UNION CITY HEALTH AND REHABILITATION
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Union City Health and Rehabilitation has a Trust Grade of B+, which means it is above average and generally recommended for families considering care options. It ranks #102 out of 298 facilities in Tennessee, placing it in the top half of state options, and #2 out of 3 in Obion County, indicating only one local facility is rated higher. The facility's trend is improving, having gone from four issues in 2019 to three in 2024, although staffing is a concern with a rating of 2 out of 5 stars and a turnover rate of 37%, which is better than the state average of 48%. While there have been no fines, which is a positive sign, some specific incidents were noted, such as failures to update care plans for residents using oxygen and not following dietary recommendations for proper nutrition, which could potentially affect residents' health. Overall, while there are notable strengths, such as good health inspection ratings and no fines, families should be aware of staffing issues and specific care deficiencies.
- Trust Score
- B+
- In Tennessee
- #102/298
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 37% 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 ○ Average
- Each resident gets 35 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Tennessee. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
- Violations ○ Average
- 9 deficiencies on record. Average for a facility this size. Mostly minor or procedural 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 (37%)
11 points below Tennessee average of 48%
Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Near Tennessee avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 9 deficiencies on record
May 2024
3 deficiencies
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** Based on policy review, medical record review, observation and interview the facility failed to revise the comprehensive care pl...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0692
(Tag F0692)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on policy review, medical record review, and interview, the facility failed to accurately assess the nutritional status an...
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 policy review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were labeled and stored appropriately for 2 of 6 medication storage areas (200 Hall Medication Cart and th...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2019
4 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 policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to promote a resident's dignity d...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0558
(Tag F0558)
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 provide reasonable accommodations for toilet ...
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 review of The National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (NPUAP) Prevention and Treatment of Pressure Ulcers: Quick Referen...
Read full inspector narrative →
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 review of the GERIATRIC MEDICATION HANDBOOK, thirteenth edition, provided by the American Society of Consultant Pharmac...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2018
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0692
(Tag F0692)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure nutritional interventio...
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
Based on policy review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure practices to prevent the potential spread of infection were followed when 1 of 1 (Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1) n...
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
- • 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.
- • 37% turnover. Below Tennessee's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • No significant concerns identified. This facility shows no red flags across CMS ratings, staff turnover, or federal penalties.
About This Facility
What is Union City's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns UNION CITY HEALTH AND REHABILITATION 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 Union City Staffed?
CMS rates UNION CITY HEALTH AND REHABILITATION's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 37%, compared to the Tennessee average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Union City?
State health inspectors documented 9 deficiencies at UNION CITY HEALTH AND REHABILITATION during 2018 to 2024. These included: 9 with potential for harm.
Who Owns and Operates Union City?
UNION CITY HEALTH AND REHABILITATION 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 THE ENSIGN GROUP, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 115 certified beds and approximately 68 residents (about 59% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in UNION CITY, Tennessee.
How Does Union City Compare to Other Tennessee Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Tennessee, UNION CITY HEALTH AND REHABILITATION's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 2.8, staff turnover (37%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Union City?
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 Union City Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, UNION CITY 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 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 Union City Stick Around?
UNION CITY HEALTH AND REHABILITATION has a staff turnover rate of 37%, 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 Union City Ever Fined?
UNION CITY 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 Union City on Any Federal Watch List?
UNION CITY 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.