NELLA'S AT AUTUMN LAKE HEALTHCARE
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Nella's at Autumn Lake Healthcare has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the facility's care and management. It ranks #109 out of 122 nursing homes in West Virginia, placing it in the bottom half, and #3 out of 3 in Randolph County, meaning only one other local option is better. The situation is worsening, with reported issues increasing from 2 in 2024 to 14 in 2025, reflecting deeper problems in care quality. While the staffing rating is below average at 2 out of 5 stars, the turnover rate is average at 52%, suggesting some consistency; however, the facility has concerning RN coverage, being lower than 94% of state facilities. Additionally, significant fines of $71,911 indicate compliance issues, and recent inspections revealed critical incidents, including dangerously high water temperatures that pose burn risks and failure to protect residents from sexually aggressive behavior, highlighting serious deficiencies in resident safety and care planning.
- Trust Score
- F
- In West Virginia
- #109/122
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 52% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ⚠ Watch
- $71,911 in fines. Higher than 93% of West Virginia facilities. Major compliance failures.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 18 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for West Virginia. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 32 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
Facility shows strength in fire safety.
The Bad
Below West Virginia average (2.7)
Significant quality concerns identified by CMS
Near West Virginia avg (46%)
Higher turnover may affect care consistency
Well above median ($33,413)
Moderate penalties - review what triggered them
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 32 deficiencies on record
Aug 2025
14 deficiencies
1 IJ (1 facility-wide)
CRITICAL
(L)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Someone could have died · This affected most or all residents
⚠️ Facility-wide issue
Based on observation, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the environment over which it had control was as free from accident hazards as possible. Hot water temperatures ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and staff interview the facility failed to provide a clean, comfortable, homelike environment. This failed ...
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 record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure documentation that required transfer information was p...
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
Based upon record review and staff interview, the facility failed to accurately reflect the resident's diagnoses in the assessment. This was found to be true for one (1) of twenty-seven (27) residents...
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
Based upon record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to update the Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) when new diagnoses were given. This was found to be true for two (...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Tube Feeding
(Tag F0693)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, resident interview and staff interview, the facility failed to provide appropriate treatment and service...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0745
(Tag F0745)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based upon record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide medically-related social services to assist the res...
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
Deficiency F0825
(Tag F0825)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on policy review, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide specialized rehabilitation services fo...
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 record review and staff interview, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment ...
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** Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to develop and/or implement individualized care plans related to...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on policy review, resident interviews, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents and/or responsible party as well as required staff were included in care plan me...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0679
(Tag F0679)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff interview, and record review the facility failed to provide an ongoing program of activities to meet...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, and staff interview the facility failed to store, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This failed practice was a random o...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure complete and accurate medical records. For five (5) of six (6) residents reviewed for the care area of advance directives, the...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2024
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
Room Equipment
(Tag F0908)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, resident interview and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain a functioning room air conditioner...
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
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** .
Based on observation, resident interviews and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure resident room temperatures were ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2023
13 deficiencies
1 IJ (1 affecting multiple)
CRITICAL
(K)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on resident interview, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from sexually...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on resident interview, observation and staff interview, the facility failed to provide residents with furniture in good repair. This was a random opportunity for discovery. Resident identifiers:...
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 resident interview, staff interview and record review, the facility failed to report an alleged allegation of sexual ab...
Read full inspector narrative →
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 staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure the resident's Pre admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) reflected pre-admission diagnoses for one (1) of two (2) r...
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
.
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to complete neuro checks after an unwitnessed fall. This was a random opportunity for discovery and has the potential to affect a limi...
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
Based on observation, record review and staff interview facility failed to ensure adequate supervision was maintained to ensure safety during medication administration for Resident #55. This failed pr...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0943
(Tag F0943)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide training to all staff (direct and indirect care) that included activities that constitute abuse, neglect, exploitation, and m...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0947
(Tag F0947)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to provide required in-service training for nurse aides which included dementia management training and resident abuse prevention trainin...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Grievances
(Tag F0585)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, policy review, resident council meeting minutes, and staff interview, the facility failed to consider the voiced concerns of residents in resident council as grievances. The faci...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
.
Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure an accurate assessment for five (5) of 19 residents whose Minimum Data Sets (MDS's) were reviewed. Resident identifiers: #31,...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0697
(Tag F0697)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** b) Resident #181
On 11/06/23 at 12:13 PM Resident #181 stated everything below her knees was hurting. Resident #181 said staff r...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation and staff interview the facility failed to store utensils in a sanitary manner. This practice had the potential to affect all residents that receive nourishment from the facility ...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Staffing Information
(Tag F0732)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure staff posting was correct. This was a random opportunity for discovery and had the potential to affect all Residents at the fac...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 2021
3 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0578
(Tag F0578)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure one (1) of 18 residents reviewed during the long-term care survey process had a Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment (POST)...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0561
(Tag F0561)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** .
Based on resident interview, observation, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure that each resident ...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** .
Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility were stored...
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
- • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 2 life-threatening violation(s), $71,911 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 32 deficiencies on record, including 2 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $71,911 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in West Virginia. Major compliance failures.
- • Grade F (6/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Nella'S At Autumn Lake Healthcare's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns NELLA'S AT AUTUMN LAKE HEALTHCARE an overall rating of 1 out of 5 stars, which is considered much below average nationally. Within West Virginia, 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 Nella'S At Autumn Lake Healthcare Staffed?
CMS rates NELLA'S AT AUTUMN LAKE HEALTHCARE's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 52%, compared to the West Virginia average of 46%.
What Have Inspectors Found at Nella'S At Autumn Lake Healthcare?
State health inspectors documented 32 deficiencies at NELLA'S AT AUTUMN LAKE HEALTHCARE during 2021 to 2025. These included: 2 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 29 with potential for harm, and 1 minor or isolated issues. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates Nella'S At Autumn Lake Healthcare?
NELLA'S AT AUTUMN LAKE HEALTHCARE 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 AUTUMN LAKE HEALTHCARE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 100 certified beds and approximately 95 residents (about 95% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in ELKINS, West Virginia.
How Does Nella'S At Autumn Lake Healthcare Compare to Other West Virginia Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in West Virginia, NELLA'S AT AUTUMN LAKE HEALTHCARE's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 2.7, staff turnover (52%) 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 Nella'S At Autumn Lake Healthcare?
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 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?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations and the below-average staffing rating.
Is Nella'S At Autumn Lake Healthcare Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, NELLA'S AT AUTUMN LAKE HEALTHCARE has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 2 Immediate Jeopardy citations (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 West Virginia. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.
Do Nurses at Nella'S At Autumn Lake Healthcare Stick Around?
NELLA'S AT AUTUMN LAKE HEALTHCARE has a staff turnover rate of 52%, which is 6 percentage points above the West Virginia average of 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 Nella'S At Autumn Lake Healthcare Ever Fined?
NELLA'S AT AUTUMN LAKE HEALTHCARE has been fined $71,911 across 2 penalty actions. This is above the West Virginia average of $33,798. Fines in this range indicate compliance issues significant enough for CMS to impose meaningful financial consequences. Common causes include delayed correction of deficiencies, repeat violations, or care failures affecting resident safety. Families should ask facility leadership what changes have been made since these penalties.
Is Nella'S At Autumn Lake Healthcare on Any Federal Watch List?
NELLA'S AT AUTUMN LAKE HEALTHCARE 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.