7246 Forest Hill Ave, Richmond, VA 23225 (opens Google Maps) · Richmond City County · (804) 320-7901· 195 certified beds · avg 182 residents/day · certified since Jul 20, 2017 · 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: MARQUIS HEALTH SERVICES (87 facilities, chain avg rating 3.0★)
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 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.
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Feb 6, 2026 · F-0627 · triggered by a complaint
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.
Why it matters: A rushed or poorly planned move can leave a resident somewhere that can't meet their needs.
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: Feb 24, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Feb 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 (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: Jan 8, 2024 (Past Non-Compliance)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Oct 4, 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: Nov 6, 2018 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 49 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
The 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
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. · from a complaint F-0657
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Feb 6, 2026 | ▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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 |
| Feb 6, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Feb 6, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0657 |
| Feb 6, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 12, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · from a complaint · F-0697 |
| Jun 12, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. · from a complaint · F-0757 |
| Jun 12, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0550 |
| Jun 12, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584 |
| Jun 12, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. · from a complaint · F-0806 |
| Nov 7, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0656 |
| Nov 7, 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. · from a complaint · F-0657 |
| Nov 7, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 27, 2024 | ▲ 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 |
| Feb 27, 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 |
| Feb 27, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint · F-0921 |
| Feb 27, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 27, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Feb 27, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area. · from a complaint · F-0919 |
| Sep 3, 2021 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| Sep 3, 2021 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not designate a qualified infection preventionist — a trained person responsible for running the infection prevention and control program. · F-0882 |
| Sep 3, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility's activities program was not run by a qualified professional. The person directing recreation and social activities must have proper training or credentials. · F-0680 |
| Sep 3, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not perform required COVID-19 testing on residents and staff. · F-0886 |
| Sep 3, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not let a resident or their legal representative see or buy copies of the resident's own records. · F-0573 |
| Sep 3, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · F-0583 |
| Sep 3, 2021 | 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. · F-0607 |
| Sep 3, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · F-0609 |
| Sep 3, 2021 | 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 |
| Sep 3, 2021 | 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 |
| Sep 3, 2021 | 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 |
| Sep 3, 2021 | 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 |
| Sep 3, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide proper foot care for residents. Foot care includes routine care like nail trimming and attention to foot problems, which matter greatly for older adults. · F-0687 |
| Sep 3, 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 |
| Sep 3, 2021 | 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 |
| Oct 4, 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 |
| Oct 4, 2018 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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. · F-0758 |
| Oct 4, 2018 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 4, 2018 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0582 |
| Oct 4, 2018 | 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 |
| Oct 4, 2018 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility hired someone with an official finding of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or theft against them. Facilities are not allowed to employ people with such findings. · F-0606 |
| Oct 4, 2018 | 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 4, 2018 | 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 4, 2018 | 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 4, 2018 | 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 |
| Oct 4, 2018 | 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 4, 2018 | 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. · F-0684 |
| Oct 4, 2018 | 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 4, 2018 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide the right treatment and services for residents with dementia or signs of dementia. Dementia care requires specific approaches, training, and patience. · F-0744 |
| Oct 4, 2018 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. · F-0801 |
| Oct 4, 2018 | 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 |
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (16 → 15).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | 16 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2021 | 15 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 9 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2025 | 5 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 4 | 1 | J ▲ |
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.
How to file a complaint about care →
4 fines totaling $36,283.
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.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Feb 6, 2026 | Fine | $14,151 |
| Feb 27, 2024 | Fine | $12,106 |
| Jan 22, 2024 | Fine | $6,774 |
| Dec 26, 2023 | Fine | $3,252 |
What these staffing numbers mean →
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) | 2.36 | 3.67 | 3.95 | bottom 1% in Virginia; bottom 2% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.32 | 0.66 | 0.69 | bottom 9% in Virginia; bottom 12% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 2.15 | 3.21 | 3.50 | bottom 3% in Virginia; bottom 3% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.18 | 0.46 | 0.48 | bottom 13% in Virginia; bottom 9% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 52.2 | 48.1 | 45.8 | bottom 40% in Virginia; bottom 31% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 45.0 | 48.2 | 42.9 | top 44% in Virginia; bottom 44% 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 3.02, RN 0.41, weekend 2.76.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.02 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 1/5.
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: 4/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Southampton Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
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.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
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 - Partnership
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Skilled Venture LLC | Organization | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2022 |
| Bergman, Carl | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2022 |
| Bergman, Carl | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2022 |
| Harman, Dina | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2022 |
| Harman, Dina | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2022 |
| Law, Joseph | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2022 |
| Law, Joseph | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2022 |
| M&t Bank | Organization | 5% or Greater Mortgage Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2022 |
| M&t Bank | Organization | 5% or Greater Security Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2022 |
| Marquis Limited LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2022 |
| Marquis Limited LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/11/2025 |
| NFR 2020 Irrv Tr | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2022 |
| Posen, Mindee | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2022 |
| Posen, Mindee | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2022 |
| Quinto Nexgen LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2022 |
| Reliant Pro Rehab LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2022 |
| Reliant Pro Rehab LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/11/2025 |
| Rsbrmk Holdings LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2022 |
| SK Nexgen Tr | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2022 |
| Southampton Property LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2022 |
Showing 20 of 31 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 11 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
CMS lists this facility under the chain Marquis Health Services — 87 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 86 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beaufont Health and Rehabilitation Center | 2.2 mi | Richmond, VA | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Forest Hill Health & Rehabilitation | 3.0 mi | Richmond, VA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| The Virginia Home | 3.2 mi | Richmond, VA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| The Laurels of Bon Air | 3.3 mi | Bon Air, VA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Glenburnie Rehab & Nursing Center | 3.7 mi | Richmond, VA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Sitter and Barfoot Veterans Care Center | 4.5 mi | Richmond, VA | ★★★★★ | 3/5 | |
| Westport Rehabilitation and Nursing Center | 4.7 mi | Richmond, VA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| The Laurels of Willow Creek | 4.8 mi | Midlothian, VA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Rosedale Health & Rehabilitation | 4.9 mi | Richmond, VA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| August Healthcare at Richmond | 4.9 mi | Richmond, VA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Vcu Health Children's Services at Brook Road | 5.0 mi | Richmond, VA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Westminster-Canterbury of Richmond | 5.7 mi | Richmond, VA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 495423.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details