GORDON HEALTH AND REHABILITATION

1280 MAULDIN ROAD NE, CALHOUN, GA 30703 (706) 625-0044
Non profit - Other 117 Beds CLINICAL SERVICES, INC. Data: November 2025
Trust Grade
90/100
#10 of 353 in GA
Last Inspection: April 2025

Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.

Overview

Gordon Health and Rehabilitation has received an impressive Trust Grade of A, indicating that it is an excellent facility highly recommended for care. It ranks #10 out of 353 nursing homes in Georgia, placing it in the top tier, and is the top facility in Gordon County. However, the trend is worsening, as the facility has seen an increase in reported issues, rising from 1 in 2023 to 2 in 2025. Staffing is a concern, with a rating of 2 out of 5 stars and a turnover rate of 40%, which is still better than the state average but indicates some instability among staff. Additionally, there were recent incidents where the facility failed to follow infection control procedures during a dressing change, potentially risking the spread of infections, and did not complete required evaluations for residents with mental health needs, which could affect their care. Despite these weaknesses, the facility has no fines on record, suggesting a commitment to compliance in other areas.

Trust Score
A
90/100
In Georgia
#10/353
Top 2%
Safety Record
Low Risk
No red flags
Inspections
Getting Worse
1 → 2 violations
Staff Stability
○ Average
40% turnover. Near Georgia's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
Penalties
✓ Good
No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Georgia facilities.
Skilled Nurses
⚠ Watch
Each resident gets only 14 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Georgia. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
Violations
✓ Good
Only 3 deficiencies on record. Cleaner than most facilities. Minor issues only.
★★★★★
5.0
Overall Rating
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Staff Levels
★★★☆☆
3.0
Care Quality
★★★★★
5.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2023: 1 issues
2025: 2 issues

The Good

  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record
  • Staff turnover below average (40%)

    8 points below Georgia average of 48%

Facility shows strength in fire safety.

The Bad

Staff Turnover: 40%

Near Georgia avg (46%)

Typical for the industry

Chain: CLINICAL SERVICES, INC.

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

The Ugly 3 deficiencies on record

Apr 2025 2 deficiencies
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 F0645 (Tag F0645)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility policy titled, Mental Wellness Services, the facility faile...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility policy titled, Mental Wellness Services, the facility failed to perform a Level II PASRR (Preadmission Screening and Resident Review) for evaluation and determination of specialized services for one of 41 sampled residents (R) (R108) reviewed. This failure had the potential for residents with mental disorders not to receive identified specialized services. Findings include: A review of the facility policy titled Mental Wellness Community last reviewed 12/27/2024 revealed under Guideline: Patients living on the community should have appropriate level 1's completed as required to determine whether a new level 2 is needed. For those patients whose level 2 evaluation has determined that they have a serious mental illness or mental retardation, the level 2 recommendations are followed. A review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) admission assessment dated [DATE] Section A (Identification Information) revealed R108 had not been evaluated for level II PASRR. A further review revealed R108 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) from Section C (Cognitive Patterns) score of 14, indicating little or no cognitive deficit, and a diagnosis from Section I (Active Diagnoses) of Manic Depression (bipolar disease). A review of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed that R108 had diagnoses that included but not limited to bipolar disorder. Further review revealed R108's level I PASRR dated 11/25/2024 reflected that R108 did not have bipolar disorder. A review of R108's physician's (MD) orders revealed an order for oxcarbazepine 300 mg milligrams) two tablets, dated 11/28/2024, to be administered by mouth twice per day for the treatment of bipolar disorder, Seroquel 300 mg 0.5 tablet, ordered 12/12/2024, to be administered by mouth at bedtime every day for bipolar disorder, and venlafaxine ER (extended release) 150 mg, dated 11/27/2024, to be administered by mouth every day for bipolar disorder. During an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 4/13/2024 at 9:20 am, she stated that the Social Worker (SW) was responsible for auditing the PASARRs in the facility, but the SW overlooked R108's level II PASRR. The DON acknowledged that R108 did have bipolar disorder and should have been evaluated based on her diagnosis. The DON added that the SW was not in the facility and was unavailable for an interview.
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

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observations, staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policies titled, Transmission-Based Precautions (Contact, Enhanced Barrier, Droplet, Airborne) and Hand Hygiene, th...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observations, staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policies titled, Transmission-Based Precautions (Contact, Enhanced Barrier, Droplet, Airborne) and Hand Hygiene, the facility failed to ensure infection control processes were followed during a dressing change for one of 13 residents (R) (R12) on enhanced barrier precautions (EBP). This deficient practice created the potential for the spread of infections in the facility. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Transmission-Based Precautions (Contact, Enhanced Barrier, Droplet, Airborne), dated 12/27/2024, revealed the Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP), section included, Enhanced Barrier Precautions are indicated for patients with any of the following: . Wounds and indwelling medical devices even if the patient is not known to be infected or colonized with a MDRO [multi drug resistant organism]. Enhanced Barrier Precautions expand the use of PPE [personal protective equipment] and refer to the use of gown and gloves during high contact activities that promote opportunities for transfer of MDROs to staff hands and clothing, . Examples of high contact patient care activities requiring gown and glove use for Enhanced Barrier Precautions include . Device care or use: .feeding tube . Review of the facility's policy titled, Hand Hygiene, dated 12/27/2024, revealed the Purpose section stated, Hand hygiene is the single most important means of preventing the spread of infections. The use of gloves does not replace hand washing. The Guideline section included, .Associates should use alcohol based hand rub or wash hands with soap and water for the following indications: . Immediately after glove removal. Gloves should not be used as a substitute for hand hygiene. Perform hand hygiene immediately after removing gloves. Review of R12's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 3/5/2025, revealed Section K (Swallowing Disorders) documented R12 had a feeding tube. Review of R12's care plan dated 3/14/2025 revealed a care area of skin breakdown risk due to a gastrostomy tube (G-tube) [a tube inserted through the abdominal wall directly into the stomach] site dressing with intervention to change the dressing as ordered. Review of R12's physician's orders revealed an order dated 11/8/2024 to clean the G-tube site once per day and apply a drain sponge (a type of dressing). Observation of G-tube site dressing change on 4/12/2025 at 10:00 am revealed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) AA entered R12's room to perform the procedure with the supplies in her hands. After providing privacy, she washed her hands, donned (put on) gloves, removed the G-tube site dressing, discarded the dressing in a trash can, cleaned the site per the physician's order, discarded the cleaning material, doffed (took off) her gloves, donned clean gloves, placed the dressing on the site, doffed gloves, and performed hand hygiene. She did not wear a gown or perform hand hygiene between glove changes during the procedure. Observation of R12's room revealed EBP signage on the wall above the head of the bed instructing staff to wear a gown and gloves when providing high-contact care to the resident. Further observation revealed gloves and an alcohol-based hand rub (ABHR) dispenser on the wall inside the room. In an interview on 4/12/2025 at 10:15 am, LPN AA confirmed she did not wear a gown for the procedure or perform hand hygiene between glove changes. She stated she was aware R12 was on EBP due to the G-tube and should have worn a gown for the procedure. She further stated she should have performed hand hygiene when changing gloves, and she was nervous and forgot to wear the gown and perform hand hygiene between glove changes. She stated that PPE was available on the supply carts in the hallways. In an interview on 4/12/2025 at 2:00 pm, the Director of Nursing (DON) stated the nurses should wear gloves and a gown when providing G-tube site dressing changes, and hand hygiene should be performed between glove changes and when going from dirty to clean steps during dressing changes. She further stated that the infection control process should be followed to prevent the spread of infections.
Mar 2023 1 deficiency
MINOR (C)

Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact

Transfer Notice (Tag F0623)

Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents

Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a process for the notification of the Ombudsman when a resident is transferred to the hospital for two of two residen...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a process for the notification of the Ombudsman when a resident is transferred to the hospital for two of two residents (R) (R#72 and R#73) reviewed for hospital transfer. The deficient practice had the potential to affect any resident that was transferred or discharged from the facility. Finding include: 1. Review of the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) for R#72 under the Census tab revealed diagnoses including a fracture, respiratory issues, and arthritis. On 1/31/2023, R#72 was transferred to the hospital due to a change in condition and returned from the hospital on 2/05/2023. Review of the EMR revealed no evidence that the facility notified the Ombudsman when the resident was transferred to the hospital. 2. Review of the EMR for R#73 under the Census tab revealed diagnoses including respiratory failure. On 2/10/2023, R#73 was transferred to the hospital due to a change in condition and returned to the facility on 2/12/2023. Review of the EMR revealed no evidence that the facility notified the Ombudsman when the resident was transferred to the hospital. Interview on 3/02/2023 at 10:00 a.m. with the Administrator and the Social Services Coordinator confirmed the facility failed to notify the Ombudsman when the R#72 and R#73 were transferred and admitted to the hospital. They stated that the facility did not have a policy or procedure to ensure the Ombudsman was notified each a time a resident was transferred to the hospital.
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 Georgia.
  • • No major safety red flags. No abuse findings, life-threatening violations, or SFF status.
  • • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Georgia 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 Gordon's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns GORDON HEALTH AND REHABILITATION an overall rating of 5 out of 5 stars, which is considered much above average nationally. Within Georgia, 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 Gordon Staffed?

CMS rates GORDON HEALTH AND REHABILITATION's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 40%, compared to the Georgia average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.

What Have Inspectors Found at Gordon?

State health inspectors documented 3 deficiencies at GORDON HEALTH AND REHABILITATION during 2023 to 2025. These included: 2 with potential for harm and 1 minor or isolated issues.

Who Owns and Operates Gordon?

GORDON HEALTH AND REHABILITATION is owned by a non-profit organization. Non-profit facilities reinvest revenue into operations rather than distributing to shareholders. The facility is operated by CLINICAL SERVICES, INC., a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 117 certified beds and approximately 112 residents (about 96% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in CALHOUN, Georgia.

How Does Gordon Compare to Other Georgia Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Georgia, GORDON HEALTH AND REHABILITATION's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 2.6, staff turnover (40%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (5 stars) is much above the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Gordon?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "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?" "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?" These questions are particularly relevant given the below-average staffing rating.

Is Gordon Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, GORDON HEALTH AND REHABILITATION 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 Georgia. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.

Do Nurses at Gordon Stick Around?

GORDON HEALTH AND REHABILITATION has a staff turnover rate of 40%, which is about average for Georgia 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 Gordon Ever Fined?

GORDON HEALTH AND REHABILITATION 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 Gordon on Any Federal Watch List?

GORDON HEALTH AND REHABILITATION 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.