SENIOR CARE CENTER - BRUNSWICK
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Senior Care Center in Brunswick, Georgia, has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns and poor overall quality. It ranks #334 out of 353 facilities in Georgia, placing it in the bottom half of all nursing homes in the state, and #5 out of 5 in Glynn County, meaning there are no better local options. The facility's performance is worsening, with issues increasing from 13 in 2024 to 15 in 2025, reflecting a decline in care quality. Staffing is particularly concerning, with a 1/5 star rating and a turnover rate of 78%, much higher than the state average, indicating instability in care. Notably, the facility has faced serious incidents, including a staff member using verbal and physical aggression towards a resident and failing to properly investigate allegations of abuse, which raises significant safety concerns for potential residents. While there is some average RN coverage, the overall picture suggests that families should carefully consider these issues when evaluating this facility.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Georgia
- #334/353
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 78% turnover. Very high, 30 points above average. Constant new faces learning your loved one's needs.
- Penalties ⚠ Watch
- $16,801 in fines. Higher than 94% of Georgia facilities. Major compliance failures.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 21 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Georgia. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 38 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in fire safety.
The Bad
Below Georgia average (2.6)
Significant quality concerns identified by CMS
32pts above Georgia avg (46%)
Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
30 points above Georgia average of 48%
The Ugly 38 deficiencies on record
Jul 2025
12 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0569
(Tag F0569)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff and residents' representative interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policy titled, Resident Tru...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a safe, clean, comfortable, home-like enviro...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, staff interviews, record review and review of the facility's policies Care Plans and Smoke Free Policy, t...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Number of residents sampled:
Number of residents cited:
Based on observation, resident and staff interviews, record reviews, and...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policies titled Occurrences and Smoke Free ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0805
(Tag F0805)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure mechanical soft - chopped meats were prepared properl...
Read full inspector narrative →
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, staff interviews, and review of the facility's policy titled, Standard Precautions, the facility failed t...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0914
(Tag F0914)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and review of the facility's policy titled Patient/Resident Rights, Accommodation of Needs, t...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0658
(Tag F0658)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, staff interviews, record reviews and review of the facility's policy titled, Medication Administration: G...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Unnecessary Medications
(Tag F0759)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations, residents and staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policy titled, Medication Administration: General Guidelines, the facility failed to ensure the medic...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations, staff interviews and review of the facility's policy titled, Medication Storage in the Healthcare Center, the facility failed to ensure that all drugs and biologicals were disca...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Garbage Disposal
(Tag F0814)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure that the dumpster area was free of debris and maintained in sanitary conditions. In addition, the facility failed to ensure th...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2025
3 deficiencies
1 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to protect one of three residents (R) (R4) sampled for falls du...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review and staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to ensure three residents (R2, R3, an...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0725
(Tag F0725)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, resident, family, and staff interviews, and review of facility document titled, Facility Assessment , th...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2024
13 deficiencies
4 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Record review revealed that R14 had a diagnosis that included but was not limited to dementia, alert with confusion.
A revie...
Read full inspector narrative →
CRITICAL
(J)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Investigate Abuse
(Tag F0610)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
Based on interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policy titled, Abuse Prohibition, the facility failed to complete a thorough investigation for two of five sampled Residents (R) (R84 a...
Read full inspector narrative →
CRITICAL
(J)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff interviews, record review, and the facility policy titled Nursing Care Plan, the facility failed to develop a car...
Read full inspector narrative →
CRITICAL
(J)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Administration
(Tag F0835)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
Based on interviews, record reviews, and review of the job summaries for the Administrator and Director of Nursing (DON), the facility Administration failed to effectively oversee an abuse prevention ...
Read full inspector narrative →
SERIOUS
(G)
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Deficiency F0757
(Tag F0757)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
Based on staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policies titled Abuse Prohibition and General Medication Preparation and Administration, the facility failed to ensure that two r...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0554
(Tag F0554)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, staff interviews, record review, and a review of the facility policy titled Self-Administration Program, ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview, record review, and review of the facility policy titled Abuse Prohibition, the facility failed to ensure that allegations of abuse were reported to the State Agency (SA) in a timel...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0660
(Tag F0660)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews, staff interviews, and the facility polices titled Discharge Planning Policy and Nursing Care Planning, ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0661
(Tag F0661)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to provide a completed discharge summary with a recapitulation of the resident's stay for one of one discharged resident (R) 454.
Finding...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0688
(Tag F0688)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, staff and resident interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of 52 sampled residents (R) R78 reviewed for limited range of motion (ROM) received passive r...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policy titled, Non-invasive long-term Ventilation Support, and Cleaning and Disinfecting Respiratory Therapy Equipm...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medication Errors
(Tag F0758)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, interviews, and the facility's policy's titled Automatic Stop orders and Psychoactive Medications, the f...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure infection control standard practices were performed to...
Read full inspector narrative →
Sept 2022
10 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
MDS Data Transmission
(Tag F0640)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure that Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were transmitted within 14 days of completion to CMS's (Centers for Medicare and Medic...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
PASARR Coordination
(Tag F0644)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interviews, and clinical record reviews, it was determined that the facility failed to coordinate Preadmis...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, staff interview, and the facility policy 'Person-Centered Care Planning', the facility failed to develop...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff interview, review of documentation, and review of the policy titled, Person-Centered Care Planning, the facility ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure quality care and services in accordance with professio...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, record reviews, and review of facility policy titled Special needs: Tracheostomy Care and Suc...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0698
(Tag F0698)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to have orders for dialysis treatment and servic...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0849
(Tag F0849)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. R#14 was admitted to the facility 1/3/19 with diagnoses including but not limited to progressive neurological conditions, Alz...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Administration
(Tag F0835)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on staff interview, record review, review of Administrator, Assistant Administrator, and Director of Nursing job descriptions, the facility administration failed to ensure timely Minimum Data Se...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
QAPI Program
(Tag F0867)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on record review, staff interviews, and review of the facility policy titled, Quality Assurance/Risk/Performance Improvement, the facility failed to implement corrective action plans that effect...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "What changes have you made since the serious inspection findings?"
- "Why is there high staff turnover? How do you retain staff?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 4 life-threatening violation(s), 2 harm violation(s), Payment denial on record. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 38 deficiencies on record, including 4 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $16,801 in fines. Above average for Georgia. Some compliance problems on record.
- • Grade F (0/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Senior - Brunswick's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns SENIOR CARE CENTER - BRUNSWICK an overall rating of 1 out of 5 stars, which is considered much below average nationally. Within Georgia, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. A rating at this level reflects concerns identified through health inspections, staffing assessments, or quality measures that families should carefully consider.
How is Senior - Brunswick Staffed?
CMS rates SENIOR CARE CENTER - BRUNSWICK's staffing level at 1 out of 5 stars, which is much below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 78%, which is 32 percentage points above the Georgia average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs. RN turnover specifically is 90%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.
What Have Inspectors Found at Senior - Brunswick?
State health inspectors documented 38 deficiencies at SENIOR CARE CENTER - BRUNSWICK during 2022 to 2025. These included: 4 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 2 that caused actual resident harm, and 32 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates Senior - Brunswick?
SENIOR CARE CENTER - BRUNSWICK is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 200 certified beds and approximately 115 residents (about 57% occupancy), it is a large facility located in BRUNSWICK, Georgia.
How Does Senior - Brunswick Compare to Other Georgia Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Georgia, SENIOR CARE CENTER - BRUNSWICK's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 2.6, staff turnover (78%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (1 stars) is much below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Senior - Brunswick?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "Can you walk me through typical staffing levels on day, evening, and night shifts?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations, the facility's high staff turnover rate, and the below-average staffing rating.
Is Senior - Brunswick Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, SENIOR CARE CENTER - BRUNSWICK has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 4 Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 1-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Georgia. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.
Do Nurses at Senior - Brunswick Stick Around?
Staff turnover at SENIOR CARE CENTER - BRUNSWICK is high. At 78%, the facility is 32 percentage points above the Georgia average of 46%. Registered Nurse turnover is particularly concerning at 90%. RNs handle complex medical decisions and coordinate care — frequent RN changes can directly impact care quality. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?
Was Senior - Brunswick Ever Fined?
SENIOR CARE CENTER - BRUNSWICK has been fined $16,801 across 2 penalty actions. This is below the Georgia average of $33,247. While any fine indicates a compliance issue, fines under $50,000 are relatively common and typically reflect isolated problems that were subsequently corrected. Families should ask what specific issues led to these fines and confirm they've been resolved.
Is Senior - Brunswick on Any Federal Watch List?
SENIOR CARE CENTER - BRUNSWICK 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.