North CarolinaCharlotte

University Place Nursing and Rehabilitation Center

9200 Glenwater Drive, Charlotte, NC 28262 · Mecklenburg County · 207 certified beds · avg 154 residents/day · certified since Jul 1, 1974

Part of chain: PRINCIPLE LONG TERM CARE (40 facilities, chain avg rating 3.0★)

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
2
Serious findings on record
$276,401
Fines, last 3 years
4.22
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5

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 self-reported quality measures.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Oct 15, 2024 · F-0760 · triggered by a complaint

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): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Sep 20, 2024 (Past Non-Compliance)

▲ Actual harm, repeated · Mar 13, 2024 · F-0679 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle.

Why it matters: Without engaging activities, residents can become bored, isolated, and depressed, and decline faster.

Severity (H): Multiple residents were actually harmed by the same failure — a pattern of real harm, not an isolated incident.

Corrected: May 30, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (35)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Jul 24, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · from a complaint
Jul 24, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jul 24, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jul 24, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jul 24, 2025B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.
Oct 15, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · from a complaint
Oct 15, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint
Aug 27, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Aug 27, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not prepare and serve food in a form that meets each resident's individual needs — for example, chopped, pureed, or softened food for residents with chewing or swallowing problems. · from a complaint
Aug 27, 2024B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe 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
Jul 9, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
May 30, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
May 30, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Mar 13, 2024▲ H · Actual harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · from a complaint
Mar 13, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Mar 13, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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. · from a complaint
Mar 13, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · from a complaint
Mar 13, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Mar 13, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Mar 13, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them.
Mar 13, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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. · from a complaint
Mar 13, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Mar 13, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 13, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Mar 13, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Mar 13, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Mar 13, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Mar 13, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Mar 13, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Aug 25, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Aug 25, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
Aug 25, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them.
Aug 25, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups.
Aug 25, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Aug 25, 2022B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (16 → 5).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202260E
2024242H ▲
202550E

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)

2 fines totaling $276,401, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.

DateTypeAmount / length
Oct 15, 2024Fine$9,318
Mar 13, 2024Fine$267,083
Mar 13, 2024Payment Denial148 days from Apr 4, 2024

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

MeasureThis facilityNorth Carolina avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)4.224.013.95top 24% in North Carolina; top 32% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.490.640.69bottom 43% in North Carolina; bottom 36% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.823.563.50top 23% in North Carolina; top 29% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.250.410.48bottom 34% in North Carolina; bottom 22% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)59.149.045.8bottom 26% in North Carolina; bottom 18% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)66.745.742.9bottom 21% in North Carolina; bottom 15% in the U.S.

Hours are per resident per day, 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 3.60, RN 0.42, weekend 3.26. Staffing rating: 2/5.

Self-reported quality measures

Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.

Quality measures rating: 1/5 · long-stay residents: 2/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Boice, GaleIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE03/05/2018
Boice, GaleIndividualIndividual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE05/04/2026
Boice, GaleIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/05/2018
Fairman, ShawnnaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/17/2025
Fairman, ShawnnaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/09/2025
Hill, RaymondIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2011
Hill, RobertIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2011
Hill, StephenIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2011
Johnson, DianneIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2011
Principle Long Term Care, INC.OrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2011

Questions to ask on your visit

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Crown Haven Health and Rehabilitation3.0 miCharlotte, NC★★☆☆☆1/5
Rockwell Park Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center3.2 miCharlotte, NC—/5SFF
Pine Crest Health & Rehabilitation5.7 miCharlotte, NC★☆☆☆☆1/5
Pruitthealth-Town Center5.9 miHarrisburg, NC★★★☆☆3/5
Asbury Health and Rehabilitation Center5.9 miCharlotte, NC★★☆☆☆2/5
Peak Resources - Charlotte7.3 miCharlotte, NC★★★☆☆3/5
Wilora Lake Healthcare7.3 miCharlotte, NC★★☆☆☆2/5abuse
Huntersville Oaks7.4 miHuntersville, NC★★★☆☆4/5
Redwood Health & Rehab8.0 miCharlotte, NC★★★☆☆3/5
Novant Health Presbyterian Medical Center-Snu8.4 miCharlotte, NC★★★★★5/5
Pelican Health at Charlotte8.4 miCharlotte, NC★★☆☆☆1/5SFF
The Gardens of Taylor Glen Retirement Community8.8 miConcord, NC★★★★☆4/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Charlotte →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 345142.