North Carolina ›Garner

The Laurels of Forest Glenn

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

1101 Hartwell Street, Garner, NC 27529 (opens Google Maps) · Wake County · (919) 772-8888· 120 certified beds · avg 108 residents/day · certified since Jun 28, 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: CIENA HEALTHCARE/LAUREL HEALTH CARE (81 facilities, chain avg rating 2.8★)

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected May 12, 2025
7
Serious findings on record
most recent May 12, 2025
$182,083
Fines, last 3 years
3.41
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: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5 · how star ratings work →

The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and quality measures from resident assessments and claims.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Jun 26, 2024 · F-0604 · triggered by a complaint

The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment.

Why it matters: Unneeded restraints can cause injuries, muscle loss, and deep emotional distress.

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 22, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Jun 26, 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: Jul 22, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Jun 26, 2024 · F-0726 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident.

Why it matters: Undertrained caregivers are more likely to miss warning signs and make care mistakes.

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 22, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Feb 23, 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: Jan 30, 2024 (Past Non-Compliance)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, pattern · Dec 9, 2022 · 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: Dec 30, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, pattern · Dec 9, 2022 · F-0835

The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents.

Why it matters: Poor administration often shows up as understaffing, supply shortages, and care problems across the whole facility.

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: Dec 30, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 12, 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 (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: May 29, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 12 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. 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. · from a complaint F-0689

  2. 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

  3. 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

View all 12 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
May 12, 2025▲ 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
May 12, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 12, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812
Jun 26, 2024▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolatedThe facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · from a complaint · F-0604
Jun 26, 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 26, 2024▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolatedThe facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · from a complaint · F-0726
Apr 4, 2024D · 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
Apr 4, 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
Feb 23, 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
Feb 23, 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
Dec 9, 2022▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, patternThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Dec 9, 2022▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, patternThe facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents. · F-0835

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (2 → 3).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2022
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 2
2024
All citations: 7
Serious citations (G–L): 4
2025
All citations: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 1

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

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202222K ▲
202474J ▲
202531G ▲

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 →

3 fines totaling $182,083, 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
May 12, 2025Fine$15,015
Jun 26, 2024Fine$84,078
Feb 23, 2024Fine$82,990
Feb 23, 2024Payment Denial32 days from Mar 21, 2024

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: 3.41
North Carolina average: 4.01
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.54
North Carolina average: 0.64
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.07
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)3.414.013.95bottom 30% in North Carolina; bottom 32% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.540.640.69top 48% in North Carolina; bottom 44% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.073.563.50bottom 34% in North Carolina; bottom 35% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.360.410.48top 42% in North Carolina; bottom 44% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)40.249.045.8top 29% in North Carolina; top 37% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)35.745.742.9top 33% in North Carolina; top 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 3.39, RN 0.54, weekend 3.05.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.39 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.

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: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for The Laurels of Forest Glenn. 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 / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Cantillo, ManuelIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2025
Cantillo, ManuelIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2025
Khan, AnisIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2016
Khan, AnisIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2016
Khan, AnisIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2016
Laurel Health Care CompanyOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2016
Laurel Health Care CompanyOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/02/2025
Qazi, MohammadIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2016
Qazi, MohammadIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2016
Qazi, MohammadIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2016
Qazi, MohammadIndividualIndividual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/17/2025
Stobb, DavidIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2016
Stobb, DavidIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2016
Taylor, DarrylIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLENO DATE PROVIDED
Taylor, DarrylIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/14/2023

All 15 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 Ciena Healthcare/Laurel Health Care — 81 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 80 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 policy on physical restraints, and what alternatives do you try first?"
  • "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
  • "How do you verify that your nurses and aides have the skills to care for residents with needs like my family member's?"
  • "What were the findings behind this administration citation, and what has leadership changed since?"
  • "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
  • "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
  • "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
  • "How does your quality committee work, and can you give an example of a problem it recently identified and fixed?"

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 40% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 15 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 (12 closest of 24 within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Bellarose Nursing and Rehab2.8 miGarner, NC★★★★★5/5
Pruitthealth-Raleigh4.0 miRaleigh, NC★★★☆☆3/5
Sunnybrook Rehabilitation Center5.9 miRaleigh, NC★☆☆☆☆1/5
Capital Nursing and Rehabilitation Center5.9 miRaleigh, NC★★★★☆4/5
Raleigh Rehabilitation Center6.3 miRaleigh, NC★★★☆☆3/5
Tower Nursing and Rehabilitation Center7.0 miRaleigh, NC★★☆☆☆2/5
Bloomsbury at Hayes Barton Place7.5 miRaleigh, NC—/5
Highfield Nursing and Rehabilitation8.3 miCary, NC★☆☆☆☆2/5
Rex Rehab & Nursing Care Center8.6 miRaleigh, NC★★★★★4/5
The Cardinal at North Hills8.9 miRaleigh, NC★★★☆☆4/5
Hillcrest Raleigh at Crabtree Valley9.2 miRaleigh, NC★★★★☆4/5
Wellington Rehabilitation and Healthcare9.7 miKnightdale, NC★☆☆☆☆2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Wake, NC — 21 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 Garner →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 345389.

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