LIFE CARE CENTER OF RHEA COUNTY
Over 2 years since last inspection. Current conditions may differ from available data.
Life Care Center of Rhea County in Dayton, Tennessee, has a Trust Grade of C+, indicating that it is slightly above average but not exceptional. It ranks #135 out of 298 nursing homes in Tennessee, placing it in the top half of facilities in the state, and is the best option among the three homes in Rhea County. The facility is improving, as it has reduced its issues from six in 2019 to five in 2022. While the staffing turnover rate is a strong point at 25%, which is well below the state average of 48%, the staffing rating itself is only 2 out of 5 stars, indicating below-average staffing levels. There have been no fines recorded, which is a positive sign, but there are concerns regarding the facility's cleanliness and medication management. For instance, the kitchen was found to be unsanitary, potentially affecting the health of nearly all residents, and several medications were discovered to be expired in medication rooms. These findings highlight areas that need improvement, despite the overall decent rating and some staffing strengths.
- Trust Score
- C+
- In Tennessee
- #135/298
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ✓ Good
- 25% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 23 points below Tennessee's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Tennessee facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 26 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Tennessee. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 13 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Low Staff Turnover (25%) · Staff stability means consistent care
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover is low (25%)
23 points below Tennessee average of 48%
Facility shows strength in quality measures, staff retention, fire safety.
The Bad
Near Tennessee average (2.8)
Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 13 deficiencies on record
Sept 2022
5 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, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure medical info...
Read full inspector narrative →
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 the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Long Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument 3.0 User's Manual, ...
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 medical record review and interview, the facility failed to refer 1 resident (Resident #31) of 4 residents reviewed for...
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 the facility policy and procedures, record review, observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain...
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 a sanitary kitchen with the potential to affect 72 of 73 residents in the facility.
The findings include:
Re...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2019
6 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
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 facility policies, medical record review, review of facility investigation, observations, and interviews, the...
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 facility policy review, medical record review, review of facility investigation, observation, and interviews, the facil...
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** Medical record review revealed Resident #52 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Fracture of Upper En...
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 facility policy review, medical record review, review of falls investigations, and interview, the facility failed to im...
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 facility policy review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications, biologicals, and medical supplies were not expired in 2 of 3 medication rooms observed.
The find...
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 food at correct temperatures in 1 of 1 walk in cooler; failed to ensure food was sealed and dated in 1 of 1...
Read full inspector narrative →
Sept 2018
2 deficiencies
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 facility policy review, observation and interview the facility failed to follow appropriate infection control practices...
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 medical record review and interview the facility failed to provide an evaluation and rationale for continued use of a P...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
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
- • 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.
- • 25% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 23 points below Tennessee's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
- • 13 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
About This Facility
What is Life Of Rhea County's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns LIFE CARE CENTER OF RHEA COUNTY an overall rating of 3 out of 5 stars, which is considered average nationally. Within Tennessee, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This mid-range rating indicates the facility meets federal standards but may have areas for improvement.
How is Life Of Rhea County Staffed?
CMS rates LIFE CARE CENTER OF RHEA COUNTY's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 25%, compared to the Tennessee average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Life Of Rhea County?
State health inspectors documented 13 deficiencies at LIFE CARE CENTER OF RHEA COUNTY during 2018 to 2022. These included: 13 with potential for harm.
Who Owns and Operates Life Of Rhea County?
LIFE CARE CENTER OF RHEA COUNTY 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 LIFE CARE CENTERS OF AMERICA, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 89 certified beds and approximately 70 residents (about 79% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in DAYTON, Tennessee.
How Does Life Of Rhea County Compare to Other Tennessee Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Tennessee, LIFE CARE CENTER OF RHEA COUNTY's overall rating (3 stars) is above the state average of 2.8, staff turnover (25%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (3 stars) is at the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Life Of Rhea County?
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 Life Of Rhea County Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, LIFE CARE CENTER OF RHEA COUNTY 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 3-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 Life Of Rhea County Stick Around?
Staff at LIFE CARE CENTER OF RHEA COUNTY tend to stick around. With a turnover rate of 25%, the facility is 21 percentage points below the Tennessee average of 46%. Low turnover is a positive sign. It means caregivers have time to learn each resident's needs, medications, and personal preferences. Consistent staff also notice subtle changes in a resident's condition more quickly.
Was Life Of Rhea County Ever Fined?
LIFE CARE CENTER OF RHEA COUNTY 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 Life Of Rhea County on Any Federal Watch List?
LIFE CARE CENTER OF RHEA COUNTY 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.