Masonicare Health Center

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.

66.0% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 335 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 52.3% 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 128 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 0.24 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 33% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 42% 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 260 beds and averages 232.3 residents a day — about 89% occupied, or roughly 28 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 0.36 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.00 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 0.25 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 0.47 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 0.32 on weekdays — about the same on weekends as weekdays. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 70% is well above the national median of 45%.

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 more than at the previous inspection — worsening. 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.

28 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 17 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · Gcited before2024-11-13 · 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 clinical record reviews, facility documentation, facility policies and interviews for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #1) who were dependent on staff for transfers, the facility failed to properly transfer a resident which ultimately resulted in a fall with a laceration to the head and subdural hematoma. The findings include: Resident #1's diagnoses included dementia, difficulty walking, and generalized muscle weakness. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 had a BIMS score of two (2) indicating short and long-term memory recall deficits and was dependent on staff for turning and repositioning when in bed and transfers getting in and out of the bed and chair. The Resident Care Plan dated 8/3/24 identified Resident #1 had a self-care deficit and was at risk for falls due to impaired balance, dementia, and poor safety awareness. Interventions directed assistance of two (2) with bed mobility and mechanical lift transfers. The nurse's note dated…

  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 · F2024-12-09 · 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 observations, review of facility policy and interviews, the facility failed to ensure food items were dated when stored, were removed once out of date for use and failed to ensure kitchen staff with facial hair were supplied and wore beard guards. The findings included: Observations during the initial tour of the kitchen on 12/2/24 at 9:50 AM identified the following: Several staff with facial hair, to include the Executive Chef and [NAME] #5 hair did not have beard guards and [NAME] #5 was actively preparing foods. Interview on 12/2/24 at 10:00 AM with the Executive Chef and the Sous Chef identified that several staff who have facial hair do not have beard guards in place. The Executive Chef identified the facility does not have any and indicated they were ordered but had not been received. Observation on 12/2/24 at 10:30 AM of the walk-in prep refrigerator Identified the following prepared foods that had exceeded the amount of days to be used: • Cheese Blitzes, full tray not covered, not dated with fruit that was turning brown • Stuffed peppers with beef stuffing full…

  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 · Ecited before2024-12-09 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — pattern
  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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of clinical records, review of facility policy/procedures and interviews for three of six sampled residents (Resident #18) reviewed for advance directives, the facility failed to ensure consents were obtained regarding the resident's wishes regarding advance directives and decisions related to cardiopulmonary code status from the resident/responsible party. The findings include: 1. Resident #18 was admitted to the facility in July/2024. The resident was sent out to the hospital on [DATE], and readmitted to the facility in September of 2024 with diagnoses that included metabolic encephalopathy, altered mental status, and cerebral infarction. The admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #18 had severely impaired cognitive function, did not display behaviors, required substantial/maximal assistance with bed mobility, dressing and personal hygiene and was dependent for transfers. The care plan dated [DATE] identified Resident #18 was at risk for impaired cognitive function related to…

  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 · E2024-12-09 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
  Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation and interviews for the facility and 1 of 6 sampled residents (Resident #80) reviewed for Abuse, and for the facility reviewed for a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, the facility failed to ensure residents resided in a safe, clean, comfortable environment. The findings included: Observation on 12/2/24 at 12:00 PM of the 3 Ramage unit North side identified a hole in the wall on the left side of the nurses' station with facility maintenance staff standing by it. The maintenance staff identified there had been a water leak and staff was standing by awaiting additional staff to replace the sheet rock. At that time this was the only active work being done. However, the base molding on the entire unit was not present. Observation on 12/4/24 at 11:05 AM of 3 Ramage North and South identified the walls in all the hallways were patched with spackle and sanded. The drywall residue/dust was clumped on the floor under the areas of sanding, spread across the floor of the hallway, across some resident room doorways, behind the barrier doors in the hallway, 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-12-09 · tag F0603 — failed to not confine residents against their will — pattern
  Protect each resident from separation (from other residents, his/her room, or confinement to his/her room).
  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 observations, review of clinical records, review of facility policy and interviews for three of six sampled residents (Residents #13, #38, #82) who resided on a secured unit, the facility failed to ensure there was documentation of the clinical criteria met for placement in the unit and that the secured unit was the least restrictive setting for the residents. The findings include: 1. Resident #13's diagnoses included dementia, bipolar disorder and liver cancer. An Elopement Risk Evaluation dated 10/3/24 indicated Resident #13 was disoriented, and forgetful with intermittent confusion, had a diagnosis of a cognitive impairment (dementia) and was not appropriate for a wander guard device. The quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #13 had severe cognitive impairment, exhibited no behavioral symptoms, was totally dependent for transfers, grooming and toileting, was non-ambulatory, and utilized a manual wheelchair for mobility. Review of psychiatric progress notes from 6/1/24 through…

  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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-12-09 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on review of facility documentation, review of facility policy/procedures, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the water management plan was followed and failed to ensure positive legionella water sampling testing result was reported to the State Agency. The findings include: Review of the facility annual Water Management Plan meeting identified that legionella testing to be done monthly. A request was made to the Administrator and the Director of Maintenance on 12/6/24 at 3:15 PM for all Legionella testing completed from April 2022 to November 2024 and the Water Management Plan binder provided by the contracted company. On 12/9/24 the facility provided at 8:30 AM testing few testing results for the years 2023 and 2024 and annual water management plan meeting minutes. Another request was made to the Director of Maintenance on 12/9/24 at 9:15 AM for Legionella testing results for the year 2022 and the missing testing results for 2023 and 2024 the facility was unable to provide testing results of April 2022 through December 2022, December of 2023, January, February and…

  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.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-12-09 · tag F0730 — isolated
  Observe each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on review of employee files and staff interviews for one of three nurse aides (NA #4), the facility failed to complete an annual performance evaluation. The findings include: Review of NA #4 personnel file identified a hire date of 1/18/2010 and failed to identify that a yearly performance evaluation was completed for 2022, 2023, or 2024. Interview with administrator on 12/3/24 at 2:30 PM identified that each employee should have a performance review completed on an annual basis on the anniversary of their hire date. She identified that the unit manager on the floor was responsible for ensuring the performance evaluation were completed yearly and could not find documentation to identify that the performance evaluation was completed for NA #4. Although requested, policy for performance evaluation was not available.

  Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-12-09 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
  Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
  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 review of the clinical record, review of facility documentation, review of facility policy/procedures and interviews for two of five sampled residents (Resident #120, and Resident #135) reviewed for unnecessary medications, the facility failed to ensure documentation of the provider's decisions and actions were noted on the pharmacist consultant's recommendation form and that the form was maintained as part of the clinical record. 1. Resident #120's diagnoses included unspecified dementia, anxiety disorder, and heart failure. The quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #120 was severely cognitively impaired, required substantial/maximal assistance with bed mobility and dressing, was dependent on staff for transfers and personal hygiene, and utilized a wheelchair for mobility. The care plan dated 3/7/24 identified Resident #120 was at risk for behavioral changes related to psychotropic medications with interventions that included administer psychotropic medications as ordered and…

  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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-12-09 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
  Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, review of facility policy, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the medication adminstraion cart was secure. The findings include: Interview on 12/2/24 at 11:30 AM with NA#5 identified the unit as the locked down dementia unit. Observation on 12/2/24 at 11:37 AM identified LPN#4 had finished prepping medication and walked into the dining room to administer to a resident. The cart was located to the right side of the entrance to the dining room. As LPN#4 walked away from the cart, he failed to secure the cart and all drawers could be opened and medications accessed. LPN#4 then came back into the hallway where the cart was located and intercepted a confused resident who needed redirection. LPN#4 escorted the resident down the hallway to the resident's room which was approximately 50 feet down the hallway. LPN#4 entered the resident room and the medication cart was not within his line of sight. Observation on 12/2/24 at 11:46 AM identified LPN#4 returned to the medication cart. Interview on 12/2/24 at 11:47 AM with LPN#4 identified that the medication…

  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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-12-09 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolated
  Develop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
  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 review of clinical records, review of facility documentation, review of facility policy/procedures, and interviews for two of five sampled residents (Resident #25 and Resident #144), reviewed for immunizations, the facility failed to administer the pneumococcal vaccine as requested by the resident upon admission and failed to offer the appropriate pneumococcal vaccine to the resident. The findings include: 1. Resident #25 was admitted to the facility in the month of January 2024 with diagnoses that included type 2 diabetes mellitus, major depressive disorder, and Wernicke's encephalopathy. The quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #25 was cognitively intact. The assessment further identified that the resident did not receive the pneumococcal vaccine as it was not offered. Review of the Informed Consent for Pneumococcal Vaccine Vaccination consent form identified Resident #25 gave the facility permission to administer the pneumococcal/Prevnar as recommended by current Centers for…

  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.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-12-09 · tag F0568 — isolated
  Properly hold, secure, and manage each resident's personal money which is deposited with the nursing home.
  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 review of clinical records, review of facility documentation, review of facility policy/procedures, and interviews for one sampled resident (Resident #25), reviewed for personal funds, the facility failed to ensure funds were deposited into the resident fund account in a timely manner. The findings include: Resident #25 was admitted to the facility in January 2024 with diagnoses that included type 2 diabetes mellitus, major depressive disorder, and Wernicke's encephalopathy. The quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified Resident #25 was cognitively intact, dependent on care with toileting hygiene, lower body dressing, personal hygiene and transfers. The assessment further identified the resident was non-ambulatory and utilized a wheelchair for mobility. Interview with Person #10 (Resident #25's responsible party) on 12/4/24 at 11:15 AM identified that Resident #25 was owed money from Social Security, which the Business Manager identified the facility had not received the funds and was advised…

  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

“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

$13,085 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $13,085 — penalty dated 2024-11-13

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.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 11 rows in the source record cover these 8 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

1 organizational owner 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.

This home reported $892K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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 CT