Majestic Care of Hopemont
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Majestic Care of Hopemont has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the quality of care provided. Ranked #79 out of 122 facilities in West Virginia, they fall into the bottom half, but are the top option in Preston County. Unfortunately, the facility is worsening, with reported issues increasing from 6 in 2022 to 28 in 2024. On a positive note, staffing is rated 4 out of 5 stars, suggesting that staff generally stay and are familiar with residents, though the turnover rate is average at 46%. However, the facility has faced serious problems, including a critical incident where a resident suffered second-degree burns from exposure to water heated to 134 degrees Fahrenheit due to inadequate monitoring, raising concerns about the safety and competency of care staff. Additionally, fines totaling $57,116 indicate compliance issues that are higher than 81% of similar facilities in the state.
- Trust Score
- F
- In West Virginia
- #79/122
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 46% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ⚠ Watch
- $57,116 in fines. Higher than 98% of West Virginia facilities. Major compliance failures.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 43 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for West Virginia. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 43 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average 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
Below West Virginia average (2.7)
Below average - review inspection findings carefully
Near West Virginia avg (46%)
Higher turnover may affect care consistency
Above median ($33,413)
Moderate penalties - review what triggered them
The Ugly 43 deficiencies on record
Nov 2024
3 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
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure that an alleged violation involving resident-to-resident sexual abuse was reported within two (2) hours of the event/allegatio...
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
Deficiency F0804
(Tag F0804)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, and staff interview, the facility failed to provide food at a palatable and appetizing temperature as determined by the type of food to ensure resident satisfaction. This failed ...
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
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to store and label food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This failed practice had the pot...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 2024
16 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
Based on staff interviews and observation the facility failed to provide a dignified dining service. This failed practice was found true for (1) one random resident observed during the lunch dining in...
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
Based on staff interview and facility documentation, the facility failed to provide reasonable accommodation in regard to activities of daily living (ADLs). This was true for one (1) of eighteen (18) ...
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 observation, staff interview, and resident interview the facility failed to provide a homelike environment by not allowing Resident # 29 access to his personal belongings by his own freewill....
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
Based on record review and staff interview, in response to allegations of abuse, the facility failed to have evidence that all alleged violations are thoroughly investigated. This was true for 1 (one)...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Facility failed to ensure a complete an accurate admission PASSAR, and an expired PASSAR
TN-PS
2 of 2 residents looked at for PA...
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
Based on staff interview and facility documentation, the facility failed to provide accurate and complete medical records in regard to activities of daily living (ADLs). This was true for one (1) of e...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0552
(Tag F0552)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on resident observation, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the resident and or representative was informed in advance by the physician, other practitioner or healt...
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 resident council meeting interviews, observation and staff interview the facility failed to ensure residents were able to submit grievances anonymously. This had the potential to affect more ...
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 record review, resident observation and staff interview the facility failed to ensure that the comprehensive care plan is reviewed and revised by an interdisciplinary team composed of individ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice which would allow the residents to...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review, staff interview and resident observation the facility failed to provide supervision, implementation, monitoring and modifying of interventions to prevent avoidable accidents. T...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Staffing Information
(Tag F0732)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on facility record review and staff interview the facility failed to provide the accurate data on the nurse staffing information form. The daily census was not accurate for 4 of 5 daily of the n...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medication Errors
(Tag F0758)
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 ensure behavior monitoring and medication side effect monitor...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
b) Resident #33
05/29/24 at 1:38 PM during a tour of resident room the black pipe foam that resembled a pool noodle was seen to be tapped with black tape along the headboard and the foot board of the ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0727
(Tag F0727)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on facility record review and staff interview the facility failed to use the services of a registered nurse for at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week. This was true for two (2) of fi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0838
(Tag F0838)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on facility record review and staff interview the facility failed to conduct and document a complete facility-wide assessment to determine what resources were necessary to care for its residents...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2024
4 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
Abuse Prevention Policies
(Tag F0607)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on reportable allegation review, staff interview and policy review the facility failed to ensure they implemented their abuse/neglect policy as it relates to thoroughly investigating allegations...
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
Based on reportable allegation review, staff interview and policy review the facility failed to ensure they thoroughly investigated allegations of abuse. Resident identifier: #34, #28. These were rand...
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 F0760
(Tag F0760)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on medical record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure one (1) of three (3) residents were free from significant medication errors. Resident #54 received two (2) medications ...
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 F0865
(Tag F0865)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on medication error report review, policy review, medical record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure their quality assurance committee analyses a significant medication erro...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2024
5 deficiencies
5 IJ (5 facility-wide)
CRITICAL
(L)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Someone could have died · This affected most or all residents
⚠️ Facility-wide issue
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff interviews, medical record review, temperature log review, and facility reportable incident (FRI) re...
Read full inspector narrative →
CRITICAL
(L)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff interviews, medical record review, temperature log review, facility reportable incident (FRI) review...
Read full inspector narrative →
CRITICAL
(L)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Deficiency F0726
(Tag F0726)
Someone could have died · This affected most or all residents
⚠️ Facility-wide issue
Based on a review of the orientation records, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure licensed staff and nurse aides were able to demonstrate competency skills and techniques necessary to ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CRITICAL
(L)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Room Equipment
(Tag F0908)
Someone could have died · This affected most or all residents
⚠️ Facility-wide issue
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and staff interview the licensee failed to maintain hot water mechanical equipment in safe ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CRITICAL
(L)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Safe Environment
(Tag F0921)
Someone could have died · This affected most or all residents
⚠️ Facility-wide issue
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and staff interview the licensee failed to maintain hot water mechanical equipment in safe ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2022
6 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
.
Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a complete and accurate Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment in the area of psychiatric/mood disorders for one (1) of f...
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
.
Based on record review staff interview, the facility failed to ensure pressure ulcer care was provided in accordance with professional standards of practice. Resident #4's pressure ulcer treatment t...
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 observation, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure temperature checks were completed daily for one (1) of the two (2) refrigerators used for medication storage. T...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0680
(Tag F0680)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
.
Based on observation and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure the activities program is directed by a qualified professional. This had a potential to affect more than a limited number of ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0730
(Tag F0730)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
.
Based on employee record reviews and staff interview, the facility failed to complete the annual performance evaluations for nurse aides. This was true for five (5) of five (5) agency nurse aides re...
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 interviews, the facility failed to store food in sanitary conditions by not labeling foods appropriately and not discarding when foods expired in the kitchen. The faci...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2021
9 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0565
(Tag F0565)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
.
Based on observation, record review, resident interview and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure resident's concerns were addressed in a timely manner. The facility failed to ensure a resi...
Read full inspector narrative →
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 two (2) of 15 residents reviewed during the long-term care survey process had a Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment (POS...
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 one (1) of 15 sample residents a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment. The facility failed ...
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 on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the accuracy of the comprehensive assessment for one (1) of 15 sample residents. Resident identifiers: #42. Facility...
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
.
Based on observation, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident received necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to p...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0883
(Tag F0883)
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 provide immunizations and vaccines in accordance with prof...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
.
Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were treated with dignity and respect. Resident's #26 and #11 had signage regarding care posted that were visible to...
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 food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. The facility failed to label and date food items in bot...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
.
Based on observation, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure infection control practices were in accordance with professional standards. The facility failed to maintain so...
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: 5 life-threatening violation(s), $57,116 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 43 deficiencies on record, including 5 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $57,116 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in West Virginia. Major compliance failures.
- • Grade F (0/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Majestic Care Of Hopemont's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns Majestic Care of Hopemont an overall rating of 2 out of 5 stars, which is considered 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 Majestic Care Of Hopemont Staffed?
CMS rates Majestic Care of Hopemont's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 46%, compared to the West Virginia average of 46%.
What Have Inspectors Found at Majestic Care Of Hopemont?
State health inspectors documented 43 deficiencies at Majestic Care of Hopemont during 2021 to 2024. These included: 5 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 38 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates Majestic Care Of Hopemont?
Majestic Care of Hopemont is owned by a government entity. Government-operated facilities are typically run by state, county, or municipal agencies. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 98 certified beds and approximately 50 residents (about 51% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in TERRA ALTA, West Virginia.
How Does Majestic Care Of Hopemont Compare to Other West Virginia Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in West Virginia, Majestic Care of Hopemont's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 2.7, staff turnover (46%) 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 Majestic Care Of Hopemont?
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 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 Immediate Jeopardy citations.
Is Majestic Care Of Hopemont Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, Majestic Care of Hopemont has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 5 Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 2-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 Majestic Care Of Hopemont Stick Around?
Majestic Care of Hopemont has a staff turnover rate of 46%, which is about average for West Virginia 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 Majestic Care Of Hopemont Ever Fined?
Majestic Care of Hopemont has been fined $57,116 across 1 penalty action. This is above the West Virginia average of $33,650. 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 Majestic Care Of Hopemont on Any Federal Watch List?
Majestic Care of Hopemont 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.