Jesse Helms Nursing Center
Monroe, North Carolina · CCN 345097
11 surveys since 2011, 1 of them producing a finding at harm level or worse.
Data as of , released by CMS on October 8, 2026. Source: CMS Provider Data Catalog.
- Citations on record
- 28
- Surveys
- 11
- Harm or worse
- 1
- Immediate jeopardy
- 0
Findings where a surveyor recorded actual harm to a resident.
Older surveys no longer in CMS’s monthly file or on Care Compare. They are shown here.
The facility
- Certified beds
- 70
- Ownership
- Non profit - Corporation
- Chain
- ATRIUM HEALTH
- County
- Union
- Medicare-certified since
- 1973
CMS ratings
- Overall
- 5
- Health inspection
- 5
- Staffing
- 3
- Quality measures
- 3
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
Aug 14, 2025
452 days ago.
Counts surveys with at least one finding. A clean survey leaves no record here, so the real gap may be shorter.
Staffing
| Measure | This facility | Peer median |
|---|---|---|
| Nurse hours per resident day | 3.95 | 4.42 |
| Registered-nurse hours per resident day | 0.40 | — |
| Annual nurse turnover | 41.0% | 41.0% |
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
| Severity | Isolated | Pattern | Widespread |
|---|---|---|---|
| Immediate jeopardy | J— | K— | L— |
| Actual harm | G— | H— | I— |
| No harm, potential for more than minimal | D360.0% | E120.0% | F— |
| No harm, potential for minimal | A— | B120.0% | C— |
In the surveyor’s words
From the most serious findings on record at Jesse Helms Nursing Center, in the surveyor’s own words.
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF812Dec 15, 2022
Based on observations, record review and staff interview the facility failed to remove dry goods stored past the use by date and ensure all dry goods stored ready for use had use by dates, failed to remove scoops with the handles resting in ingredients from four of four dry storage bins, failed to clean silverware intended for the lunch meal for one of one silverware tray, failed to label a container of ice cream in the reach in freezer and failed to label and dispose of one of one expired food products in a resident community refrigerator. The findings included: 1. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF812Jun 10, 2021
Based on record reviews, observations, and staff interviews, the facility failed to discard expired nutritional supplement drinks in 1 of 2 coolers observed and failed to dry before stacking meal trays for use for 1 of 3 kitchen observations. Findings included: 1. The kitchen was observed on [DATE] at 9:15 AM. A cooler designated as the resident drink cooler was observed to have 6 cartons of a clear nutritional supplement with an expiration date of [DATE]. The dietary supervisor (DS) was interviewed at the time of the observation and reported the coolers were checked daily by the dietary aide (DA) for expired items and the expired supplements should have been discarded. The DA was interviewed on [DATE] at 9:46 AM. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF580Aug 14, 2025
Based on record review, and physician and staff interviews, the facility failed to notify the physician immediately of a change in condition for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for change of status (Resident #67). The findings included: Resident #67 was admitted to the facility 5/14/25 with diagnoses including congestive heart failure and diabetes. The admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] assessed Resident #67 to be cognitively intact. The medical record was reviewed and vital signs for Resident #67 revealed the following: 6/22/25 at 7:07 PM temperature 103.1 Fahrenheit (F) (normal 98.6), pulse 137 (normal 60-100), blood pressure 147/135 (normal 120/70). […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF684Aug 14, 2025
Based on record review, physician, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a Resident's abnormal vital signs were reported to the on-coming shift. This was for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for quality of care (Resident #67).The findings included: Resident #67 was admitted to the facility 5/14/25 with diagnoses including congestive heart failure and diabetes. The admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] assessed Resident #67 to be cognitively intact. The medical record was reviewed and vital signs for Resident #67 were as followed: 6/22/25 at 7:07 PM temperature 103.1 Fahrenheit (F) (normal 98.6), pulse 137 (normal 60-100), blood pressure 147/135 (normal 120/70). 6/22/25 at 7:40 PM temperature 102.8 F, pulse 124, blood pressure 101/41. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF645Dec 15, 2022
Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to rescreen a resident with diagnoses including mental illness for Level II Preadmission Screening and Record Review (PASRR, a resident identified as having a serious mental illness or intellectual debility and/or developmental disability as defined by state and federal guidelines) for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for Preadmission Screening and Record Review (PASRR) (Resident # 41). Findings included: Resident #41 had been admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included epilepsy and schizophrenia. […]
Read 21 findings in full →The most serious and the most recent: 21 of 28 on record.
Every survey on record
FindingsAt actual harm or above
- Aug 14, 2025Standard and complaint2 findings
- Dec 15, 2022Standard3 findings
- Jun 10, 2021Standard3 findings
- May 10, 2018Standard2 findings
- Apr 21, 2016Standard5 findings
- May 20, 2015Standard and complaint1 finding
- Feb 20, 2014Standard3 findings
- Jul 9, 2013—1 finding
Show the 3 earlier surveys
- Mar 21, 2013—1 finding
- Dec 20, 2012—2 findings · 1 harm
- Oct 20, 2011—5 findings
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