Comfort Care Home Health and Hospice
A hospice in Chesapeake, Virginia 23320
1301 Executive Blvd Suite 200, Chesapeake, Virginia 23320. (757) 312-6460.
Watch and the shortlist are kept with a free account, on every device. Your watch list. CMS’s own record is on Care Compare.
The short answer
Record last released by CMS on Oct 23, 2026.
- 6 deficiencies cited in the last three years
- 3of 5 family caregiver rating
- 9of 10 CMS’s Hospice Care Index
Each figure’s source sits beside it, in its section below.
What these words mean3
- Star ratings
- CMS rates some kinds of place from 1 to 5 stars, more stars meaning better on CMS’s own measures for that kind: for a nursing home, its health inspections, staffing and quality measures. A rating is CMS’s summary of those measures; it doesn’t promise good care. Source: CMS, Care Compare and the Five-Star Quality Rating System.
- Inspection (survey)
- A visit by state inspectors, often unannounced, who check a place against the rules it must meet. For nursing homes and other places Medicare pays, CMS calls these visits surveys: a standard survey of a nursing home comes at least every 15 months, and a complaint survey whenever a complaint calls for one. Source: CMS; 42 CFR 488.308.
- Deficiency, citation, violation
- What inspectors write up when a place didn’t meet a rule: the rule, what they saw, and when. CMS calls it a deficiency; states may say citation or violation. It is the inspectors’ finding, not a court’s, and the place is usually asked for a plan to correct it. Source: CMS, statement of deficiencies (Form CMS-2567); each state’s licensing agency.
What did inspectors find?
6 deficiencies cited in the last three years
The middle of the 25 hospices serving ZIP code 23320 had 6.5.
The last inspection on record was on Jul 11, 2025: a recertification inspection by the state.
CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.
CMS, Hospice ZIP Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.
When those deficiencies happened
6 deficiencies in 2 months of the last 36. Last cited Jul 2025. Most serious: Standard-level. The last 3 years, to Oct 27, 2026.
| Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | Nov | Dec | ||||||||||
| 2024 | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec |
| 2025 | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec |
| 2026 | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct |
Hover or focus a month to read it.
Hearth Record drew this from the dates and levels in the source’s own records.
Each deficiency, as cited
Rule titles as CMS’s inspectors cite them, set in sentence case.
CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.
Jul 11, 2025: recertification inspection by the state1 deficiency
-
Level of activity (42 CFR 418.78(e))
The inspectors’ words, 151 words
“Based on interview, document review, and policy review, the hospice agency failed to have volunteer hours that equaled five percent of total patient care hours. This had the potential to cause 22 of 22 active patients to have unmet needs. Findings include:Review of the “Hospice Volunteer Analysis” report, provided by the facility, dated from 07/01/24 to 06/30/25 revealed, “Total Volunteer Hours at 103 hours with an hourly rate at $34.79…” The report documented the “Volunteer Time Percentage” at 4.12%.During an interview on 07/11/25 at 1:00 PM, the Administrator confirmed the volunteer time percentage was below the required 5%. The Administrator stated the agency was active with recruiting events.Review of the policy titled, “Hospice Volunteer Services”, dated July 2025, revealed, “. . . Purpose: to document cost-savings attributable to volunteer services as part of the organizational fiscal stewardship . . . Calculate cost savings using standardized volunteer hourly wages . . .””
Jan 3, 2024: complaint inspection by the state5 deficiencies
-
Content of comprehensive assessment (42 CFR 418.54(c)(6))
The inspectors’ words, 134 words
“Based on staff interview and document review, it was determined the hospice failed to ensure each patient’s plan of care included an accurate medication profile in two (2) of seven (7) medical records reviewed in the survey sample. Medical record #’s 3 and 7. Seven (7) medical records were reviewed 01/02/24 - 01/03/24. The medical record for patient #3 contained documentation that the nurse applied triple antibiotic ointment to the patient’s wound on 04/03/23. The patient’s medication profile did not contain triple antibiotic ointment. The medical record for patient #7 contained documentation that the nurse applied triple antibiotic ointment to the patient’s peg tube site on 12/24/23. The patient’s medication profile failed to contain triple antibiotic ointment. Staff member #1 confirmed on 01/03/24 that all medications should be listed on the patient’s medication profile.”
-
Plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(b))
The inspectors’ words, 754 words
“Based on staff interview and clinical record review, it was determined the hospice failed to ensure each patient received care in accordance with the written plan of care established by the interdisciplinary group in four (4) of seven (7) clinical records reviewed in the survey sample. Clinical record #3, 4, 7, 9. Seven (7) medical records were reviewed 01/02/24 - 01/03-24. 1. The medical record for patient #3 contained documentation that nurses provided wound care to the patient’s sacral wound from 03/28/23 - 04/06/23 with no orders for wound care documented in the patient’s plan of care. Orders were documented in the record on 04/06/23 as follows: Right foot heel blister/left foot heel observation. May apply transparent film dressing if needed to keep skin intact. Decubitus/pressure ulcer stage II/inner buttocks gluteal fold. Using aseptic technique, cleanse wound with normal saline or dermal wound cleanser and pat dry with non-sterile gauze. Apply very thin layer of antibiotic ointment. Cover with foam bandage. Wound care to be completed 3 times weekly by skilled nurse and as needed by family for loose or soiled dressings. Prior to 04/06/23 the patient’s record contained no documentation of orders for wound care to either the patient’s heels or the patient’s inner buttocks/sacral wound. The medical record contained documentation that on 04/10/23 the nurse utilized zeroform (a dressing containing 3% Bismuth Tribromophenate in a special petrolatum blend on fine mesh gauze, https://www.cardinalhealth.com/en/product-solutions/medical/skin-and-wound-management/traditional-wound-care/non-adherent-moist-gauze-dressings/xeroform-occlusive-dressing.html) for the patient’s wound. Patient #3’s care plan contained no documented order for a xeroform dressing. 2. The medical record for patient #4 contained documentation that the nurse made an as needed visit on 11/25/23 to troubleshoot problems with the patient’s Foley catheter. The patient’s plan of care failed to contain orders for the catheter. 3. The medical record for patient #9 contained documentation that the nurse drained and provided site care to the patient’s peg tube on 12/28/23. The patient’s plan of care failed to contain orders for site care or draining. 4. The medical record contained documentation that patient #9 had wounds to the shoulder and sacrum. The record contained documentation that the nurse changed the dressings to these wounds on 12/27/23. The patient’s plan of care failed to contain documentation of written orders for the wound care. An interview was conducted with staff member #6 on 01/03/24 who confirmed all orders four wound care and catheter care should appear on the patient’s plan of care. Seven (7) medical records were reviewed 01/02/24 - 01/03-24. 1. The medical record for patient #3 contained documentation that nurses provided wound care to the patient’s sacral wound from 03/28/23 - 04/06/23 with no orders for wound care documented in the patient’s plan of care. Orders were documented in the record on 04/06/23 as follows: Right foot heel blister/left foot heel observation. May apply transparent film dressing if needed to keep skin intact. Decubitus/pressure ulcer stage II/inner buttocks gluteal fold. Using aseptic technique, cleanse wound with normal saline or dermal wound cleanser and pat dry with non-sterile gauze. Apply very thin layer of antibiotic ointment. Cover with foam bandage. Wound care to be completed 3 times weekly by skilled nurse and as needed by family for loose or soiled dressings. Prior to 04/06/23 the patient’s record contained no documentation of orders for wound care to either the patient’s heels or the patient’s inner buttocks/sacral wound. The medical record contained documentation that on 04/10/23 the nurse utilized zeroform (a dressing containing 3% Bismuth Tribromophenate in a special petrolatum blend on fine mesh gauze, https://www.cardinalhealth.com/en/product-solutions/medical/skin-and-wound-management/traditional-wound-care/non-adherent-moist-gauze-dressings/xeroform-occlusive-dressing.html) for the patient’s wound. Patient #3’s care plan contained no documented order for a xeroform dressing. 2. The medical record for patient #4 contained documentation that the nurse made an as needed visit on 11/25/23 to troubleshoot problems with the patient’s Foley catheter. The patient’s plan of care failed to contain orders for the catheter. 3. The medical record for patient #7 contained documentation that the nurse drained and provided site care to the patient’s peg tube on 12/28/23. The patient’s plan of care failed to contain orders for site care or draining. 4. The medical record contained documentation that patient #9 had wounds to the shoulder and sacrum. The record contained documentation that the nurse changed the dressings to these wounds on 12/27/23. The patient’s plan of care failed to contain documentation of written orders for the wound care. An interview was conducted with staff member #6 on 01/03/24 who confirmed all orders four wound care and catheter care should appear on the patient’s plan of care.”
-
Content of plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(c))
The inspectors’ words, 494 words
“Based on staff interview and document review, it was determined the hospice failed to ensure each patient’s plan of care included all services necessary for the management of the terminal illness and related conditions in five (5) of seven (7) medical records reviewed in the survey sample. Medical record #’s 2, 3, 4, 7, 9. Additionally, the hospice failed to ensure each patient’s plan of care was individualized in four (4) of seven (7) medical records reviewed. Medical record #’s 6 - 9. Seven (7) medical records were reviewed 01/02/24 - 01/03-24. The medical record for patient #2 contained documentation that the patient had foley and pleurx catheters. The plan of care failed to contain orders for the foley catheter to include the size of the catheter and care of the catheter. The medical record failed to contain documentation of orders for dressing changes or site care to the pleurx site. The medical record for patient #3 contained documentation that nurses provided wound care to the patient’s sacral wound from 03/28/23 - 04/06/23 with no orders for wound care documented in the patient’s plan of care. The medical record for patient #4 contained documentation that the nurse made an as needed visit on 11/25/23 to troubleshoot problems with the patient’s Foley catheter. The patient’s plan of care failed to contain orders for the catheter. Patient #6’s care plan contained a skilled nursing goal documented as follows: patient will remain comfortable. The plan of care was not individualized to contain a personalized pain goal or a description of the goal of “comfort.” The medical record for patient #7 contained documentation that the nurse drained and provided site care to the patient’s peg tube on 12/28/23. The patient’s plan of care failed to contain orders for site care or draining. Patient #7’s care plan reads in part: patient will be pain free or verbalize an acceptable pain level with current pain management regimen. The plan of care was not individualized to contain a patient stated pain goal or what level of pain would be considered “acceptable” to the patient. The medical record for patient #8 contained documentation that the patient was experiencing pain. The plan of care was not individualized to contain a patient stated pain goal or what level of pain would be considered acceptable to the patient. The medical record contained documentation that patient #9 had wounds to the shoulder and sacrum. The record contained documentation that the nurse changed the dressings to the wounds on 12/27/23. The patient’s plan of care failed to contain documentation of written orders for the wound care. Patient #9’s care plan contained a skilled nursing goal documented as follows: patient will remain comfortable. The plan of care was not individualized to contain a personalized pain goal or a description of the goal of “comfort.” An interview was conducted with staff member #1 on 01/03/24 who confirmed all orders and supplies should be listed on the plan of care.”
-
Content of plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(c)(3))
The inspectors’ words, 99 words
“Based on staff interview and document review, it was determined the hospice failed to ensure each patient’s plan of care failed to include measurable outcomes using data elements in seven (7) of seven (7) medical records reviewed in the survey sample. Medical record #’s 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8 and 9. Seven (7) medical records were reviewed in the agency 01/02/24-01/03/24. All of the clinical records reviewed failed to contain documentation of measurable outcomes anticipated from implementing the plan of care. Staff member #2 acknowledged the lack of measurable outcomes on the patients’ plans of care on 01/03/24.”
-
Review of the plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(d))
The inspectors’ words, 151 words
“Based on staff interview and document review, it was determined the hospice failed to ensure each patient’s plan of care was updated as frequently as the patient condition required in one (1) of seven (7) medical records reviewed in the survey sample. Medical record # 6. Seven (7) medical records were reviewed in the hospice 01/02/24-01/03/24. The medical record for patient #6 contained documentation that the patient had a prn visit by the nurse on 12/27/23 to address new onset dyspnea. The nurse notified the nurse practitioner who ordered oxygen via nasal canula at 2 L as needed for shortness of breath. The hospice’s interdisciplinary group meeting on 12/28/23 documented discussion regarding the patient’s dyspnea, however the patient’s plan of care was not updated with interventions for newly reported symptoms. Staff member #2 confirmed on 01/03/24 that patient #6 plan of care had not been updated when the patient’s condition changed.”
All 2 inspections in the last three years
| Date | Visit | What the record says |
|---|---|---|
| Jul 11, 2025 | Recertification inspection by the state | 1 deficiency cited |
| Jan 3, 2024 | Complaint inspection by the state | 5 deficiencies cited |
Is it certified?
- Medicare-certified hospice since Nov 21, 1996.
- Ownership: other.
- No For hospices, home health agencies, hospitals and dialysis facilities, CMS writes deficiencies at two levels. Standard is the usual one; condition-level is the more serious, when a problem is serious enough that the provider doesn’t meet a whole condition of taking part in Medicare. Source: CMS, State Operations Manual. deficiency or CMS’s most serious finding: the place’s failure to meet a rule caused, or was likely to cause, serious injury, harm, impairment or death to someone in its care. Source: CMS; 42 CFR 489.3. on record in the last three years.
CMS, Hospice General Information. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.
CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.
Has anything been proven against it?
- CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for hospices, so none are shown.
- 5 deficiencies cited in the last three years came from inspections that included a complaint investigation.
CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.
Who does the caring?
- From Medicare claims (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024): 19.3 nurse care minutes per routine home care day, 17.3% of skilled nursing minutes at weekends and a visit near death for 90.8% of patients who died.
- Where its patients were cared for (Jan 1, 2024 to Dec 31, 2024): 78% at home, 5% in assisted living, 13% in a nursing facility, 1% in a skilled nursing facility, 4% in a hospital.
CMS, Hospice Provider Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.
| Measure | This provider |
|---|---|
| Nurse care minutes per routine home care day | 19.3 min |
| Skilled nursing minutes at weekends | 17.3% |
| Visits near death | 90.8% of patients who died |
Who owns it?
- 4 owners or officers are people: Stephen Mcdonnell (corporate officer); James Jackson (corporate officer); Shemaine L Rose (managing employee (on the payroll)); Amber L Egyud (corporate officer).
- No private-equity firm among the owners CMS lists.
- No real-estate investment trust among the owners CMS lists.
CMS, Hospice All Owners and Hospice Enrollments. Released Sep 29, 2026. Updated quarterly.
What do families say?
- Family caregivers rate it 3 of 5 in CMS’s survey (Oct 1, 2023 to Sep 30, 2025): 79% rated it 9 or 10 out of 10, and 80% would definitely recommend it.
- CMS’s Hospice Care Index: 9 of 10 (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024).
- 77.6% of patients were assessed on all seven of CMS’s measures at the start of care (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025); 45.9% had visits from a nurse or social worker on at least 2 of their last 3 days (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024).
CMS, CAHPS Hospice Survey and Hospice Provider Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.
| Measure | Rating |
|---|---|
| Family caregiver survey ratingCMS star rating from its survey of patients’ family caregivers, 1 to 5 | 3 of 5 |
| Hospice Care IndexCMS’s Hospice Care Index, 0 to 10 (higher is better): a point for each of ten measures from Medicare claims on which the hospice meets CMS’s threshold | 9 of 10 |
How does it compare nearby?
- Of the 25 hospices CMS’s data show serving patients in ZIP code 23320, where this hospice’s office is, the middle number of deficiencies cited in the last three years was 6.5; this one had 6.
CMS, Hospice ZIP Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.
CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.
| Place | Deficiencies, 3 years |
|---|---|
| Sentara Home Care Services - Chesapeake | 18 |
| Comfort Care Home Health and Hospice This hospice | 6 |
| Medi Home Health and Hospice - Chesapeake | 1 |
| Amedisys Hospice Care | 9 |
| Trinity Hospice LLC | 8 |
| Acg Hospice | 2 |
| Albemarle Home Care and Hospice | 1 |
| Bon Secours Hospice | 7 |
| Personal Touch Home Care & Hospice-Newport News | 12 |
| Hospice of Virginia | 24 |
| Promedica Hospice (Virginia Beach) | 10 |
| Gentiva | Not given |
What the record doesn’t say
- CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for hospices, so none are shown.
- Only complaints that led to a citation appear; complaints that didn’t aren’t published.
- CMS ended its Special Focus Program for hospices with serious problems on Feb 14, 2025, so no hospice is marked as one.
- Hospice quality measures have a gap from October 2025: CMS replaced its patient assessment then, and public results from the new one (HOPE) are expected around November 2027.
Sources
-
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Hospice General Information (yc9t-dgbk).
Released Aug 26, 2026 and checked Oct 27, 2026. Updated quarterly. Public domain (U.S. Government work).
-
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Hospice Provider Data (252m-zfp9).
Released Aug 26, 2026 and checked Oct 27, 2026. Updated quarterly. Public domain (U.S. Government work).
-
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, CAHPS Hospice Survey (gxki-hrr8).
Released Aug 26, 2026 and checked Oct 27, 2026. Updated quarterly. Public domain (U.S. Government work).
-
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, QCOR hospice inspection reports (Hospice Survey Reports - Oct 2021 through Sep 2026.xlsx).
Released Oct 23, 2026 and checked Oct 27, 2026. Updated quarterly. Public domain (U.S. Government work).
-
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Hospice All Owners (e983965e-1603-4cb8-82b5-c40090e380d1).
Released Sep 29, 2026 and checked Oct 27, 2026. Updated quarterly. Public domain (U.S. Government work).
-
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Hospice Enrollments (25704213-e833-4b8b-9dbc-58dd17149209).
Released Sep 29, 2026 and checked Oct 27, 2026. Updated quarterly. Public domain (U.S. Government work).
-
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Hospice ZIP Data (95rg-2usp).
Released Aug 26, 2026 and checked Oct 27, 2026. Updated quarterly. Public domain (U.S. Government work).
If you believe something here is wrong, a correction starts with the agency whose record this copies: CMS. CMS’s own record is on Care Compare. If Hearth Record copied something wrongly, it will fix it and log the correction publicly, with its date: how corrections work.
This copy of the record was made on Oct 27, 2026.
From the hospice
The public record above comes first. Anything the hospice adds will appear here, below it, and say who wrote it.
Replies
None. Replies aren’t open yet. When they open, the hospice will be able to answer any finding for free, and the reply will show beside that finding, unedited and dated.
Paid listing
None. Paid listings aren’t open yet. When they open, anything paid for will say “Paid by the hospice”, and paying will never change a finding, a rating or the order of results.