Deficiency Index

Clinton County Care and Rehabilitation Center

Albany, Kentucky · CCN 185315

9 surveys since 2011, and no finding has been recorded at harm level.

Data as of , released by CMS on October 8, 2026. Source: CMS Provider Data Catalog.

Citations on record
32
Surveys
9
Harm or worse
0
Immediate jeopardy
0
The record, 2011–2025
’11’15’20’25
No harm recordedHarm or worseNot surveyed
Harm or worseNone

No finding on record has been cited at harm level or above.

Beyond CMS’s monthly file7/9

Older surveys no longer in CMS’s monthly file or on Care Compare. They are shown here.

The facility

Certified beds
52
Ownership
For profit - Corporation
Chain
SIGNATURE HEALTHCARE
County
Clinton · rural
Medicare-certified since
1991

CMS ratings

Overall
4
Health inspection
4
Staffing
3
Quality measures
4

CMS’s own Five-Star ratings.

Compared with similar facilities

Not shown for this facility: too few citations in window (n=8, floor 20).

Last survey on record

May 8, 2025

550 days ago.

Counts surveys with at least one finding. A clean survey leaves no record here, so the real gap may be shorter.

Staffing

MeasureThis facilityPeer median
Nurse hours per resident day3.793.66
Registered-nurse hours per resident day0.74—
Annual nurse turnover22.9%45.1%

As reported by the facility to CMS, beside the peer-group median.

Enforcement

No fines, payment denials or special-focus designation on the current CMS record.

Severity of recent findings

Citations by CMS scope and severity. Rows are harm level, columns are how widespread the finding was.
SeverityIsolatedPatternWidespread
Immediate jeopardyJ—K—L—
Actual harmG—H—I—
No harm, potential for more than minimalD675.0%E112.5%F112.5%
No harm, potential for minimalA—B—C—
CMS’s current file: 8 of the 32 citations on record.

In the surveyor’s words

From the most serious findings on record at Clinton County Care and Rehabilitation Center, in the surveyor’s own words.

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, widespreadF880Dec 22, 2021

    Based on observation, interview, and a review of the facility policy Coronavirus (COVID-19) - Screening of Visitors and review of the facility policy and manufactures recommendations for sanitization of blood glucose monitors, it was determined the facility failed to have an effective infection control system to prevent the spread of infection by not consistently and adequately screening visitors at one (1) of one (1) designated visitor entrance to the facility and failing to sanitize blood glucose monitors in accordance with manufactures recommendations for three (3) of twenty-three (23) sampled residents. The findings include: 1. […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF583Dec 22, 2021

    Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure resident privacy during care and treatment for [MEDICAL RECORD OR PHYSICIAN ORDER] . The facility failed to provide visual privacy for Resident #32 during wound care and a skin assessment on 12/21/2021. Residents #22, #38, and #96 were not provided privacy during blood glucose monitoring and insulin injections on 12/20/2021. The findings include: A review of the facility policy for privacy titled Resident Rights with a revised date of 08/16/2018, revealed all residents had the right to be treated with respect and dignity and the rights would be promoted by the facility. […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF812May 8, 2025

    Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of the facility's policy, it was determined the facility failed to store, prepare, and serve food in a sanitary manner and in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This failure had the potential to affect all residents of the facility who consumed food prepared in the kitchen. The findings include: Review of the facility's [NAME] Report, last updated [DATE], revealed 45 of 47 residents received their food from the kitchen. 1. Review of the facility's Chemicals policy, revised ,d+[DATE], revealed the purpose of the policy was to ensure all chemicals would be properly stored. Per the policy, all chemicals would be in a separate/secured area. 2. […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF550Dec 22, 2021

    Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure one (1) of twenty-three (23) sampled residents (Resident #34) was treated with respect and dignity. Observation on 12/20/2021 revealed Resident #34's catheter bag was not covered or blocked from view. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Resident Rights dated 08/16/2018 revealed all residents have the right to be treated with respect and dignity. These rights would be promoted and protected by the facility. All residents would be treated in a manner and in an environment that promoted maintenance or enhancement of qualify of life. […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF636Dec 22, 2021

    Based on interview and record review, it was determined the facility failed to conduct an admission comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment within the required timeframe for one (1) of twenty-three (23) sampled residents (Resident #95). A review of Resident #95's medical record revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE]; however, an admission MDS assessment for Resident #95 was not completed within fourteen (14) days of admission as required. Further, the admission MDS assessment was not completed as of 12/22/2021. […]

Read 20 findings in full →The most serious and the most recent: 20 of 32 on record.

Every survey on record

FindingsAt actual harm or above

  • May 8, 2025Complaint1 finding
  • Dec 22, 2021Standard7 findings
  • Jan 25, 2018Standard2 findings
  • Nov 3, 2016Standard14 findings
  • Oct 15, 2015Standard1 finding
  • Nov 6, 2014Standard2 findings
  • Nov 7, 2013—2 findings
  • Oct 11, 2012—2 findings
Show the 1 earlier survey
  • Nov 17, 2011—1 finding

Surveys that found no deficiencies are not in CMS’s files and do not appear here.

Comparable facilities

The nearest facilities to this one in the same peer group, by weighted findings.

Deficiency Index is independent and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or approved by CMS, Medicare, or any government agency. About this data · Report a correction