nov 18, 2019	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
Nov 18, 2019	F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread	The facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. · F-0947
Nov 18, 2019	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The 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. · F-0550
Nov 18, 2019	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584
Nov 18, 2019	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	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
Nov 18, 2019	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. · F-0658
Nov 18, 2019	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not allow residents to take their own medications when a clinical review showed they could do so safely. Residents have this right if their care team determines it's appropriate. · F-0554
Nov 18, 2019	D · Potential for more than minimal 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
Nov 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
Nov 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
Nov 18, 2019	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
Nov 18, 2019	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
Nov 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
Nov 18, 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
Nov 18, 2019	C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread	The 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. · F-0732

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (19 → 13).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01

All citationsSerious citations (G–L)

2019

2022

2023

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

Year	Citations	Serious (G–L)	Worst severity that year
2019	17	1	K ▲
2022	19	0	E
2023	15	1	G ▲

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 →

No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.

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 facilityVirginia averageU.S. average

Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)

2.74

3.67

3.95

Registered Nurse hours

0.34

0.66

0.69

Weekend total nurse staffing

2.38

3.21

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)	2.74	3.67	3.95	bottom 8% in Virginia; bottom 7% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours	0.34	0.66	0.69	bottom 14% in Virginia; bottom 14% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing	2.38	3.21	3.50	bottom 12% in Virginia; bottom 6% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)	0.31	0.46	0.48	bottom 42% in Virginia; bottom 34% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)	35.6	48.1	45.8	top 20% in Virginia; top 25% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)	33.3	48.2	42.9	top 22% in Virginia; top 33% 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 2.78, RN 0.35, weekend 2.42.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (2.78 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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Skyview Springs Rehab and Nursing 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
Copper VA Trust	Organization	5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest	—	03/31/2021
Gold VA Trust	Organization	5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest	—	03/31/2021
HVH Luray Operations Holdings LLC	Organization	5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest	—	03/31/2021
Luray Operations Holdings LLC	Organization	5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest	—	03/31/2021
Silver VA Trust	Organization	5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest	—	03/31/2021
Skyview Springs Holdings LLC	Organization	5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest	100%	03/31/2021
VA Noble Parentco LLC	Organization	5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest	—	03/31/2021
Idels, Shimon	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	12/01/2022
Miller, Eva	Individual	W-2 Managing Employee	NOT APPLICABLE	06/01/2021

All 9 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 Hill Valley Healthcare — 43 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.

Staunton Post Acute & Rehabilitation — Staunton, VA · overall 2/5abuse
Summit Health and Rehab Center — Lynchburg, VA · overall 3/5
Tate Springs Health & Rehab — Lynchburg, VA · overall 4/5
Williamsburg Post Acute & Rehabilitation — Williamsburg, VA · overall 3/5
Winchester Health & Rehabilitation — Winchester, VA · overall 1/5
Alderwood Post Acute & Rehabilitation — Lynnwood, WA · overall 2/5abuse
Birch Creek Post Acute & Rehabilitation — Tacoma, WA · overall 1/5
Gig Harbor Health and Rehabilitation — Gig Harbor, WA · overall 2/5abuse

Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 42 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?"
"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?"
"How do you coordinate and monitor care for residents who receive dialysis?"
"Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
"How do you record and honor each resident's treatment wishes and advance directives, and how do staff know about them?"
"If my family member falls or their condition changes, exactly when and how will I be notified?"
"How do you screen new residents for mental health and disability-related needs, and how do you provide the specialized services they require?"

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 36% 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
Life Care Center of New Market	10.0 mi	New Market, VA	★★★★★	4/5
Skyline Terrace Conv Home	14.0 mi	Woodstock, VA	★★★★★	5/5
Woodstock Valley Health and Rehabilitation	14.6 mi	Woodstock, VA	★☆☆☆☆	1/5	abuseSFF

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Luray →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 495255.