GOOD SAMARITAN SOCIETY - FAIRFIELD GLADE
Over 2 years since last inspection. Current conditions may differ from available data.
Good Samaritan Society - Fairfield Glade has received a Trust Grade of B+, which indicates it is above average and recommended for families considering care options. It ranks #10 out of 298 facilities in Tennessee, placing it in the top half of state facilities, and #1 of 4 in Cumberland County, meaning it is the best choice locally. The facility is on an improving trend, having reduced issues from 10 in 2023 to just 1 in 2024, which is a positive sign. Staffing is a strong point, with a 5/5 rating and more RN coverage than 94% of Tennessee facilities, though the turnover rate of 61% is concerning and higher than the state average. While there are no fines on record, there have been issues such as food not being served at safe temperatures for residents and care plans not adequately addressing end-of-life wishes for some residents, indicating areas needing attention alongside its strengths.
- Trust Score
- B+
- In Tennessee
- #10/298
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 61% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Tennessee facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 67 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than 97% of Tennessee nursing homes. RNs are the most trained staff who catch health problems before they become serious.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 18 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
5-Star Staffing Rating · Excellent nurse staffing levels
-
5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
15pts above Tennessee avg (46%)
Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
13 points above Tennessee average of 48%
The Ugly 18 deficiencies on record
Oct 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
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual 3.0 review, medical record review, and interview, the facility failed t...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2023
8 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
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 facility policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a privacy cove...
Read full inspector narrative →
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 facility policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure medical inform...
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
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 facility policy review, medical record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure an allegation of employee ...
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
Investigate Abuse
(Tag F0610)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on the facility policy review, medical record review, and interviews, the facility failed to investigate an allegation of ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to implement a wound care intervention for 1 resident (R...
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 record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to implement interventions to prevent accidents for 1 re...
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
Based on facility policy review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were secured in 1 of 4 medication carts and in 1 of 4 treatment carts observed.
The findings incl...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Resident #20 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Dementia, History of Falling, and General Anxiety D...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 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
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 on review of a facility policy, medical record review, facility investigation review, observation and interview, the facil...
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
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 review of a facility policy, medical record review, observation and interview, the facility failed to report an allegat...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2019
2 deficiencies
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 medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to adequately monitor and report an irregularity...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0655
(Tag F0655)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on medical record review and interview the facility failed to provide evidence of documentation in the medical record indi...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2018
5 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
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 medical record review and interview the facility failed to accurately complete a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for ...
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 facility policy review, medical record review, and interview, the facility failed to administer medication as ordered f...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
QAPI Program
(Tag F0867)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on review of the two previous annual survey results, review of facility policy, and interview the facility failed to maintain compliance related to food safety requirements for 3 consecutive yea...
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 facility policy review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure expired supplies were not available f...
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 facility policy review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to maintain appropriate food temperatures, on the tray line, on 2 of 3 units affecting 38 of 45 residents who resided i...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "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
- • Grade B+ (80/100). Above average facility, better than most options in Tennessee.
- • No major safety red flags. No abuse findings, life-threatening violations, or SFF status.
- • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Tennessee facilities.
- • 18 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
- • 61% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
About This Facility
What is Good Samaritan Society - Fairfield Glade's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns GOOD SAMARITAN SOCIETY - FAIRFIELD GLADE an overall rating of 5 out of 5 stars, which is considered much above average nationally. Within Tennessee, 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 Good Samaritan Society - Fairfield Glade Staffed?
CMS rates GOOD SAMARITAN SOCIETY - FAIRFIELD GLADE's staffing level at 5 out of 5 stars, which is much above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 61%, which is 15 percentage points above the Tennessee average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs.
What Have Inspectors Found at Good Samaritan Society - Fairfield Glade?
State health inspectors documented 18 deficiencies at GOOD SAMARITAN SOCIETY - FAIRFIELD GLADE during 2018 to 2024. These included: 17 with potential for harm and 1 minor or isolated issues.
Who Owns and Operates Good Samaritan Society - Fairfield Glade?
GOOD SAMARITAN SOCIETY - FAIRFIELD GLADE is owned by a non-profit organization. Non-profit facilities reinvest revenue into operations rather than distributing to shareholders. The facility is operated by GOOD SAMARITAN SOCIETY, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 60 certified beds and approximately 52 residents (about 87% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in CROSSVILLE, Tennessee.
How Does Good Samaritan Society - Fairfield Glade Compare to Other Tennessee Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Tennessee, GOOD SAMARITAN SOCIETY - FAIRFIELD GLADE's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 2.9, staff turnover (61%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (3 stars) is at the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Good Samaritan Society - Fairfield Glade?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "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 high staff turnover rate.
Is Good Samaritan Society - Fairfield Glade Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, GOOD SAMARITAN SOCIETY - FAIRFIELD GLADE 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 Tennessee. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.
Do Nurses at Good Samaritan Society - Fairfield Glade Stick Around?
Staff turnover at GOOD SAMARITAN SOCIETY - FAIRFIELD GLADE is high. At 61%, the facility is 15 percentage points above the Tennessee average of 46%. 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 Good Samaritan Society - Fairfield Glade Ever Fined?
GOOD SAMARITAN SOCIETY - FAIRFIELD GLADE 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 Good Samaritan Society - Fairfield Glade on Any Federal Watch List?
GOOD SAMARITAN SOCIETY - FAIRFIELD GLADE 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.