Search for Skilled Nursing by ZIP Code:  :

Huntersville Oaks

  1. Home
  2. Skilled Nursing Home Facilities Directory
  3. North Carolina (NC)
  4. Huntersville
Full Name

Phone Number

Email Address

City of interest
We value your privacy. By clicking, you agree to the terms and conditions of our privacy policy. You also consent that we can reach out to you using a phone system that can auto-dial numbers. Your consent is not required to use our service.

Search for nursing homes in your area

ZIP:

About Huntersville Oaks

General Information

Legal Business NameHuntersville Oaks
Ownership TypeNon Profit - Corporation
Changed Ownership In The Last 12 MonthsNo
First Accepted MedicareOctober 1, 1973 (44 years)
Capacity168
Residents159
Percent Occupied95%
Program ParticipationMedicare And Medicaid
Resident And Family CouncilsResident
In HospitalNo
Continuing Care Retirement CommunityNo
Special Focus FacilityNo
Auto Sprinkler System In Required AreasYes

Ratings for Huntersville Oaks

Huntersville Oaks
was reviewed by Medicare to have a rating of 3 out of 5. About Medicare Ratings
Overall Rating
Health Inspections Rating
Quality Measures Rating
Staff Rating
RN Staff Rating

Overall Ratings of North Carolina Nursing Homes

Fines, Complaints, and Inspection Problems in the Past 3 Years

Compare The Number of Problems

Types of Problems at Nursing Homes

Some issues within a nursing home are much more severe than others. Medicare evaluates each problem based on 2 scales: the number of residents affected by a problem and the severity of the potential or actual harm to residents based on the problem. We have color coded the matrix below to make it easier to pick out the more severe problems. In general, orange and red issues related to the treatment of a resident are considered substandard quality of care.

  Residents Affected
Severity of the Deficiency Few Some Many
Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety J K L
Actual harm that is not immediate jeopardy G H I
No actual harm with potential for more than minimal harm that is not immediate jeopardy D E F
No actual harm with potential for minimal harm A B C

October 6, 2016 - 9 months ago

 Residents AffectedSeveritySource/TypeDescription
DFewPotential for HarmComplaint+InspectionProvide necessary care and services to maintain or improve the highest well being of each resident .

June 19, 2015 - 2 years ago

 Residents AffectedSeveritySource/TypeDescription
GFewActual HarmComplaintImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
GFewActual HarmComplaintGive residents proper treatment to prevent new bed (pressure) sores or heal existing bed sores.
GFewActual HarmComplaintProvide necessary care and services to maintain or improve the highest well being of each resident .
DFewPotential for HarmComplaintAssist those residents who need help with eating/drinking, grooming and personal and oral hygiene.
DFewPotential for HarmComplaintConduct initial and periodic assessments of each resident's functional capacity.
DFewPotential for HarmComplaintTry to resolve each resident's complaints quickly.
DFewPotential for HarmComplaintEnsure residents have the right to have a choice over activities, their schedules, and health care according to their interests, assessments, and plans of care.

August 28, 2014 - 3 years ago

 Residents AffectedSeveritySource/TypeDescription
DFewPotential for HarmComplaint+InspectionStore, cook, and serve food in a safe and clean way.

Staffing Levels Per Resident per Day

Medicare determines the expected staffing time per resident per day depending on level of care the residents of Huntersville Oaks require. It is important to compare the reported time to expected time for a single facility instead of comparing the amount of time per resident of two facilities. Learn why.

2hr 15min
2hr 35min
ReportedExpected
CNA
50min
40min
ReportedExpected
LPN
1hr
1hr 10min
ReportedExpected
RN
4hr 10min
4hr 20min
ReportedExpected
Total Nursing

This facility also provides approximately 30min per resident per WEEK of physical therapist time.

Quality Measures for Long Stay Residents

85.3%
94.5%
94.5%
94.5%
93.5%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016NC
Percentage of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
89.3%
90.7%
89.3%
91.7%
92.6%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016NC
Percentage of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
82.4%
77.1%
83.3%
82.2%
55.2%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016NC
Percentage of low risk long-stay residents who lose control of their bowels or bladder
24.0%
26.5%
19.6%
23.1%
30.3%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016NC
Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antianxiety or hypnotic medication
24.8%
34.8%
20.2%
34.3%
23.2%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016NC
Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to move independently worsened
9.3%
9.6%
8.2%
9.4%
14.1%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016NC
Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication
30.0%
20.2%
16.5%
16.3%
18.3%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016NC
Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased
7.8%
7.5%
8.1%
8.2%
8.1%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016NC
Percentage of long-stay residents who self-report moderate to severe pain
10.8%
9.3%
6.3%
4.6%
8.6%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016NC
Percentage of long-stay residents who lose too much weight
5.8%
9.7%
7.9%
7.2%
7.3%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016NC
Percentage of high risk long-stay residents with pressure ulcers
0.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
3.0%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016NC
Percentage of long-stay residents who have depressive symptoms
6.7%
5.1%
2.7%
0.9%
4.9%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016NC
Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection
4.1%
4.2%
4.5%
4.6%
3.3%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016NC
Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury
11.4%
8.5%
9.4%
6.9%
2.4%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016NC
Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.5%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016NC
Percentage of long-stay residents who were physically restrained

Quality Measures for Short Stay Residents

86.3%
90.6%
91.6%
93.0%
82.5%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016NC
Percentage of short-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
67.0%
93.1%
93.1%
93.1%
81.1%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016NC
Percentage of short-stay residents who were assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
72.2%
69.6%
68.6%
60.6%
63.3%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016NC
Percentage of short-stay residents who made improvements in function
21.8%
17.1%
12.6%
11.2%
16.4%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016NC
Percentage of short-stay residents who self-report moderate to severe pain
1.8%
0.8%
1.6%
1.2%
1.9%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016NC
Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication
0.6%
0.5%
1.3%
1.3%
1.1%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016NC
Percentage of short-stay residents with pressure ulcers that are new or worsened