12185 Clipper Drive, Lake Ridge, VA 22192 (opens Google Maps) · Prince William County · (703) 643-9017· 60 certified beds · avg 40 residents/day · certified since Jul 9, 1993 · 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: INGLESIDE ENGAGED LIVING (2 facilities, chain avg rating 5.0★)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5 · 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.
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Jan 22, 2026 · 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 (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, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 22 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. F-0689
The facility did not have an agreement with at least one Medicare- or Medicaid-certified hospital to ensure residents can be transferred quickly when they need hospital care. F-0843
The facility did not perform required COVID-19 testing on residents and staff. F-0886
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 22, 2026 | ▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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 |
| Jan 22, 2026 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not have an agreement with at least one Medicare- or Medicaid-certified hospital to ensure residents can be transferred quickly when they need hospital care. · F-0843 |
| Jun 23, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not perform required COVID-19 testing on residents and staff. · F-0886 |
| Jun 23, 2022 | 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 |
| Jun 23, 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 |
| May 16, 2019 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| May 16, 2019 | 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 |
| May 16, 2019 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| May 16, 2019 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| May 16, 2019 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| May 16, 2019 | 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 |
| May 16, 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 |
| May 16, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave. · F-0625 |
| May 16, 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 |
| May 16, 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 |
| May 16, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids. · F-0685 |
| May 16, 2019 | 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. · F-0689 |
| May 16, 2019 | 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 |
| May 16, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755 |
| May 16, 2019 | 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 |
| May 16, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| May 16, 2019 | 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. · F-0806 |
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (3 → 2).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 17 | 0 | E |
| 2022 | 3 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 2 | 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 →
1 fine totaling $8,405.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jan 22, 2026 | Fine | $8,405 |
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) | 5.55 | 3.67 | 3.95 | top 8% in Virginia; top 7% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 1.21 | 0.66 | 0.69 | top 9% in Virginia; top 9% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 5.03 | 3.21 | 3.50 | top 7% in Virginia; top 6% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 1.02 | 0.46 | 0.48 | top 5% in Virginia; top 5% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 28.8 | 48.1 | 45.8 | top 10% in Virginia; top 12% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 44.4 | 48.2 | 42.9 | top 42% in Virginia; bottom 45% 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 5.14, RN 1.12, weekend 4.66.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (5.14 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 5/5.
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: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Westminster at Lake Ridge. 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 →
Non profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Westminster Ingleside King Farm Retirement Communities INC | Organization | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2011 |
| Alley, Traci | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/02/2021 |
| Armstrong, Tommy | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/17/2025 |
| Armstrong, Tommy | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/17/2025 |
| Baker Tilly Advisory Group LP | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2015 |
| Baker Tilly Us LLP | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2015 |
| Bartels, Bruce | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/04/2015 |
| Cecchine, Margaret | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2023 |
| Chasm, Alexis | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/29/2023 |
| Clark, Dale | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2021 |
| Cox, Sally | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2018 |
| Delovska-Trajkova, Dusanka | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2013 |
| Flagship Rehabilitation, INC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2015 |
| Gleckman, Howard | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Green, Lynn | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/14/2024 |
| Green, Lynn | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/14/2024 |
| Hauge, Jennifer | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2022 |
| James, Ashley | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/20/2023 |
| James, Ashley | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/20/2023 |
| Johnson, Gregg | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2021 |
Showing 20 of 46 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 26 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
CMS lists this facility under the chain Ingleside Engaged Living — 2 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.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Belmont Bay Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center | 2.5 mi | Woodbridge, VA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Belvoir Woods Health Care Center at the Fairfax | 4.9 mi | Fort Belvoir, VA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Burke Health & Rehabilitation Center | 6.8 mi | Burke, VA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Greenspring Village | 6.8 mi | Springfield, VA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| August Healthcare at Leewood | 9.8 mi | Annandale, VA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Birmingham Green | 11.1 mi | Manassas, VA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Mount Vernon Healthcare Center | 11.2 mi | Alexandria, VA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Fairfax Rehabilitation and Nursing Center | 11.4 mi | Fairfax, VA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Annandale Healthcare Center | 11.6 mi | Annandale, VA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| George Washington Health & Rehabilitation | 12.2 mi | Alexandria, VA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| The Boulevard Post Acute | 12.3 mi | Fairfax, VA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Goodwin House Alexandria | 13.6 mi | Alexandria, VA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
CMS records place this facility in Prince William, VA — 4 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.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 495280.
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