Hearth Record

High Point Regional Health System

An acute care hospital in High Point, North Carolina 27261

601 N Elm St, High Point, North Carolina 27261. (336) 878-6000.

  • Medicare payments cut under the HAC Reduction Program (fiscal year 2026)
CMS’s own record, on Care Compare

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 20, 2026.

The last 24 months 1 deficiency in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Mar 2025. Most serious: Standard-level. Every month

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?

The last inspection on record was on Feb 20, 2026: a complaint inspection.

1 deficiency cited in the last three years.

Source:

CMS, QCOR Hospital 2567 statements of deficiencies. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

When those deficiencies happened

1 deficiency in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Mar 2025. Most serious: Standard-level. The last 3 years, to Nov 5, 2026.

1 deficiency by month over the last 3 years. Each cell is one month.
JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2023 Dec
2024 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2025 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2026 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNov

Hover or focus a month to read it.

No visit on record Visited, nothing cited A stronger orange is more serious, on its source’s own levels, read onto four bands: from the least serious it publishes to the most
Source:

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.

Source:

CMS, QCOR Hospital 2567 statements of deficiencies. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

Mar 14, 2025: complaint inspection1 deficiency
  • Safety Policy And Procedures

    The inspectors’ words, 1,650 words

    “SAFETY POLICY AND PROCEDURES CFR(s): 482.26(b) [§482.26 Condition of Participation: Radiologic Services §. If therapeutic services are also provided, they, as well as the diagnostic services, must meet professionally approved standards for safety and personnel qualifications.] §482.26(b) Standard: Safety for Patients and Personnel The radiologic services, particularly ionizing radiology procedures, must be free from hazards for patients and personnel. This Standard is not met as evidenced by: 50318 Based on review of hospital policies, procedure guidelines, medical record, and staff interviews, the Radiology Leadership failed to ensure an order for discharge or discharge criteria was established after a radiology procedure in 2 of 3 sampled patients (Patient #1 and #26) who were discharged following a paracentesis procedure. The findings include: Review on 03/12/2025 of hospital policy, “Patient Care - Patient Assessment and Reassessment in the Radiology Department,” effective 05/19/2021 revealed, “... 3 ... The radiologist is the team leader within Imaging Services for patient assessment/reassessment and pain management ...” Request on 03/12/2025 for a protocol or policy related to vital signs monitoring during and after a paracentesis revealed there was no specific protocol for this. Review on 03/13/2025 of hospital Imaging Services document, “Outpatient Paracentesis Process,” effective 01/2020, revealed, “ ... 11. Paracentesis with albumin - if albumin is completed in the Ultrasound room and the patient is stable, PA (Physician’s Assistant)/IR (Interventional Radiologist) discharge patient from Radiology.” Review on 03/13/2025 of guidelines provided by the hospital from the Academy of Medical-Surgical Nurses (AMSN) for Paracentesis, assisting Procedure, revised 11/19/2021, revealed, “ ... Monitor the patient’s vital signs, oxygen saturation level, and respiratory status at an interval determined by the patient’s condition and your facility because no evidence-based research indicates the best practice for frequency of assessing vital signs after a procedure.” Request on 03/14/2025 for discharge criteria related to paracentesis procedures revealed there was no specific, written discharge criteria. 1. Closed medical record review on 03/11/2025 for Patient #1 revealed a 63-year-old patient who presented on 08/02/2022 at 0753 for an ultrasound-guided paracentesis (a procedure that involves inserting a needle into the abdominal cavity to remove excess fluid). An initial set of vital signs were performed at 0830, with a pulse documented as 40, blood pressure 156/81, and oxygen saturation (O2 sat - percentage of oxygen in the blood) as 97%. An informed consent was signed by the patient, a witness, and the Provider at 0830 for paracentesis due to ascites (excess fluid accumulation in the abdominal cavity). A time out was performed at 0835 to verify the correct patient, procedure, and the consent had been signed; puncture to the right lower quadrant of the abdomen was at 0836. Vital signs were performed at 0838, 0844, 0848, 0858, and 0908. An IV (intravenous) was placed at 0837 and 50 grams of Albumin (a protein produced by the liver) was started after the IV insertion. Nurse’s Note at 0910 revealed the drainage was completed with a total of 5.25 liters of clear, yellow fluid removed, and the patient tolerated the procedure well. The IV was removed at 0917. The catheter entry site was assessed at 0918 with a comment, “puncture from paracentesis.” The staff ambulated the patient out of the room to return home at 0918. The Ultrasound Study Result was read by PA #1 who performed the paracentesis and signed by Radiologist #4 at 0937 and revealed the paracentesis was performed, the catheter was removed, and a dressing was applied. Study Result revealed, “The patient tolerated the procedure well without immediate post procedural complication.” A post-procedure image revealed no fluid in the abdomen. Interventional Radiology Procedure Note by PA #1 was signed at 0938 and revealed the risks and benefits were discussed with the patient, including, but not limited to bleeding, infection, and damage to adjacent structures like the bowel and liver. The Procedure Summary revealed a successful ultrasound-guided paracentesis from the right lateral abdomen, which yielded 5.25 liters of clear, yellow fluid. There were no immediate complications, and the patient tolerated it well. Record review revealed there was no discharge order or discharge criteria addressed by the Provider. Interview request on 03/12/2025 revealed PA #1 who performed Patient #1’s paracentesis was unavailable for interview. Interview on 03/12/2025 at 0902 with Nurse #5 who assisted with Patient #1’s paracentesis revealed the Nurse recalled the patient, who was periodically receiving paracentesis. Nurse #5 revealed paracentesis was not performed under sedation. Nurse #5 would monitor the patient’s vital signs every 10 minutes, unless there was a change and would then increase to every 5 minutes. Nurse #5 revealed for post-procedure monitoring, a post-procedure set of vital signs would be taken, the Dermabond was dry, and the patient felt okay/at their baseline. The fluid removed from the patient would also be assessed for any blood and anything outside of the clear, yellow fluid color. Nurse #5 revealed the last set of vital signs at 0908 was indicative that the procedure had ended prior to this. A post-procedure ultrasound image was also taken to show there was no fluid left in the patient’s abdomen; this would be reviewed by the Sonographer, as well as the Nurse and the Provider. Nurse #5 would ask the patient how they were feeling and if they had any concerns after the procedure. Nurse #5 revealed if there was any change or concerns, the Provider would be made aware to assess the patient prior to discharge. Nurse #5 revealed the expectation for discharge was the patient’s vital signs had not changed from their baseline, the albumin, if ordered, was completed, and discharge instructions were given. There was no written protocol or policy for monitoring or discharge criteria for paracentesis procedures. Interview on 03/12/2025 at 0940 with Radiologist #4 revealed the Radiologist recalled the patient. Radiologist #4 revealed paracentesis procedures were not performed under sedation so the patients did not stay for an extended period as this could delay other patients and procedures. For sedation procedures, the patients were typically monitored for one to two hours after, and there was a strict protocol for discharge. Radiologist #4 reiterated paracentesis patients were not staying for hours if there were no changes in their baseline or vital signs. The monitoring and discharge were based off the patient’s vital signs, assessment, and albumin, if ordered. The Radiologist revealed a post-procedure image would be assessed for any fluid left in the patient’s abdomen. The Radiologist was unsure of the monitoring protocol for paracentesis procedures. Interview on 03/12/2025 at 1038 with Sonographer #8 who assisted during the paracentesis recalled the patient, who had received paracentesis monthly. The Nurses were responsible for vital signs, and Sonographer #8 would initially assess the images, check for leaking at the catheter site, and the patient’s general wellbeing prior to discharge. If a patient’s blood pressure was not at their baseline, they would be monitored longer, but typically, patients were not staying for hours for monitoring, especially if their vital signs were at baseline. Sonographer #8 revealed there was not a specific protocol for vital signs for paracentesis procedures. A meeting with the Chief Medical Officer, Radiologist #5, and Director #9 related to Patient #1 and paracentesis procedure monitoring and discharge criteria was held on 03/13/2025 at 1108. There were no specific guidelines for post-paracentesis monitoring as these procedures were considered low-risk procedures without sedation. The patient’s vital signs were monitored as well as their clinical presentation, and the monitoring was specific for each situation/patient. There were no specific discharge criteria for paracentesis procedures, and it was based off each patient’s clinical presentation. Facility Leadership revealed nothing was changed from August 2022 as they felt there were no concerns that would warrant a change. 2. Closed medical record review on 03/12/2025 for Patient #26 revealed a 55-year-old patient who presented on 03/11/2025 at 1101 for an ultrasound-guided paracentesis. An initial set of vital signs was performed at 1129 with a pulse of 77, blood pressure 182/88, respirations 18, and O2 sat 95%. Vital signs were repeated at 1135 with a blood pressure of 183/90 and at 1140 with a blood pressure of 178/90. A time out was performed at 1141 and the procedure started after. Blood pressure readings were performed every 15 minutes starting at 1145, while pulse and O2 sats were performed every 5 minutes. Nurse Note at 1227 revealed drainage was completed with 7.75 liters of clear, yellow fluid removed. The patient tolerated well, and Dermabond and a Band-Aid were applied to the left lower quadrant of the abdomen. The procedure was documented as finished at 1229, and the patient was out of the room at 1234. The Ultrasound Study Result was read by PA #2 who performed the paracentesis and signed by the attending Radiologist at 1359 and revealed the paracentesis was performed, the catheter was removed, and a dressing was applied. The patient tolerated the procedure well without immediate post procedural complication. A post-procedure image revealed no fluid in the abdomen. Record review revealed there was no discharge order or discharge criteria addressed by the Provider. Interview on 03/14/2025 at 1215 with Director #9 revealed the Radiology department used the Society of Interventional Radiology and the American College of Radiology for guidelines, but these were not specific to procedures and did not dictate monitoring after procedures. The basis for their paracentesis monitoring was based off the AMSN guidelines for Paracentesis. The Radiologists determined the protocol for monitoring vital signs (every 5-10 minutes) for paracentesis procedures as there was no specific national guidelines, but it was not written in a policy or protocol. The Nurses were assessing the patients, monitoring their vital signs and clinical presentation, and the Radiologist made the final determination when a patient was ready to be discharged. The discharge criteria was based off the patient’s clinical presentation, including vital signs, but it was not specified in a policy or protocol. NC00211912, NC00189277, NC00189174, NC00192351, NC00199364, NC00200328, NC00201897, NC00204275, NC00207485, NC00216341, NC00218707, NC00227636”

    Rule A0535. Standard-level. From a complaint.

All 3 inspections in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
Feb 20, 2026Complaint inspectionNo deficiencies cited
Feb 19, 2026Complaint inspectionNo deficiencies cited
Mar 14, 2025Complaint inspection1 deficiency cited

How do patients fare?

  • CMS’s overall for it is 2 of 5.
  • Of the measures behind its , CMS counts against the national value: mortality, 0 better and 0 worse of 7; safety of care, 1 better and 0 worse of 7; readmission, 0 better and 0 worse of 9.
  • Patients rate it 3 of 5 in CMS’s patient survey (1,012 surveys completed, Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025): 64% rated it 9 or 10 out of 10, and 64% would definitely recommend it.
  • Infections, compared by CMS with the national benchmark (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025): central line bloodstream infections (CLABSI), better than the national benchmark; catheter urinary tract infections (CAUTI), no different than national benchmark; surgical site infections after colon surgery, no different than national benchmark; surgical site infections after abdominal hysterectomy, no different than national benchmark; MRSA bloodstream infections, no different than national benchmark; C. diff infections, better than the national benchmark.
  • CMS’s patient safety composite for serious complications, PSI 90, Jul 1, 2022 to Jun 30, 2024: no different than the national value.
  • Deaths within 30 days, as CMS gives them (Jul 1, 2022 to Jun 30, 2025): heart attack 11.1%, heart failure 10.4%, pneumonia 14.1%, COPD 7.9%, stroke 12.3%. CMS gives no comparison with the national rate for them in this release.
  • Readmissions within 30 days, as CMS gives them (Jul 1, 2023 to Jun 30, 2025): heart attack 15.2%, heart failure 21.8%, pneumonia 16.7%, COPD 18.4%, heart bypass surgery 11.4%. CMS gives no comparison with the national rate for them in this release.
  • After outpatient care, compared by CMS: unplanned hospital visits after a colonoscopy, no different than the national rate; hospital admissions after outpatient chemotherapy, no different than the national rate; emergency visits after outpatient chemotherapy, no different than the national rate; unplanned hospital visits after outpatient surgery, no different than expected.
  • Emergency department patients spent a median of 247 minutes there before leaving (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025), and 2% left before being seen.
  • 48% of patients with severe sepsis or septic shock got the care CMS measures, SEP-1 (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025).
  • Medicare’s spending per patient here is 0.95 times the national median (Jan 1, 2024 to Dec 31, 2024).
Ratings and measures, as published
MeasureRating
Overall ratingCMS’s overall hospital quality star rating, 1 to 52 of 5
Patient survey ratingCMS star rating from its survey of the hospital’s patients (HCAHPS), 1 to 53 of 5

Is it certified, and in good standing?

  • Medicare-certified acute care hospital since Jul 1, 1966.
  • Ownership: voluntary non-profit - private.
  • It is accredited by The Joint Commission, whose surveys stand in for the state’s routine inspections.
  • No deficiency on record in the last three years.
  • It has an inpatient rehabilitation unit of 16 beds, which CMS lists apart as a rehabilitation facility.
  • Voluntary non-profit - Private.
Source:

CMS, Provider of Services File - Hospital & Non-Hospital Facilities. Released Oct 14, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, Hospital General Information. Released Aug 13, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, QCOR Hospital 2567 statements of deficiencies. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

Has it been penalized?

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for hospitals.
  • CMS cut its Medicare payments by 1% for fiscal year 2026 under the Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program, which does so for the quarter of hospitals that fare worst on conditions patients get in hospital.
  • 1 deficiency cited in the last three years came from an inspection that included a complaint investigation.
Source:

CMS, Hospital-Acquired Condition (HAC) Reduction Program. Released Aug 13, 2026. Updated yearly.

CMS, Provider of Services File - Hospital & Non-Hospital Facilities. Released Oct 14, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, QCOR Hospital 2567 statements of deficiencies. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

On record, newest first
DateWhatDetail
Medicare payment reduction (HAC Reduction Program)Fiscal year 2026: 1% of Medicare payments

What do patients say about their care?

  • CMS doesn’t publish staffing levels for hospitals.
  • In CMS’s patient survey, patients rate how well its nurses communicated 3 of 5.
  • 64% of its health care workers got a flu shot (Oct 1, 2024 to Mar 31, 2025).
Source:

CMS, Patient survey (HCAHPS) - Hospital and Timely and Effective Care - Hospital. Released Aug 13, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Who owns it?

  • Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center owns 100% directly since Sep 1, 2018.
  • Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center and Atrium Health Inc. and Advocate Health Inc. run it.
  • 22 owners or officers are people: Thomas Braden Covington (corporate director); James Hoekstra (corporate officer); James Hoekstra (managing employee (on the payroll)); Kenneth Smith (corporate director); Bernard Ravi Chinnassami (corporate director, 0%); Deborah Groves Harding (corporate director); Mark A Arredondo (corporate director, 0%); Latasha D Logan Ford (corporate director); Don M Webb (corporate director); Michael Thomas Waid (corporate director); David W Zaas (corporate director); Steven Craig Rohrbeck (corporate director, 0%); Amy Smith (corporate director, 0%); Frank Kolwezi Thomas (corporate director); Julie Delgaudio (corporate director, 0%); Royster Milton Tucker (corporate director); David Michael Fisher (corporate director); Paul H. Brigman (corporate director); Gurney Lee Stroud (corporate director, 0%); Matthew S Edwards (corporate director, 0%); Jerry Wayne Camp (corporate director); Joe Blosser (corporate director, 0%).
  • CMS’s Provider of Services file records 4 changes of ownership.
  • No private-equity firm among the owners CMS lists.
  • No real-estate investment trust among the owners CMS lists.
Source:

CMS, Hospital All Owners and Hospital Enrollments. Released Sep 29, 2026. Updated monthly.

CMS, Provider of Services File - Hospital & Non-Hospital Facilities. Released Oct 14, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Organisations CMS lists
OrganisationRoleShareSince
Wake Forest University Baptist Medical CenterOwns 5% or more directly100%Sep 1, 2018
Wake Forest University Baptist Medical CenterRuns it (operational or managerial control)50%Oct 9, 2020
Atrium Health Inc.Runs it (operational or managerial control)50%Oct 9, 2020
Wake Forest UniversityOwns 5% or more through other companies40%Oct 9, 2020
North Carolina Baptist HospitalOwns 5% or more through other companies40%Oct 9, 2020
Atrium Health Inc.Owns 5% or more through other companies20%Oct 9, 2020
Advocate Health Inc.Runs it (operational or managerial control)Dec 2, 2022

How does it compare nearby?

  • Of the 2 hospitals CMS lists in Guilford County, 2 have an overall star rating from CMS: 1 rated 3 of 5, 1 rated 2 of 5.
  • CMS rates this one 2 of 5.
Source:

CMS, Hospital General Information. Released Aug 13, 2026. Updated quarterly.

1 compared
PlaceOverall star rating
The Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital3

What the record doesn’t say

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for hospitals, so none are shown. The one payment cut CMS publishes for each hospital, under its Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program, is shown where it applies.
  • Only complaints that led to a citation appear; complaints that didn’t aren’t published.
  • Most hospitals are accredited by a private organisation (The Joint Commission, DNV and others) whose routine inspections stand in for the state’s; those reports aren’t public, and QCOR holds only the state’s surveys: no inspection on record here doesn’t mean none took place.
  • QCOR says its hospital inspection data are complete only through September 17, 2026, while it moves to a new system.
  • CMS doesn’t publish staffing levels for hospitals.
  • In its September 2026 release CMS gives no comparison with the national rate for death and readmission rates, though it gives the rates.

Sources

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.

Source:

This copy of the record was made on Nov 5, 2026.

From the hospital

The public record above comes first. Anything the hospital adds will appear here, below it, and say who wrote it.

Replies

None. Replies aren’t open yet. When they open, the hospital 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 hospital”, and paying will never change a finding, a rating or the order of results.

How to read a record

Four things every record does, shown on an example record made up for this guide.

An example record, made up for this guide

An example nursing home

Made up for this guide: no real place is shown

Not fully inspected in over two years (CMS flag)

11 health citations at the latest inspection cycle

The state average is 14.3.

Source:

CMS, State and US Averages and Health Deficiencies. Released Oct 28, 2026. Updated monthly.

From the homeNone yet. Replies and paid listings aren’t open, and when they open they will sit here, below the record.

1 of 4

Every fact names its source.

Who published it, when, and how often it changes sit beside each fact, with a link to the agency’s own file.

Sign in

A free account keeps your watch list, shortlists, comparisons and saved searches on every device, and can email you when something you watch changes. Browsing never needs one.