Thanks to a push to hold rest homes in North Carolina more accountable for the quality of service they offer, it is possible to turn up some useful information through research. For example, members of the public can determine whether a home has violated regulations or whether its residents have been hurt in accidents. Still, a simple rating system, giving the homes from one to five stars, makes absolute sense and should be established by the General Assembly. Opposition from some home operators doesn't stand up to logic.

Rest homes meet the needs of many thousands of this state's elderly residents, and their role is bound to expand. With the baby boom generation nearing retirement and old age beyond that, it's more important than ever that standards of safety and day-to-day care for the elderly be enforced. The additional numbers, after all, will put more pressure on this industry to perform, and the quality of care must be maintained and improved. (Just because the boomers are approaching the age when long-term care starts to become an issue doesn't mean, of course, that the quality of care hasn't been important all along. It was and it is.)

A rating system would make checking a rest home's performance, and inquiring as to any problems, easier for families who are considering such care for an elderly loved one.

Sen. Austin Allran, a Republican from Catawba and Iredell counties, fears that a home given a poor rating would be "stigmatized." But if a home gets a low rating because it doesn't take good enough care of residents, then it ought to be stigmatized. At least the owners would have an even stronger incentive to address problems.

An industry representative does make a valid point in noting that the state needs to do more in terms of guidelines if it continues to allow a mix in the homes of elderly, frail people along with mental patients, as is now the case. And the state also would have to boost subsidies for care when patients can't pay themselves. That's fair enough, and something the state should do, although lower-performing homes shouldn't expect their bottom lines to be boosted by public funds just because they're in business.

No reputable rest home has anything to fear from closer scrutiny and a rating system. In fact, those facilities that are getting the job done with efficiency and compassion should be leading the way toward stronger regulation and enforcement of rules, because excellent homes are only helped when that's the case.

Rest homes take care of our precious elderly parents, uncles, aunts, brothers, sisters. At this late stage of life, they have earned good care and concern, and they deserve to have the security of a place to be and people to look after them.

People who are in this business and do it well are noble indeed, and they can profit, as they should be able to, from doing the job well. But those who don't fulfill their obligations to their residents, who tolerate sloppy care or try to get by on the cheap, deserve nothing -- except strong sanctions when rules are violated, and a rating system that will expose them.