Magnolia Manor - Greenwood
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Magnolia Manor in Greenwood, South Carolina has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the facility's quality of care. Ranking #153 out of 186 in the state means it falls in the bottom half of nursing homes, and it is the lowest-ranked option in Greenwood County at #4 of 4. The facility's performance has been stable, with 22 issues identified in recent inspections, including 1 critical incident where a resident was observed smoking unsafely on the property of a smoke-free facility. While staffing is rated average with a 3/5 score and a turnover rate of 40%, which is better than the state's average, there were serious concerns regarding food safety, such as improperly stored food that could affect all residents. Overall, while there are some strengths in staffing, the poor trust grade and multiple health and safety violations highlight significant weaknesses that families should consider.
- Trust Score
- F
- In South Carolina
- #153/186
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Holding Steady
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 40% turnover. Near South Carolina's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ○ Average
- $3,962 in fines. Higher than 52% of South Carolina facilities. Some compliance issues.
- Skilled Nurses ○ Average
- Each resident gets 36 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for South Carolina. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 22 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
-
Staff turnover below average (40%)
8 points below South Carolina average of 48%
Facility shows strength in fire safety.
The Bad
Below South Carolina average (2.8)
Significant quality concerns identified by CMS
Near South Carolina avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 22 deficiencies on record
Jun 2025
7 deficiencies
1 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** (2.)
Based on review of the facility policy, observations, record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure R131 was...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on a review of the facility policy, record reviews, and interviews, the facility failed to report to the State Survey Agen...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0628
(Tag F0628)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of the facility policy, observations, record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to notify Resident (R)7...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Unnecessary Medications
(Tag F0759)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on review of the facility policy, observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a medication administration error rate of less than 5 percent. The medication administ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of the facility policy, observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure expired medication and biolog...
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 review of facility policy, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the useof gowns during catheter ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on review of the facility policy, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure foods that were stored in the freezer, refrigerators and dry food storage were appropriately sealed,...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2024
1 deficiency
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
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, record review, observation and facility policy review, the facility failed to supervise 1 (Resident (R)6) of...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2024
5 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
Notification of Changes
(Tag F0580)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff notified the resident's physician and/or the resident's responsible party (RP) of a fall for 2 (Resid...
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
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff accurately coded a Minimum Da...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 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 F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure resident care plans were updated to include revised appropriate fall interventions for 3 (Residents (R)1, R...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 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
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff followed the facility policy ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 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
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff conducted fall risk assessments and accurately coded fall risk assessments for 3 (Residents (R)1, R2,...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2024
1 deficiency
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
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based in record review, interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure Residents (R)1 and R2 were free...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2023
1 deficiency
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
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on review of facility policy, interview and record review, the facility failed ensure the dignity and resident rights of 1 of 3 residents. Specifically, on 11/22/23, Certified Nursing Aide (CNA)...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2023
3 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0645
(Tag F0645)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a Level I Pre-admission Screening Resident Review (PASSAR) was accurate for 1 of 24 residents, Resident (R)31. This failure had the ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0883
(Tag F0883)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview, record review, facility policy review, and review of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines, the facility failed to revise their pneumococcal vaccine polic...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview, and review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to ensure all glasses were allowed to be air dried before stacked, all equipment was clean after washing, and ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2023
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
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of the facility policy, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to honor a resident's wishes related ...
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
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 record review, interviews and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure the physician's medication order...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2021
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
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 observations, interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to provide activities...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Unnecessary Medications
(Tag F0759)
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 the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure the medication...
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?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • $3,962 in fines. Lower than most South Carolina facilities. Relatively clean record.
- • 40% turnover. Below South Carolina's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 22 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • Grade F (26/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Magnolia Manor - Greenwood's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns Magnolia Manor - Greenwood an overall rating of 1 out of 5 stars, which is considered much below average nationally. Within South Carolina, 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 Magnolia Manor - Greenwood Staffed?
CMS rates Magnolia Manor - Greenwood's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 40%, compared to the South Carolina average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Magnolia Manor - Greenwood?
State health inspectors documented 22 deficiencies at Magnolia Manor - Greenwood during 2021 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 21 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 Magnolia Manor - Greenwood?
Magnolia Manor - Greenwood 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 FUNDAMENTAL HEALTHCARE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 88 certified beds and approximately 74 residents (about 84% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in Greenwood, South Carolina.
How Does Magnolia Manor - Greenwood Compare to Other South Carolina Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in South Carolina, Magnolia Manor - Greenwood's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 2.8, staff turnover (40%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (1 stars) is much below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Magnolia Manor - Greenwood?
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?" "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 facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations.
Is Magnolia Manor - Greenwood Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, Magnolia Manor - Greenwood has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation (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 South Carolina. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.
Do Nurses at Magnolia Manor - Greenwood Stick Around?
Magnolia Manor - Greenwood has a staff turnover rate of 40%, which is about average for South Carolina 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 Magnolia Manor - Greenwood Ever Fined?
Magnolia Manor - Greenwood has been fined $3,962 across 1 penalty action. This is below the South Carolina average of $33,118. 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 Magnolia Manor - Greenwood on Any Federal Watch List?
Magnolia Manor - Greenwood 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.