KELLER LANDING

813 KELLER LANE, TUSCUMBIA, AL 35674 (256) 383-1535
For profit - Corporation 109 Beds GENESIS HEALTHCARE Data: November 2025
Trust Grade
90/100
#21 of 223 in AL
Last Inspection: February 2022

Over 2 years since last inspection. Current conditions may differ from available data.

Overview

Keller Landing in Tuscumbia, Alabama, has an excellent Trust Grade of A, indicating it is highly recommended and performs well compared to other facilities. It ranks #21 out of 223 nursing homes in Alabama, placing it in the top half, and is the best option among the three facilities in Colbert County. The nursing home is improving, having reduced its issues from one in 2019 to none in 2022, which is a positive trend. Staffing is a strength here with a rating of 4 out of 5 stars and a turnover rate of only 35%, which is significantly lower than the state average. Notably, there have been no fines recorded, indicating compliance with regulations, and the facility has more registered nurse coverage than 100% of Alabama facilities, which enhances resident care. However, there have been concerns regarding hand hygiene practices, with specific incidents where nurses failed to wash their hands after handling contaminated items before administering medications. Additionally, there were instances of personal information being left visible, which could compromise resident privacy. While these findings point to areas needing improvement, the overall quality and care at Keller Landing make it a strong choice for families seeking a nursing home.

Trust Score
A
90/100
In Alabama
#21/223
Top 9%
Safety Record
Low Risk
No red flags
Inspections
Getting Better
1 → 0 violations
Staff Stability
○ Average
35% turnover. Near Alabama's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
Penalties
✓ Good
No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Alabama facilities.
Skilled Nurses
✓ Good
Each resident gets 76 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than 97% of Alabama nursing homes. RNs are the most trained staff who catch health problems before they become serious.
Violations
✓ Good
Only 3 deficiencies on record. Cleaner than most facilities. Minor issues only.
★★★★★
5.0
Overall Rating
★★★★☆
4.0
Staff Levels
★★★★☆
4.0
Care Quality
★★★★★
5.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2019: 1 issues
2022: 0 issues

The Good

  • 4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
  • 4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record
  • Staff turnover below average (35%)

    13 points below Alabama average of 48%

Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, fire safety.

The Bad

Staff Turnover: 35%

10pts below Alabama avg (46%)

Typical for the industry

Chain: GENESIS HEALTHCARE

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

The Ugly 3 deficiencies on record

Jun 2019 1 deficiency
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interviews, record review, and review of a facility document titled, Hand Hygiene, the facility failed to ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interviews, record review, and review of a facility document titled, Hand Hygiene, the facility failed to ensure a licensed nurse washed her hands prior to administering Resident Identifier (RI) #15's medications, after touching contaminated items, including the door/door knob and privacy curtain. Further, after administering RI #15's medication, the licensed nurse removed her right glove, placed it in the garbage can, and returned to the medication cart, without first washing her hands. This deficient practice affected RI #15, one of three residents observed, and one of three licensed nurses observed during medication pass observations. Findings Include: A review of a facility policy titled, Hand Hygiene with a review date of 11/15/2018 revealed, .PURPOSE To . reduce the transmission of pathogenic microorganisms.PROCESS 1. Perform hand hygiene: 1.1 Before patient care . 1.4 After patient care . RI #15 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. On 6/19/19 at 9:40 a.m., the surveyor observed Employee Identifier (EI) #1, a Registered Nurse, during a medication pass. EI #1 entered RI #15's room, closed the door with both hands, touched the door knob with her right hand, and pulled the curtain to the left side of RI #15's bed with both hands, but did not wash her hands prior to giving RI #15's oral medication. After EI #1 gave RI #15's inhaler medication, the surveyor observed EI #1 walk out of RI #15's room with her right gloved hand holding RI #15's inhaler. EI #1 then removed her glove from the right hand, put the glove in the garbage can, and did not wash her hands. EI #1 placed RI #15's inhaler on top of the medication cart, and opened the Medication Administration Record Book on top of the medication cart with both hands. On 6/19/19 11:41 at a.m., an interview was conducted with EI #2, a Registered Nurse/Infection Control Preventionist. EI #2 was asked what should you do prior to giving a resident a oral medication. EI #2 stated you should wash your hands. EI #2 was asked what should you do after giving a resident an inhaler medication, and removing gloves, prior to opening a Medication Administration Record Book on top of the medication cart. EI #2 stated you should wash your hands. EI #2 was asked what is your facility policy on hand hygiene regarding patient care. EI #2 stated you should wash your hands prior to and after patient care. EI #2 was asked why should you perform hand hygiene prior to giving a resident a medication and after giving a resident a medication. E #2 stated it is to prevent cross contamination. On 6/19/19 at 12:09 p.m., an interview was conducted with EI #1. EI #1 was asked if she washed her hands after she entered RI #15's room, closed the door with both hands, and pulled the curtain, prior to giving RI #15's oral medication. EI #1 stated no, she did not wash her hands. EI #1 was asked why she did not wash your hands. EI #1 stated she was not thinking. EI #1 stated she should have washed her hands in order to prevent infection to a resident. EI #1 was asked if she washed her hands after she gave RI #15's inhaler medication and removed her glove and put it in the garbage can, prior to returning to the cart and touching the Medication Administration Record Book. EI #1 stated no. EI #1 stated she should have washed her hands in order to prevent infection to a resident.
Sept 2018 2 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0583 (Tag F0583)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interviews, record review and review of a facility policy titled, Privacy Rights: Patient, the facility fa...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interviews, record review and review of a facility policy titled, Privacy Rights: Patient, the facility failed to ensure a Registered Nurse, Employee Identifier (EI) #2, did not leave Resident Identifier (RI) #52's Medication Administration Record (MAR) visible and unattended exposing RI #52's personal information and medications taken. This was observed on 09/11/18, during the morning medication administration pass. This deficient practice affected RI #52, one of five residents observed during the medication administration pass, and EI #2, one of four nurses observed administering medications. Findings Include: Review of a facility policy titled, Privacy Rights: Patient, with a revision date of 11/18/16, documented: POLICY The patient has a right to personal privacy and confidentiality of his/her personal and medical records. Personal privacy includes . medical treatments . RI #52 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE]. On 09/11/18 at 8:19 a.m., the surveyor observed an opened MAR left on top of an unattended medication cart. The MAR revealed RI #52's face, allergies, diet, code status and some of the resident's medications. EI #2 walked to the medication cart and the surveyor shared with EI #2 that RI #52's medical information was visible. The surveyor asked EI #2 what would it be considered when a resident's MAR was left visible where anyone walking by could see the MAR. EI #2 said it would be a privacy issue. On 09/13/18 at 10:00 a.m., the surveyor conducted an interview with EI #1, the Director of Nursing. The surveyor asked EI #1 what should the nurse do, concerning the resident's MAR, when he/she left the medication cart. EI #1 said the nurse should close the MAR. The surveyor asked EI #1 what was it considered when the MAR was left in a position where anyone walking by could observe the resident's information. EI #1 said that would be a privacy concern.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, record review and review of facility policies titled, Medication Administration: Oral and Lin...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, record review and review of facility policies titled, Medication Administration: Oral and Linen Handling, the facility failed to ensure: 1) a medication nurse, Employee Identifier (EI) #2, sanitized her hands after administering medications to Resident Identifier (RI) #1, and before signing the Medication Administration Record (MAR) on 09/12/18, during the morning medication administration pass; and 2) linen did not touch the uniform of EI #3, a laundry staff member on 09/12/18, when EI #3 was folding the linen (sheets). These deficient practices affected RI #1, one of five residents observed during the medication administration pass, and EI #2, one of four nurses observed administering medications. It also affected EI #3, a laundry staff member and had the potential to affect the resident who would receive that linen. Findings Include: 1) A review of the facility policy titled, Medication Administration: Oral with a revision date of 05/04/15, revealed: .3. Administer medication . 4. Cleanse hands. 5. Document: .Administration of medication . RI #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE]. On 09/12/18 at 8:10 a.m., the surveyor observed EI #2 prepare all, except two, of RI #1's medications. EI #2 walked to where RI #1 was and administered the medications to RI #1. On 09/12/18 at 8:36 a.m., EI #2 went to central supply to obtain a stock medication for RI #1, then walked back to the medication cart. Without sanitizing her hands, EI #2 put gloves on, then opened and dated the stock medication. EI #2 prepared the other two medications for RI #1. On 09/12/18 at 8:43 a.m., EI #2 administered the medications to RI #1. On 09/12/18 at 8:46 a.m., EI #2 went back to the medication cart, and without sanitizing her hands, initialed the MAR. The surveyor asked EI #2 what should she have done before she initialed the MAR. EI #2 said used hand sanitizer. The surveyor asked EI #2 what could it be considered when she touched several items/things, then came back to the medication cart and initialed the MAR. EI #2 replied contamination. On 09/13/18 at 8:13 a.m., the surveyor conducted an interview with EI #5, the Infection Control Nurse. The surveyor asked EI #5 what should the nurses do, before touching anything, when returning to the medication cart after administering medications. EI #5 said use hand sanitizer or wash their hands, if they were visibly soiled. The surveyor asked EI #5 what would it be considered if that was not done. EI #5 replied, she guessed that would be cross contamination. 2) Review of a facility policy titled, Linen Handling, with an effective date of 09/01/04, documented: . PROCESS . 3. Cleanse hands before handling clean linen; do not allow linen to touch uniform . On 09/12/18 at 10:36 a.m., the surveyor observed EI #3, a laundry staff member folding linen (sheets). EI #3 held the sheets up against her shirt and pants when folding them, then placed the sheets on a shelf. On 09/12/18 10:40 a.m., the surveyor observed EI #3 continue to fold sheets while holding the sheets up against her shirt and pants. The surveyor asked EI #3 how should linen be handled when being folded. EI #3 said staff's hands were washed before the linen was folded. The surveyor asked EI #3 should linen be held up against her clothes when being folded. EI #3 replied no. The surveyor asked EI #3 what would that be considered when linen was held up against her clothes. EI #3 said contamination. The surveyor shared with EI #3 the observation of her folding the sheets up against her shirt and pants. EI #3 said she did not realize she was doing that. On 09/12/18 at 10:45 a.m., the surveyor conducted an interview with EI #4, the Laundry Manager. The surveyor asked EI #4 should linen that was being folded be held up against staff clothing. EI #4 said no. The surveyor asked EI #4 how should the linen be held or folded. EI #4 replied, away from your clothes. EI #4 was asked when not held away from your clothes, what would that be considered. EI #4 said contamination. On 09/13/18 at 08:23 a.m., the surveyor conducted an interview with EI #5, the Infection Control Nurse. The surveyor asked EI #5 how should laundry staff handle linen when the linen was being folded. EI #5 said the linen was not supposed to touch a person's clothes or uniform when being folded.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

  • "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
  • "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • Grade A (90/100). Above average facility, better than most options in Alabama.
  • • No major safety red flags. No abuse findings, life-threatening violations, or SFF status.
  • • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Alabama facilities.
  • • Only 3 deficiencies on record. Cleaner than most facilities. Minor issues only.
Concerns
  • • No significant concerns identified. This facility shows no red flags across CMS ratings, staff turnover, or federal penalties.
Bottom line: Generally positive indicators. Standard due diligence and a personal visit recommended.

About This Facility

What is Keller Landing's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns KELLER LANDING an overall rating of 5 out of 5 stars, which is considered much above average nationally. Within Alabama, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.

How is Keller Landing Staffed?

CMS rates KELLER LANDING's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 35%, compared to the Alabama average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.

What Have Inspectors Found at Keller Landing?

State health inspectors documented 3 deficiencies at KELLER LANDING during 2018 to 2019. These included: 3 with potential for harm.

Who Owns and Operates Keller Landing?

KELLER LANDING is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by GENESIS HEALTHCARE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 109 certified beds and approximately 72 residents (about 66% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in TUSCUMBIA, Alabama.

How Does Keller Landing Compare to Other Alabama Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Alabama, KELLER LANDING's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 3.0, staff turnover (35%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (5 stars) is much above the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Keller Landing?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?"

Is Keller Landing Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, KELLER LANDING has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 5-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Alabama. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.

Do Nurses at Keller Landing Stick Around?

KELLER LANDING has a staff turnover rate of 35%, which is about average for Alabama nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.

Was Keller Landing Ever Fined?

KELLER LANDING has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.

Is Keller Landing on Any Federal Watch List?

KELLER LANDING is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.