Cavalier Healthcare Of England

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

47.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 44 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 71.4% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 21 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.25 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 35% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 5% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 70 beds and averages 61.3 residents a day — about 88% occupied, or roughly 9 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.16 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.39 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.01 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.70 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.34 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.46 to 0.22 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 44% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

23 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 12 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-01-31 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interviews, record review and review of manufacturer's instructions, the facility failed to properly secure the seat belt for 1 Resident #1 of 2 (Resident #1, and #2) case mix residents who were transported in the facility's transport van. This failed practice resulted in a past immediate jeopardy, which caused or could have caused serious harm, injury or death to Resident #1. These findings were determined to be a past Immediate Jeopardy. The Administrator was notified of the findings of Immediate Jeopardy on 01/31/2024 at 11:35 AM. The findings included: 1. During record review on 1/30/24 at 9:20 AM Resident #1 was admitted on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Orthopedic aftercare following and amputation and Dementia. Resident ' s Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] assessed the resident cognitive ability as being severely impaired with a Brief Interview for mental Status (BIMS) score of 3. Resident #1 ' s Care Plan dated 10/07/23 Focus: I am at moderate risk for falls related to gait/balance…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-07-03 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — pattern
  Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the interdisciplinary team reviewed and revised the comprehensive care plan after each assessment or change in condition for four (Resident #10, #47, #35, and #43) of five sampled residents. The findings include: Resident #10 A review of Resident #10’s Medical Diagnosis record revealed diagnoses which included muscle wasting and atrophy, dementia with behavioral disturbance, anxiety disorder, cognitive communication deficit, schizophrenia, dementia with agitation, and schizoaffective disorder. A review of Resident #10’s annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 12/30/2024, revealed the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 03, which indicated severe cognitive impairment. A review of Resident #10’s Care Plan, revised on 09/02/2024, the Care Plan identified the resident to be at high risk for falls, with the resident’s last fall documented on 03/11/2024. A review of Resident #10’s Progress…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-07-03 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, interviews, and facility policy review, it was determined that the dietary staff failed to ensure hand hygiene was completed for one of one meal service observed. The findings include: During an observation on 07/01/2025 at 11:20 AM, this surveyor observed Dietary [NAME] (DC) #4 open a box of rolls, without gloves on. DC #4 then reached into the box with their bare hands and took out a hand full of rolls to prepare, without washing their hands in between touching the outside of the box and the food. During an interview on 07/01/2025 at 11:42 AM, DC #4 stated, I touched the box and didn't wash my hands. I should have washed my hands after opening the box before touching the rolls because it is cross contamination. During an observation on 07/01/2025 at 12:33 PM, DC #4 opened the lid to the hot metal plate warmer container, retrieved a metal plate, and closed the lid with his bare hands. DC #4 then placed the metal plate on the base of the heat keeper combination. Then DC #4 opened the ceramic hot plate container with his bare hands, retrieved a ceramic plate,…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-07-03 · tag F0553 — failed to let residents help plan their care — isolated
  Allow resident to participate in the development and implementation of his or her person-centered plan of care.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident’s family member serving as Power of Attorney was invited to participate in a care plan meeting for one (Resident #13) of three residents reviewed for care plans. The findings include: A review of Resident #13’s admission Record indicated the facility admitted the resident on 10/20/2023, with diagnoses which included Alzheimer’s and dementia. The admission Record indicated the resident had a designated Power of Attorney (POA) when admitted . A review of Resident #13’s quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date of 04/28/2025 revealed the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 04, which indicated severe cognitive impairment. A review of Resident #13's Care Plan, initiated on 11/27/2023, revealed the resident had impaired cognitive function, dementia or impaired thought processes. The Care Plan also revealed Resident #13 had impaired nutrition, with an intervention to include family in their nutritional evaluation. During an interview on 07/02/2025 at 3:23 PM,…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-07-03 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review, interview, and observation, the facility failed to ensure one (Resident #15) of one resident reviewed had formulated an advanced directive that provided a clear understanding of the resident's wishes. Specifically, documentation regarding Resident #15’s code status containing conflicting information regarding life-sustaining treatments. The findings include: A review of Resident #15’s Code Status, on 06/30/2025 at 8:14 PM, revealed a signed Acknowledgement of Receipt of Advance Directive was signed by their family member on 08/08/2023. A second acknowledgment of Receipt of Advanced Directives/Medical Treatment Decisions was signed on 08/09/2023 and read, “I have chosen to formulate and issue the following Advance Directives,” with the Do Not Resuscitate box checked and an enacted date of 08/08/2023. Another checked box stated, I do not choose to formulate or issue any Advance Directives at this time. I want efforts made to prolong my life and I want life-sustaining treatment to be provided. The family member who signed these documents were not documented as…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-07-03 · tag F0637 — isolated
  Assess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interview, it was determined the facility failed to complete a significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) within 14 days after the facility determined there had been a significant change in a resident’s physical or mental condition for one (Resident #35) of one resident. The findings include: A review of Resident #35’s “admission Record indicated the facility initially admitted the resident on 01/06/2021, with diagnoses which included abnormal finding of blood chemistry and pneumonia. A review of Resident #35’s “Arkansas Department of Health and Human Services Evaluation of Medical Need Criteria” form indicated the resident was re-admitted from the hospital, on hospice services on 04/25/2025, with a diagnosis of acute kidney injury. The form indicated Resident #35 had multiple hospitalizations within the last month and had decided to transition to hospice care. A review of Resident #35’s Minimum Data Set (MDS) dashboard on the resident's electronic health record revealed the resident’s Significant Change MDS was started on 04/28/2025. A review of Resident…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-07-03 · tag F0640 — isolated
  Encode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure an entry Minimum Data Set (MDS) comprehensive assessment was encoded and transmitted in the allotted timeframe for one (Resident #35) of one resident reviewed for MDS requirements. The findings include: A review of Resident #35's admission Record indicated the facility initially admitted the resident on 01/06/2021, with diagnoses which included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and pneumonia. A review on 07/03/2025 of Residents #35's electronic health record revealed a discharge MDS with an assessment review date (ARD) of 04/23/2025. Also present was an entry MDS, ARD date of 04/25/2025, with n export ready status, a significant change MDS with an ARD of 04/28/2025, with an in-progress status, and a quarterly MDS with an ARD of 06/20/2025, with an in-progress status. A review of Resident #35's Care Plan Report, last revised on 04/01/2024, did not reflect any of the resident's changes in care, such as the resident being admitted to hospice services. During an interview on 07/03/2025 at 8:39…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-07-03 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review, observation, interviews, facility document review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident was checked and changed every two hours for perineal care and repositioned to prevent the risk of infection and skin breakdown for one (Resident #39) of one resident reviewed. The findings include: During an observation on 07/01/2025 at 3:00 PM, this surveyor observed Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #1 and CNA #2 transfer Resident #39 from a wheelchair to their bed, using a gait belt. When the resident was assisted in placing their legs on the bed, this surveyor observed a large, dark wet spot on the back of both legs going from the groin to just above the knees, and a dark wet spot streaking across the front of Resident #39's jeans. CNA #1 described the resident's jeans as soaked and dirty. The resident's demeaner indicated embarrassment. This surveyor was granted permission to observe care by the resident nodding their head. During an observation on 07/01/2025 at 3:10 PM, this surveyor observed Resident #39 during perineal care and noted…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-03-11 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
  Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure meals were served in a method that conserved the nutritive value and maintained the appearance of cold and hot products and serving of food items at temperatures that were acceptable to the residents to improve palatability and encourage good nutritional intake during 2 of 2 meals observed. The findings are: 1. The Grievance complaint form initiated 1/6/2025 provided by the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) on 3/10/2025, indicated meals on the evening shift were cold when served down the halls. 2. On 3/10/2025 at 12:20 pm, during an interview, Resident #14 stated to this surveyor that the food was sometimes cold when it was served. When asked if the food was cold in the dining room or bedroom, Resident #14 stated, both. 3. On 3/10/2025 at 12:39 PM, Dietary Aide (DA) #1 left the door to an unheated food cart open while loading the lunch meal trays inside the cart. After loading 9 lunch trays into the cart DA #1 closed the door at 12:48 PM and pushed the food cart outside the…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-04-04 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation and interview, the facility (1) failed to ensure food items stored in the refrigerator were covered and dated, (2) failed to ensure that the kitchen vents were cleaned to provide a sanitary environment for food preparation, (3) failed to ensure floors, dish washer the door frames, baseboard and ceiling tiles were free of chipped, holes, paint peeling, rust, stains, (4) failed to ensure dietary staff washed their hands when contaminated to decrease the potential for food borne illness for residents receiving food from 1 of 1 kitchen, dietary staff washed their hands before handling clean equipment or food items to prevent potential food borne illness for residents who received meals from 1 of 1 kitchen, and (5) failed to ensure hot food item was maintained at 135 degrees Fahrenheit or above on the steam table while awaiting service to prevent potential food borne illness for residents who received meals from 1 of 1 kitchen; The failed practices had the potential to affect 57 residents who received meals from the kitchen (total census: 57). The findings are: 1. On…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-04-04 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — pattern
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure nails were clean and trimmed for 1 (Resident #2) of 1 sampled resident. The findings are: Resident #1 had a diagnosis of Type 2 Diabetes mellitus. A Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 03/09/2024 documented the resident scored 14 (13-15 indicates cognitively intact) on a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS). A care plan for Resident #2 documented, .Check nail length and trim and clean on bath day and as necessary. Report changes to the nurse . On 04/01/2024 at 10:41 AM, Resident #2 ' s fingernails were long with a black substance underneath. She stated, They clean them whenever they have enough help. On 04/01/2024 at 01:04 PM, Resident #2 ' s fingernails were long with a black substance underneath. On 04/04/2024 at 09:19 AM, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #3 was asked, Who's responsible for cutting and cleaning Resident #2 nails? She stated, The nurses, because the [Resident] is a diabetic. On 04/04/2024 at 09:22 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) # 2 was asked,…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Fines & penalties

$18,356 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

• $8,160 — penalty dated 2024-01-31
• $10,196 — penalty dated 2024-01-31

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to CAVALIER HEALTHCARE — 4 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

3 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

About 71% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $786K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 13% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in AR