How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
West Village Post Acute
8 North Texas Avenue, Greenville, SC 29611 (opens Google Maps) · Greenville County · (864) 295-1331· 132 certified beds · avg 125 residents/day · certified since Sep 2, 1975 · 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: PACS GROUP (274 facilities, chain avg rating 2.9★)
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jan 16, 2026
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Oct 13, 2022
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.56
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 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 · Oct 13, 2022 · F-0600
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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Oct 13, 2022 · F-0600
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: Nov 13, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 23 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
The facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician. F-0803
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
View all 23 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jan 16, 2026 | 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 |
| Jan 16, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician. · F-0803 |
| Jan 16, 2026 | 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 |
| Jan 16, 2026 | 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 |
| Jan 16, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · from a complaint · F-0692 |
| Jan 16, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them. · F-0694 |
| Jan 16, 2026 | 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 |
| Mar 14, 2025 | 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 |
| Nov 15, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0550 |
| Nov 15, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · from a complaint · F-0583 |
| Nov 15, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0761 |
| Oct 13, 2022 | ▲ 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. · F-0600 |
| Oct 13, 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 |
| Oct 13, 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 |
| Oct 13, 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 |
| Oct 13, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0558 |
| Oct 13, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' right to receive the visitors they choose, at the times they choose. · F-0563 |
| Oct 13, 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 |
| Oct 13, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · F-0604 |
| Oct 13, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · F-0679 |
| Oct 13, 2022 | 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 |
| Oct 13, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692 |
| Oct 13, 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 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (3 → 7).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2022
All citations: 12
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2024
All citations: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 7
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 12 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2024 | 3 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2026 | 7 | 0 | F |
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 facilitySouth Carolina averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.56
South Carolina average: 4.08
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.59
South Carolina average: 0.67
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.08
South Carolina average: 3.55
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | South Carolina avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 3.56 | 4.08 | 3.95 | bottom 33% in South Carolina; bottom 39% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.59 | 0.67 | 0.69 | top 46% in South Carolina; top 50% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.08 | 3.55 | 3.50 | bottom 32% in South Carolina; bottom 35% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.49 | 0.41 | 0.48 | top 22% in South Carolina; top 34% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 53.3 | 45.9 | 45.8 | bottom 29% in South Carolina; bottom 29% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 60.0 | 42.1 | 42.9 | bottom 21% in South Carolina; bottom 22% 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 3.28, RN 0.54, weekend 2.84.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.28 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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 2/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for West Village Post Acute. 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8 North Texas Avenue LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/15/2024 |
| Hancock, Mark | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/03/2025 |
| Hancock, Mark | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/15/2024 |
| Holck, Justin | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/09/2025 |
| Holck, Justin | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/09/2025 |
| Jergensen, Joshua | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Jergensen, Joshua | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Mauldin, Elizabeth | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/22/2024 |
| Mauldin, Elizabeth | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/22/2024 |
| Mitchell, John | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Mitchell, John | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Murray, Jason | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/15/2024 |
| Pacs Group, INC. | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/15/2024 |
| Pacs Holdings, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/15/2024 |
| Providence Administrative Consulting Services INC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2021 |
| Providence Group NH, LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/15/2024 |
| Truist Bank | Organization | 5% or Greater Security Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/16/2024 |
| Truist Bank | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/21/2025 |
| Wheeler, Kerry | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2021 |
| Wheeler, Kerry | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2021 |
Showing 20 of 21 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 1 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Pacs Group — 274 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.
- Alta Heights Post Acute — Goodlettsville, TN · overall 4/5
- Eaton Creek Post Acute — Nashville, TN · overall —/5SFF
- Grandview Post Acute — Cookeville, TN · overall 1/5
- Selmer Post Acute — Selmer, TN · overall 4/5
- Stone River Post Acute — Murfreesboro, TN · overall 3/5
- Houston Transitional Care — Houston, TX · overall 3/5
- North Houston Transitional Care — Houston, TX · overall 3/5
- Bridge Crest Post Acute — Vancouver, WA · overall 2/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 273 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.
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "Who reviews your menus, and can I see this week's menu and join my family member for a meal?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "How do you monitor residents' weight and eating, and what happens when someone starts losing weight?"
- "Who on your staff manages IV therapy, and what training and monitoring is in place?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the South 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 53% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 21 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 22 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Magnolia Manor - Greenville | 1.6 mi | Greenville, SC | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Greenville Post Acute | 3.5 mi | Greenville, SC | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Heartland Health Care Center - Greenville East | 3.7 mi | Greenville, SC | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | SFF |
| Presbyterian Home of SC - Foothills | 6.4 mi | Easley, SC | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Powdersville Post-Acute | 6.5 mi | Easley, SC | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| The Arboretum at the Woodlands | 6.8 mi | Greenville, SC | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Patewood Post Acute | 6.9 mi | Greenville, SC | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Linville Court at the Cascades Verdae | 7.0 mi | Greenville, SC | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Promedica Skilled Nursing and Reh- Greenville West | 7.3 mi | Greenville, SC | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| The Gables of Pelham Skilled Nursing & Rehab | 7.6 mi | Greenville, SC | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Fleetwood Post Acute | 8.5 mi | Easley, SC | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| NHC Healthcare - Mauldin | 9.1 mi | Greenville, SC | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Greenville, SC — 19 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Brushy Creek Post Acute — Greer, SC · overall 1/5abuse
- Chandler Creek Post Acute — Greer, SC · overall 1/5
- Fountain Inn Post Acute — Fountain Inn, SC · overall 3/5
- NHC Healthcare - Greenville — Greer, SC · overall 5/5
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 425102.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).