LIFE CARE CENTER OF OOLTEWAH

5911 SNOW HILL ROAD, OOLTEWAH, TN 37363 (423) 531-0600
For profit - Corporation 120 Beds LIFE CARE CENTERS OF AMERICA Data: November 2025
Trust Grade
80/100
#73 of 298 in TN
Last Inspection: December 2022

Over 2 years since last inspection. Current conditions may differ from available data.

Overview

Life Care Center of Ooltewah has a Trust Grade of B+, indicating that it is above average and recommended for families seeking care. It ranks #73 out of 298 nursing homes in Tennessee, placing it in the top half of facilities in the state, and #5 out of 11 within Hamilton County, meaning only four local options are better. However, the facility's trend is worsening, with issues increasing from 1 in 2019 to 3 in 2022. Staffing is rated as average with a turnover rate of 43%, which is slightly better than the state average of 48%, and they have good RN coverage, exceeding that of 91% of Tennessee facilities. While there have been no fines, the inspector findings revealed some concerns: one resident did not receive medication as ordered, another resident's fall prevention plan was not implemented, and there were inaccuracies in medical records for a resident, indicating areas that need improvement alongside their strengths in staffing and RN coverage.

Trust Score
B+
80/100
In Tennessee
#73/298
Top 24%
Safety Record
Low Risk
No red flags
Inspections
Getting Worse
1 → 3 violations
Staff Stability
○ Average
43% turnover. Near Tennessee's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
Penalties
✓ Good
No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Tennessee facilities.
Skilled Nurses
✓ Good
Each resident gets 57 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Tennessee. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
Violations
○ Average
6 deficiencies on record. Average for a facility this size. Mostly minor or procedural issues.
★★★★☆
4.0
Overall Rating
★★★☆☆
3.0
Staff Levels
★★★★☆
4.0
Care Quality
★★★★☆
4.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2019: 1 issues
2022: 3 issues

The Good

  • 4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record
  • Staff turnover below average (43%)

    5 points below Tennessee average of 48%

Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.

The Bad

Staff Turnover: 43%

Near Tennessee avg (46%)

Typical for the industry

Chain: LIFE CARE CENTERS OF AMERICA

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

The Ugly 6 deficiencies on record

Dec 2022 3 deficiencies
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, observation, and interview, the facility failed to follow a physician's ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**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 follow a physician's order for medication administration for 1 resident (Resident #56) of 6 residents reviewed for medications. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Administration of Medications, reviewed on 8/25/2022, showed .The facility will ensure medications are administered safely and appropriately per physician order . Resident #56 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis, and Dorsalgia (back pain). Review of an admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], showed Resident #56 was cognitively intact and received scheduled and as needed pain medication. The resident received Opioids (narcotic pain relieving medication) on all 7 days of the look back period. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) dated 10/1/2022-10/31/2022 showed an order dated 9/28/2022 for .Lidocaine Patch [an over the counter medication used to relieve mild pain] 4% [percent] .Apply to lower back topically [medication applied to a particular place on the body] one time a day for back pain .apply 2 patches and remove per schedule . The Lidocaine Patch was not administered as ordered on 10/1/2022, 10/2/2022, 10/3/2022, 10/6/2022, 10/8/2022, 10/9/2022, 10/12/2022, 10/13/2022, 10/18/2022, 10/21/2022. Registered Nurse (RN) #1 documented the 10/1/2022, 10/2/2022, and 10/3/2022 doses as not administered. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 documented the 10/6/2022 dose as not administered and LPN #2 documented the 10/8/2022, 10/9/2022, 10/12/2022, 10/13/2022, 10/18/2022, and 10/21/2022 as not administered. Review of the Orders - Administration Note dated 10/1/2022 at 11:32 PM, showed .Lidocaine Patch 4% .Apply to lower back topically one time a day for back pain apply 2 patches and remove per schedule .No patch to remove . Review of the Orders - Administration Note dated 10/2/2022 at 10:41 PM, showed .Lidocaine Patch 4% .Apply to lower back topically one time a day for back pain apply 2 patches and remove per schedule .No patch found to remove . Review of the Orders - Administration Note dated 10/6/2022 at 10:05 AM, showed .Lidocaine Patch 4% .Apply to lower back topically one time a day for back pain apply 2 patches and remove per schedule .Waiting on pharmacy . Review of the Orders - Administration Note dated 10/8/2022 at 8:22 AM, showed .Lidocaine Patch 4% .Apply to lower back topically one time a day for back pain apply 2 patches and remove per schedule .Waiting on pharmacy . Review of the Orders - Administration Note dated 10/9/2022 at 8:11 AM, showed .Lidocaine Patch 4% .Apply to lower back topically one time a day for back pain apply 2 patches and remove per schedule .Waiting on pharmacy . Review of the Orders - Administration Note dated 10/12/2022 at 8:50 AM, showed .Lidocaine Patch 4% .Apply to lower back topically one time a day for back pain apply 2 patches and remove per schedule .Waiting on pharmacy . Review of the Orders - Administration Note dated 10/13/2022 at 9:03 AM, showed .Lidocaine Patch 4% .Apply to lower back topically one time a day for back pain apply 2 patches and remove per schedule .Waiting on pharmacy . Review of the Orders - Administration Note dated 10/18/2022 at 8:34 AM, showed .Lidocaine Patch 4% .Apply to lower back topically one time a day for back pain apply 2 patches and remove per schedule .Waiting on pharmacy . Review of the Orders - Administration Note dated 10/21/2022 at 8:44 AM, showed .Lidocaine Patch 4% .Apply to lower back topically one time a day for back pain apply 2 patches and remove per schedule .Waiting on Pharmacy . Observation and interview with Resident #56 on 12/13/2022 at 4:04 PM, in the resident's room, showed the resident lying in bed eating a snack and watching TV with no signs of distress observed. Resident #56 stated he had chronic neck and back pain. Pain control interventions included medications, therapy, and repositioning. Resident #56 stated the pain control interventions .help . his pain but did not .cure it . Resident #56 denied any changes or worsening in his pain. During a telephone interview on 12/13/2022 at 4:46 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) and the Medical Director stated Resident #56 had chronic pain and received scheduled and as needed medications for pain. Continued interview confirmed it was their expectation that physician's orders were followed. The Medical Director stated that Resident #56 had no change in pain characteristics or behaviors as a result of not receiving Lidocaine patches as ordered. During an interview on 12/14/2022 at 8:16 AM, the Administrator stated Resident #56 had an order for Lidocaine 4% patches. Lidocaine 4% patches are over the counter medications and available as house stock in the facility. Lidocaine 5% must be dispensed by the pharmacy. The Administrator stated some of the nurses did not realize the difference in the 2 patches and did not realize the Lidocaine 4% patches that Resident #56 had ordered were available in the facility and did not have to come from the pharmacy. The Administrator confirmed Resident #56 did not receive Lidocaine patches as ordered by the physician and it was the facility's expectation that physician's orders were followed. During a telephone interview on 12/14/2022 at 10:01 AM, RN #1 stated there were occasions when Resident #56's Lidocaine patch was unavailable to administer and she would notify the pharmacy the patches were unavailable. RN #1 stated she was recently made aware that the Lidocaine Patches were facility stocked and did not have to come from the pharmacy. Resident #56 had scheduled and as needed pain medications, which were given and managed the resident's pain. Resident #56's pain remained at baseline with no changes. Interview revealed RN #1 requested the lidocaine patches from the pharmacy, who did not have the 4% patches, when the patches should have been obtained from the facility's central supply. Attempted telephone interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 unsuccessfully on 12/14/2022 at 10:10 AM. During an interview on 12/14/2022 at 10:30 AM, LPN #2 stated she was unable to recall any time when Lidocaine Patches were unavailable to administer and Resident #56 always showed the same demeanor during her interactions with the resident and no distress was noted.
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 the facility policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to implement a fall ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on the facility policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to implement a fall intervention for 1 resident (Resident #42) of 3 residents reviewed for falls. The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Fall Management, reviewed 9/29/2022, showed .Implement interventions .consistent with a resident's .care plan .Supervision .Refers to an intervention and means of mitigating the risk of an accident .During the admission .a care plan will be developed .interdisciplinary team will review and revise the care plan .upon a fall . Resident #42 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Fracture of Third Lumbar Vertebra, Wedge Compression Fracture of Fourth Lumbar Vertebra and Muscle Weakness. Review of an admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], showed Resident #42 was severely cognitively impaired. The resident was dependent of 2 staff members for bed mobility and toileting. Review of the facility's fall investigation dated 11/21/2022, showed Resident #42 had an unwitnessed fall from the bed. The resident was found lying on the floor with a skin tear to the left knee and left toe. The immediate action taken was .Gym mats . Review of the Care Plan dated 11/22/2022, showed Resident #42 had an actual fall with minor injury and was updated on 11/29/2022 with an intervention of fall mats. During an observation on 12/12/2022 at 12:02 PM, Resident #42 was lying in bed with no fall mats beside the bed. During an observation on 12/13/2022 at 1:41 PM, the resident was lying in bed with no fall mats beside the bed. During an interview on 12/13/2022 at 2:13 PM, the 100-Hall Unit Manager confirmed that there were no fall mats in Resident #42's room. After the interview, the Unit Manager brought fall mats to the resident's room for placement. During an interview on 12/14/2022 at 10:24 AM, the MDS Coordinator stated new interventions were put on the care plan by unit managers after a fall was discussed. She stated the interventions should be put into place before the intervention was added on the care plan.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Medical Records (Tag F0842)

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 maintain an accurate medical record for 1 resident (Residen...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on medical record review and interview, the facility failed to maintain an accurate medical record for 1 resident (Resident #56) of 18 residents reviewed for medical records. The findings include: Resident #56 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis, and Dorsalgia (back pain). Review of the [named facility] PHYSICAL MEDICINE & REHABILITATION prescription dated 9/28/2022, showed .Methadone 10 mg [milligrams] .3 tabs [tablets] PO [by mouth] QAM [every morning] .#9 (nine) .NO REFILLS . Review of a Controlled Substance Verbal Prescription Order from Practitioner dated 10/1/2022, showed .Methadone 10 mg .Dispense Quantity .#9 .3 tabs PO QAM (for pain) . No refills were ordered. Review of a prescription dated 10/3/2022, showed .METHADONE 10 MG TABLET .Take 3 tablet by mouth once a day .PRESCRIBED QUANTITY: 6 (SIX) TABLETS .DAYS SUPPLY: 2 .DIAGNOSIS .DORSALGIA .REFILLS .0 (ZERO) . Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], showed the resident was cognitively intact and received scheduled and PRN (as needed) pain medications. Resident #56 received Opioid (narcotic medications used for severe pain control) medications on all 7 days of the look back period. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) dated 10/1/2022 - 10/31/2022, showed an order dated 9/28/2022 for .Methadone .10 MG .Give 3 tablet by mouth one time a day for chronic back pain . It was noted that the resident did not receive the Methadone on 10/8/2022, 10/9/2022, 10/10/2022, 10/11/2022, 10/12/2022, or 10/13/2022. Continued review showed an order dated 9/28/2022 for .OxyCODONE-Acetaminophen [opioid] Tablet 5-325 MG Give 1 tablet by mouth every 6 hours as needed for moderate to severe pain. The resident received the medication on 10/1/2022 at 5:27 PM, 10/2/2022 at 6:33 AM, 1:27 PM, and 9:30 PM, 10/3/2022 at 5:16 AM, 1:26 PM, and 7:57 PM, 10/4/2022 at 3:29 AM and 9:00 PM, 10/5/2022 at 2:39 AM, 8:36 AM, 2:29 PM, and 9:18 PM, 10/6/2022 at 4:10 AM, 1:54 PM, and 8:11 PM, 10/7/2022 at 5:12 AM, 12:25 PM, and 7:32 PM, 10/8/2022 at 6:05 AM, 12:05 PM, and 7:58 PM, 10/9/2022 at 6:27 AM and 7:45 PM, 10/10/2022 at 1:58 AM, 9:58 AM, 4:00 PM, 10:10 PM, 10/11/2022 at 4:59 AM, 10/12/2022 at 6:28 AM and 1:47 PM, 10/13/2022 at 4:10 PM, 12:01 PM, and 6:01 PM. It was noted that all Oxycodone-Acetaminophen administrations were effective at treating Resident #56's pain. Review of the Orders - Administration Note dated 10/8/2022 at 8:26 AM, showed .Methadone . Tablet 10 MG .Give 3 tablet by mouth one time a day for chronic back pain .Waiting on pharmacy . Review of the Orders - Administration Note dated 10/9/2022 at 8:13 AM, showed .Methadone .Tablet 10 MG .Give 3 tablet by mouth one time a day for chronic back pain .Waiting on pharmacy . Review of the Orders - Administration Note dated 10/10/2022 at 9:57 AM, showed .Methadone .Tablet 10 MG .Give 3 tablet by mouth one time a day for chronic back pain .waiting on pharmacy . Review of the Orders - Administration Note dated 10/11/2022 at 10:05 AM, showed .Methadone .Tablet 10 MG .Give 3 tablet by mouth one time a day for chronic back pain .waiting on pharmacy . Review of the Orders - Administration Note dated 10/12/2022 at 8:53 AM, showed .Methadone .Tablet 10 MG .Give 3 tablet by mouth one time a day for chronic back pain .Waiting on pharmacy . Review of the Orders - Administration Note dated 10/13/2022 at 9:01 AM, showed .Methadone .Tablet 10 MG .Give 3 tablet by mouth one time a day for chronic back pain .Waiting on pharmacy . Review of a prescription dated 10/13/2022, showed .METHADONE 10 MG TABLET .Take 3 tablet by mouth once a day .PRESCRIBED QUANTITY: 63 (SIXTY-THREE) TABLETS .DAYS SUPPLY: 21 .DIAGNOSIS .CHRONIC PAIN .REFILLS .0 (ZERO) . Observation and interview with Resident #56 on 12/13/2022 at 4:04 PM, in the resident's room, showed the resident lying in bed eating a snack and watching TV with no signs of distress observed. Resident #56 stated he had chronic neck and back pain. Pain control interventions included medications, therapy, and repositioning. Resident #56 stated the pain control interventions .help . his pain but did not .cure it . Resident #56 stated he had been taking Methadone .for a long time . and there had been .a few times . the Methadone was not administered at the facility. Resident #56 denied any changes or worsening in his pain. During a telephone interview on 12/13/2022 at 5:14 PM, Nurse Practitioner #1 stated Resident #56 was admitted to the facility after a stroke. Resident #56's daughter reported that the resident had been seen at an outpatient clinic for pain control and was taking methadone. Resident #56's daughter stated he was always in pain. Resident #56 was on a scheduled and as needed pain medication regimen at the facility. Nurse Practitioner #1 saw Resident #56 on 10/3/2022, 10/10/2022, and 10/24/2022 and no acute signs of distress were noted. Nurse Practitioner #1 ordered a .few days . supply of Methadone after her 10/3/2022 visit. Methadone required a specific prescribing diagnosis to order routinely, and it was unclear what Resident #56's diagnosis was in order to receive a continuous daily supply of Methadone, so a pain management consult was requested on her 10/10/2022 visit. During an interview on 12/14/2022 at 10:00 AM, the Regional Director of Clinical Services stated the 9/28/2022 order for Methadone was for a 3-day supply and should have been discontinued after 3 days. The order for Methadone obtained on 10/1/2022 was for a 3-day supply and should have been discontinued after 3 days. The Methadone order dated 10/3/2022 was for a 2-day supply and should have been discontinued after 2 days. Another order for Methadone was received 10/13/2022. Resident #56 did not have an active order for Methadone from 10/8/2022 - 10/13/2022. The Regional Director of Clinical Services confirmed Resident #56's Methadone order was entered into the facility's system incorrectly upon admission on [DATE] as daily without a discontinue date. Each subsequent order for Methadone should have been entered into the facility's system with the start date it was ordered and discontinued after the prescribed quantity was administered. During an interview on 12/14/2022 at 11:19 AM, the Regional Director of Clinical Services confirmed Resident #56's Methadone orders were entered into the facility's system incorrectly and the medical record was inaccurate.
Sept 2019 1 deficiency
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 complete an accurate Discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assess...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on medical record review and interview the facility failed to complete an accurate Discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment for 1 resident (#48) of 3 residents reviewed for discharge. The findings include: Medical record review revealed Resident #48 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Pneumonia, Neoplasm of Right Ovary, Atrial Fibrillation, Urinary Tract Infection, Muscle Weakness, Dysphagia, Dementia, Gastro-esophageal Reflux Disease, and Major Depressive Disorder. Medical record review of a physician's order dated 8/12/19 revealed .Patient to discharge home . Medical record review of the discharge summary note dated 8/19/19 revealed .Patient discharged home with daughter left per private vehicle . Medical record review of the Discharge MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed .Discharge Status .Acute hospital . Interview with the MDS Coordinator on 9/25/19 at 3:16 PM, in the MDS office, confirmed Resident #48 had been discharged home and the Discharge MDS Assessment reflected an inaccurate discharge status.
Sept 2018 2 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0655 (Tag F0655)

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 address the risk for pain on the b...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on facility policy review, medical record review, and interview, the facility failed to address the risk for pain on the baseline care plan for 1 resident (#248) of 9 residents reviewed for pain of 28 residents sampled. The findings include: Review of the facility policy Baseline Care Plan issued 8/24/17 revealed .develop a baseline care plan .that incorporates the resident's goal, preferences, and services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being .provide effective person-sentered [centered] care of the resident that meet professional standards of care .update the baseline care plan as needed to reflect current needs until the comprehensive care plan is developed . Medical record review revealed Resident #248 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Personal History of Malignant Neoplasm (cancer) of Breast, Malignant Neoplasm of Bone, Anemia, and Muscle Weakness. Medical record review of an incomplete 5 day Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 15, indicating the resident was cognitively intact. Medical record review of the baseline care plan dated 9/17/18 revealed no documentation of the risk for pain. Medical record review of the Physician's orders dated 9/14/18 revealed .ibuprofen [pain medication] .tablet every 8 hours PRN [as needed] .pain . further review revealed .Pain assessment every shift . Medical record review of a Physician's orders dated 9/20/18 revealed .Tramadol [pain medication] prn pain . Medical record review of the medication administration record dated 9/2018 revealed the resident had received pain medication daily from 9/20/18 - 9/26/18. Interview with Resident #248 on 9/24/18 at 2:31 PM, in the resident's room, revealed the resident had pain .I do .I have degenerative spine disease . Interview with the Director of Nursing on 9/26/18 at 8:05 AM, in the conference room, confirmed the resident had complained of pain since admission and had received pain medication. Continued interview confirmed the facility failed to care plan the risk for pain on Resident #248's baseline care plan.
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** Medical record review revealed Resident #248 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Personal History of...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Medical record review revealed Resident #248 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Personal History of Malignant Neoplasm (cancer) of Breast, Malignant Neoplasm of Bone, Anemia, and Muscle Weakness. Medical record review of an incomplete 5 day Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 15, indicating the resident was cognitively intact. Medical record review of a Physician's order dated 9/18/18 revealed .Tramadol 50mg [milligrams] .[1tablet] po [by mouth] q [every] 4hrs prn [as needed] pain 1-5 [based on a pain scale of 1-10 with 1 being mild pain and 10 being the worst pain imaginable] .[2 tablets] .po q 4hrs prn pain 6-10 . Medical record review of a Physician's orders dated 9/20/18 revealed .Tramadol 50mg [1 tablet] po q 4hrs prn pain . Medical record review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) dated 9/2018 revealed the MAR had not been updated with the order dated 9/20/18. Further review revealed Tramadol 2 tablets had been administered 4 times since 9/20/18. Interview and observation with Resident #248 on 9/25/18 at 4:04 PM, in the resident's room, revealed the resident had requested pain medication due to current pain level of 6. Observation revealed Registered Nurse #1 entered the resident's room and administered 2 tramadol tablets to Resident #248. Interview with the Director of Nursing on 9/26/18 at 8:05 AM, in the conference room, confirmed the MAR had not been updated with the Physician's order dated 9/20/18 and the physicians order had not been followed. Based on medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to follow physician's orders for 2 residents (#13, #248) of 28 residents sampled. The findings include: Medical record review revealed Resident #13 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Displaced Bimalleolar Fracture of the Left Lower Leg [fractured ankle], Essential Tremor, and Type 2 Diabetes. Medical record review of the September 2018 Physician Orders revealed an order dated 8/6/18 .LLE [Left Lower Extremity] Boot to be worn for transfers and when OOB [Out Of Bed]. May remove for skin checks/therapy . Observation and interview with Resident #13 on 9/25/18 at 10:15 AM, revealed she wears her boot at bedtime, staff assist with transfers by placing the wheel chair next to the bed, put the walker in front of her, and she does most of the work to stand turn and sit on the bed, the staff have to lift her legs. Observation revealed the resident was sitting in the wheel chair and had tennis shoes on with no boot present. Observation and interview on 9/26/18 at 8:50 AM in Resident #13's room, revealed Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) #1, CNA #2 and Restorative CNA #3 assisted Resident #13 to sit on the side of the bed, using a gait belt assisted her to stand, placed the walker in front of the resident, and with 2 CNA's using the gait belt the resident walked to the wheel chair and sat down. Interview with the 3 CNA's revealed Resident #13 only wears a boot when in bed. Further interview confirmed the resident did not have a boot on when transferring from the bed to the wheel chair. Interview with the Director Of Nursing and the Licensed Practical Nurse Unit Manager #1 on 9/26/18 at 9:22 AM, at the 100 hallway nurse's station confirmed the physician's order for the boot to be worn during transfers was not followed.
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 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.
  • • 43% turnover. Below Tennessee's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
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 Life Of Ooltewah's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns LIFE CARE CENTER OF OOLTEWAH an overall rating of 4 out of 5 stars, which is considered 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 Life Of Ooltewah Staffed?

CMS rates LIFE CARE CENTER OF OOLTEWAH's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 43%, compared to the Tennessee average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.

What Have Inspectors Found at Life Of Ooltewah?

State health inspectors documented 6 deficiencies at LIFE CARE CENTER OF OOLTEWAH during 2018 to 2022. These included: 6 with potential for harm.

Who Owns and Operates Life Of Ooltewah?

LIFE CARE CENTER OF OOLTEWAH 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 120 certified beds and approximately 80 residents (about 67% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in OOLTEWAH, Tennessee.

How Does Life Of Ooltewah Compare to Other Tennessee Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Tennessee, LIFE CARE CENTER OF OOLTEWAH's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 2.8, staff turnover (43%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Life Of Ooltewah?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "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?"

Is Life Of Ooltewah Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, LIFE CARE CENTER OF OOLTEWAH 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 4-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 Ooltewah Stick Around?

LIFE CARE CENTER OF OOLTEWAH has a staff turnover rate of 43%, which is about average for Tennessee 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 Life Of Ooltewah Ever Fined?

LIFE CARE CENTER OF OOLTEWAH 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 Ooltewah on Any Federal Watch List?

LIFE CARE CENTER OF OOLTEWAH 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.