Complete Care At Silver Lake LLC

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.

52.4% 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 163 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 78.9% 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 90 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 31% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 23% 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 120 beds and averages 116.7 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 3 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. 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 3.75 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.94 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.98 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 3.35 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.91 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.02 to 0.73 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 34% is below 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 fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. 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.

30 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 19 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2025-01-23 · 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, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide supervision to prevent residents from sustaining injuries from falls and/or a burn from hot water for three (Residents (R) 40, R96, and R38) of eight sampled residents reviewed for accidents out of a total sample of 32. R40 was assessed to require two staff members for bed mobility; however, the resident was repositioned by one staff member and slid out of bed, which resulted in actual harm of bilateral femur fractures. R96 suffered actual harm of second degree burns when water, which had been heated in the microwave for three to four minutes, spilled on her. R38 suffered a fractured femur, and facility staff failed to implement identified interventions to prevent further falls and injury The deficient practices caused residents to experience a decrease in quality of life and quality of care problems. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Incidents and Accidents, updated 03/14/23,…

  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 · Fcited before2026-01-23 · 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, interview, document review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure chicken salad sandwiches were served at the proper temperature. This deficient practice had the potential to affect 112 out of 114 residents.Findings included:During the second kitchen observation and interview on 01/22/26 from 11:54 AM to 12:15 PM, the following were made with the Dietary District Manager (DDM):A steam table pan was observed on the counter at the left end of the steam table. The steam table pan contained approximately 20 chicken salad sandwiches, stacked one on top of one another. At 12:05 PM the chicken salad sandwiches were being served on the tray line for room trays. A review of the temperature log for the lunch meal revealed the chicken salad sandwiches were within a safe temperature range. At 12:15 PM, the District Dietary Manager (DDM) obtained the temperature of the chicken salad on the chicken salad sandwich. The temperature was 54 degrees Fahrenheit (F). The DDM instructed that the DM stop service. The DDM stated there was another tray of chicken salad…

  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 · F2026-01-23 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — widespread
  Make sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the kitchen area was free from fruit flies. The facility failed to keep the kitchen clean and ensure bait boxes remained under the three compartments sink to deter pests as recommended by their pest control provider. This created the potential for the harborage of insects and vermin which had the potential to affect 114 out of 114 residents.Findings included:1. During the initial kitchen observation and interview on 01/20/26 from 9:30 AM to 9:54 AM, the following observations were made with the Dietary Manager (DM):a. The smaller three compartment sink in the corner of the kitchen, near the hand-washing sink, had approximately 15-20 fruit flies near the floor on the right side of the sink. On the floor, there were three bait boxes on the right side of the sink and two bait boxes on the left side. There was a one-ounce plastic, empty coffee creamer container on the floor on the right side of the sink and black debris. The Dietary Manager (DM) stated the area needed to be cleaned and confirmed they had a…

  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.

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-01-23 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolated
  Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, interviews, record review and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a call light was within reach for one resident (Resident (R) 1) out of 39 sampled residents reviewed for call lights. This failure had the potential to create a situation where the resident would need help and could not reach the call light, causing the resident's needs to go unmet.Findings Include:Review of 1's Face Sheet located under the Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR), revealed admission date of 10/07/25 with diagnoses which included Schizophrenia and intellectual disabilities.Review of R1's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 11/24/25, located in the MDS tab of the EMR, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 out of 15 which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. R1 was dependent on staff for all Activities of Daily Living (ADLs).Review of the Care Plan located in the EMR under the Care Plan tab and dated 10/08/25 revealed, .Be sure the resident's call light is within reach and encourage 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-01-23 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolated
  Prevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure one of five residents (Resident (R) 11) reviewed for unnecessary medications, continued to receive as needed (PRN) psychotropic medication (lorazepam) beyond 14 days, without an evaluation and documentation of the clinical indications to use the medication beyond the 14 days. This failure had the potential to place the resident at risk of adverse consequences.Findings include:Review of R11's electronic medical record (EMR) located under the Profile tab indicated the facility admitted the resident on 11/04/24.Review of R11's EMR Orders located under the Orders tab dated 12/23/25 indicated, lorazepam 0.5 milligrams (mg) [antianxiety medication] and take one half tab (0.25 mg) to be administered every four hours PRN [as needed] for agitation and restlessness.Review of R11's EMR Medication Administration Record (MAR) located under the Orders tab dated 12/25 indicated the facility administered the lorazepam on 12/24/25 one dose; on 12/26/25 one dose; 12/29/25 one dose; and on 12/30/25 one…

  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 · Dcited before2026-01-23 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record reviews, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a person-centered comprehensive care plan was developed for one of one resident (R)6 receiving wound care/treatment out of a total of 39 sampled residents. This deficient practice placed R6 at risk of worsening wounds, new wound development, and for unmet resident care needs and goals for care.Findings include:Review of R6's admission Record, located under the Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed admission date of12/02/25 with diagnoses that included cellulitis, end stage renal disease (ESRD), dependence on renal dialysis, and difficulty in walking.Review of R6's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 12/04/25 located in the EMR under the MDS tab reflected R6 was at risk of developing pressure ulcers/injuries and had one or more unhealed pressure ulcers/injuries (PU/PI) present upon admission to the facility. The MDS reflected R6 had two Stage 3 pressure ulcers (Full thickness tissue loss) and moisture associated skin damage…

  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 · D2026-01-23 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolated
  Ensure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review, interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents maintained good hygiene for two (Resident (R) 20 and 75) of five residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL) in the sample of 39 residents. This failure has the potential for the residents to develop skin infections, social isolation, and a general decline in health.Findings included:1. Review of R20's Record of admission located in the Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed admission date 11/26/24 with diagnoses including major depressive disorder, Parkinson's disease, dizziness, anxiety, and difficulty in walking.Review of R20's Care Plan Report, dated 04/23/25 in the Care Plan tab in the EMR revealed, [R20] had an ADL self-care performance deficit due to activity intolerance. A care plan dated 04/24/25 revealed [R20] had potential for skin impairment due to decreased mobility, high blood pressure (HTN), fragile skin, and poor safety awareness. An intervention for this was to R20's skin will be assessed on a weekly basis on my scheduled bath day.Review of…

  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 · D2026-01-23 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  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 record review, interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure one resident (Resident (R) 71) of two residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living (ADLs) received the necessary services to maintain good personal hygiene out of a total survey sample of 39 residents. This failure has the potential for the residents to develop a general decline in health.Findings include:1. Review of R71's admission Record located in the electronic medical records (EMR) under the Profile tab indicated admission date 01/06/23, with diagnoses of dementia with agitation.Review of R71's Care Plan located in the EMR under the Care Plan tab dated 12/17/25 indicated that the resident has an Activities of Daily Living (ADL) self-care performance deficit related to (r/t) limited mobility.Review of R71's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) located in the EMR with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 10/16/25 indicated the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of nine out of 15 which resident was cognition was moderately impaired. The assessment…

  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 · D2026-01-23 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record reviews, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to follow care plan interventions to set the low air loss (LAL) mattress at 150 for one of one (Resident (R)66) out of a total of 39 sampled residents. This deficient practice placed R66 at risk of worsening non-pressure wounds, new wound development, and for unmet resident care needs and goals for care.Findings include:Review of R66's admission Record located under the Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed R66 admitted to the facility on [DATE], initial admission date 06/05/25, with diagnoses that included Type 2 diabetes mellitus with foot ulcer, non-pressure chronic ulcer of right heel and midfoot limited to breakdown of skin, non-pressure chronic ulcer of right ankle with unspecified severity, non-pressure chronic ulcer of left heel and midfoot with other specified severity, and hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting right dominant side.Review of R66's Care Plan…

  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 · D2026-01-23 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  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, record reviews, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to follow physician orders and care plan interventions for one of one Resident (R)73 to set the low air loss (LAL) mattress at 250 out of 39 sampled residents. This deficient practice placed R73 at risk of worsening pressure wounds, new wound development, and for unmet resident care needs and goals for care.Findings include:During an observation on 01/21/26 at 1:45 PM, R73's LAL pump was set at greater than 300.Review of R73's admission Record located under the Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed R73 admitted to the facility on [DATE], initial admission date 05/20/21, with diagnoses that included morbid (severe) obesity due to excess calories, cellulitis of left lower limb, and paraplegia (paralysis that affects the lower half of the body).Review of R73's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 09/29/25 located in the EMR under the MDS tab reflected R73 was…

  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 · D2026-01-23 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
  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, interviews, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the indwelling urinary catheter tubing and collection bag were not in contact with the floor and a securement device was in place for one resident (Resident(R)24) of one resident reviewed for indwelling urinary catheters out of 39 sampled residents. This failure placed the residents at risk for transmission of infection to the urinary tract or injury from tension, pulling, and accidental dislodgement of the catheter from the bladder.Findings include:During observations on 01/20/26 at 1:00 PM, 01/21/26 at 9:37 AM, and 01/21/26 at 2:37 PM, R24's indwelling urinary catheter rested on the floor hanging from the right side of the bedframe. There was not a securement device in place to immobilize the catheter tube against the skin on R24's right or left thigh.Review of R24's admission Record located under the Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed R24 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with…

  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

$47,541 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $47,541 — penalty dated 2025-01-23

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 COMPLETE CARE — 85 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 33 rows in the source record cover these 25 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

18 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 74% 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 $2.3M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 15% 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 2024. 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, FY2024). 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 DE