How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
The Laurels of Willow Creek
11611 Robious Road, Midlothian, VA 23113 (opens Google Maps) · Chesterfield County · (804) 379-4771· 120 certified beds · avg 112 residents/day · certified since Sep 24, 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 Sep 13, 2023
2
Serious findings on record
most recent Mar 24, 2022
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.62
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: ★★☆☆☆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.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Mar 24, 2022 · F-0684
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Mar 24, 2022 · F-0684
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 (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: Jun 2, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Mar 24, 2022 · F-0760
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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Mar 24, 2022 · F-0760
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.
Why it matters: A serious medication error can cause real harm, hospitalization, or worse.
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: Apr 19, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 54 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 did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. F-0697
The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · from a complaint F-0755
View all 54 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 13, 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 |
| Sep 13, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 13, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · from a complaint · F-0755 |
| Sep 13, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 13, 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 |
| Sep 13, 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. · from a complaint · F-0580 |
| Sep 13, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 13, 2023 | 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 13, 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. · from a complaint · F-0658 |
| Sep 13, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. · F-0676 |
| Sep 13, 2023 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0686 |
| Sep 13, 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 |
| Sep 13, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698 |
| Sep 13, 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 |
| Sep 13, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · F-0725 |
| Sep 13, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide each resident with a nourishing, tasty, well-balanced diet that meets their daily nutritional and special dietary needs. · from a complaint · F-0800 |
| Sep 13, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 13, 2023 | 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 |
| Mar 24, 2022 | ▲ G · Actual 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 |
| Mar 24, 2022 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | 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. · F-0760 |
| Mar 24, 2022 | 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 |
| Mar 24, 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 |
| Mar 24, 2022 | 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 |
| Mar 24, 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 |
| Mar 24, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842 |
| Mar 24, 2022 | 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 |
| Mar 24, 2022 | 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. · F-0561 |
| Mar 24, 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 |
| Mar 24, 2022 | 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 |
| Mar 24, 2022 | 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 |
| Mar 24, 2022 | 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 |
| Mar 24, 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 |
| Mar 24, 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 |
| Mar 24, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0757 |
| Mar 24, 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 |
| Mar 14, 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 |
| Mar 14, 2019 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Mar 14, 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 |
| Mar 14, 2019 | 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 |
| Mar 14, 2019 | 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 |
| Mar 14, 2019 | 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 |
| Mar 14, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · F-0610 |
| Mar 14, 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 |
| Mar 14, 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 |
| Mar 14, 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 |
| Mar 14, 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 |
| Mar 14, 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 |
| Mar 14, 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 |
| Mar 14, 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 |
| Mar 14, 2019 | 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 |
| Mar 14, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Mar 14, 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 |
| Mar 14, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide timely, quality laboratory tests to meet residents' needs. · F-0770 |
| Mar 14, 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 stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (17 → 18).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2019
All citations: 19
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2022
All citations: 17
Serious citations (G–L): 2
2023
All citations: 18
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 | 19 | 0 | E |
| 2022 | 17 | 2 | G ▲ |
| 2023 | 18 | 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: 3.62
Virginia average: 3.67
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.56
Virginia average: 0.66
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.11
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) | 3.62 | 3.67 | 3.95 | top 34% in Virginia; bottom 42% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.56 | 0.66 | 0.69 | top 42% in Virginia; bottom 46% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.11 | 3.21 | 3.50 | top 36% in Virginia; bottom 37% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.33 | 0.46 | 0.48 | bottom 47% in Virginia; bottom 38% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 47.0 | 48.1 | 45.8 | top 45% in Virginia; bottom 44% 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 3.24, RN 0.50, weekend 2.79.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.24 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 Willow Creek. 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 / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Felty, Danny | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Felty, Danny | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Khan, Anis | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2016 |
| Khan, Anis | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2016 |
| Khan, Anis | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2016 |
| Laurel Health Care Company | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/02/2016 |
| Laurel Health Care Company | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/03/2025 |
| Qazi, Mohammad | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2016 |
| Qazi, Mohammad | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2016 |
| Qazi, Mohammad | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2016 |
| Select Rehabilitation, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2024 |
| Shive, Stacie | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/25/2021 |
| Shive, Stacie | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/25/2021 |
| Stobb, David | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2016 |
| Stobb, David | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2016 |
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.
- Aria Nursing and Rehabilitation — Lansing, MI · overall 1/5
- Autumnwood of Deckerville — Deckerville, MI · overall 3/5
- Autumnwood of McBain — McBain, MI · overall 1/5
- Boulevard Temple Care Center, LLC — Detroit, MI · overall 3/5
- Brittany Manor — Midland, MI · overall 3/5abuse
- Christian Park Health Care Center — Escanaba, MI · overall 1/5abuse
- Christian Park Village — Escanaba, MI · overall 5/5
- Courtney Manor — Bad Axe, MI · overall 1/5
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
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "What systems do you use to prevent medication errors, and what happens when one occurs?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "How do you assess and manage residents' pain, especially for those who have trouble communicating?"
- "How does your pharmacist review residents' medications, and how quickly can you fill new or urgent prescriptions?"
- "How often is each resident's medication list reviewed, and who decides when a drug can be reduced or stopped?"
- "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
- "If my family member falls or their condition changes, exactly when and how will I be notified?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 47% 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 29 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Laurels of Bon Air | 3.4 mi | Bon Air, VA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Southampton Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center | 4.8 mi | Richmond, VA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| The Haven at Brandermill Woods | 5.0 mi | Midlothian, VA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Beaufont Health and Rehabilitation Center | 5.1 mi | Richmond, VA | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Lakewood Manor | 5.9 mi | Richmond, VA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Canterbury Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center | 6.4 mi | Richmond, VA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Shalom Gardens Health & Rehabilitation | 6.7 mi | Richmond, VA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| August Healthcare at Richmond | 6.8 mi | Richmond, VA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Westport Rehabilitation and Nursing Center | 7.2 mi | Richmond, VA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Forest Hill Health & Rehabilitation | 7.4 mi | Richmond, VA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Glenburnie Rehab & Nursing Center | 7.5 mi | Richmond, VA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Cedarfield Pinnacle Living | 7.7 mi | Richmond, VA | —/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Chesterfield, VA — 5 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Tyler's Retreat at Iron Bridge — Chester, VA · overall 3/5
- Health Care Center Lucy Corr — Chesterfield, VA · overall 2/5
Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 495257.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).