Miracle Hill Nursing & Rehabilitation Center, INC

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.

Met the expected recovery: 60.9% 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 23 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 0.23 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 29% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 3% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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 105.0 residents a day — about 88% occupied, or roughly 15 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 3.62 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.45 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.43 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 3.25 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.77 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.50 to 0.33 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 42% is about the same as 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.

29 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 18 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2025-06-05 · 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, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that a resident was free from harm and neglect when it failed ensure that residents with diabetes mellitus receive their insulin and/or blood glucose monitoring as ordered for 1 of 16 residents diagnosed with diabetes mellitus. (Resident #90) The findings include: A medical record review was conducted on Resident# 90, who was admitted in the facility on 11/10/2024. Resident #90 was noted to have an elevated blood glucose of 583 mg/dl and elevated A1C of 11.4% on 12/23/2024. There was no documented intervention or orders to address the elevated blood glucose level and elevated A1C. Record review showed no nursing actions and no medical orders had taken place on these laboratory results. Hospital records were reviewed and on 02/24/2025, the resident was transported to the hospital emergency room due to altered mental status. Resident #90 was diagnosed with diabetic ketoacidosis, encephalopathy, and a urinary tract infection (UTI).…

  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 · D2026-06-30 · tag F0552 — isolated
  Ensure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
  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, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to fully inform the residents of the risks and benefits and alternate treatment options for 1 of 3 residents sampled for the use of psychotropic medications (Resident #4).The findings included: On 6/29/26, a review of Resident #4's medical record was conducted. Resident #4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 2/16/26. Review of Resident #4's medical history revealed he had diagnoses that included dementia with psychotic disturbances. Physician's orders included Memantine 5 milligrams (mg) dated 2/9/26 (a medication used to treat moderate to severe Alzheimer's disease), Mirtazapine 7.5 mg dated 2/9/26 (a medication used to treat depression), and Rivastigmine 9.5 mg patch dated 2/10/26 (a medication used to treat moderate to severe Alzheimer's disease). Further record review revealed on 2/12/26 Resident #4 became combative and aggressive and a one-time order of Haldol 5 mg (an antipsychotic medication used 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 no plan of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-11-19 · 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 interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure that staff administered medications ordered to treat a urinary tract infection for 2 of 3 residents reviewed after their return to the facility following hospitalization.(Residents #1 and #3)The findings include:Record reviewsOn 11/18/25, a review of Resident #1's electronic medical record (EMR) showed that this resident was admitted to the hospital on [DATE] for nausea and vomiting and received a diagnosis of urinary tract infection (UTI) and sepsis syndrome. Upon discharge back to facility on 10/9/25, the physician ordered Augmentin 875/125mg with instructions for Resident #1 to take 1 tablet by mouth two times daily until 10/22/25. Upon review of the EMR, no order was found for this medication; therefore, it does not appear that staff administered the medication as ordered.On 11/19/25, a review of Resident #3's EMR revealed that the resident was admitted to the hospital on [DATE] and received a diagnosis of acute cystitis, a type of urinary…

  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 · D2025-08-27 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolated
  Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
  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 interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to implement the plan of care for 1 of 4 residents sampled for medication administration (Resident #3).The findings include:On 8/26/25 at 10:45 AM, an interview was conducted with Resident #3. He stated he had not received one medication, a Clonidine patch (a medicine used to treat high blood pressure but can also treat Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder), for weeks. Resident #3 further stated nursing had told him the pharmacy delivered a pill instead of a patch. On 8/26/25, a review of Resident #3's medical record was conducted. The resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] from hospital. Resident #3 had diagnoses that included bipolar disorder. The plan of care included administering medications as ordered related to behavioral problems. Physician's orders included Clonidine HCL tablet 0.2 mg apply transdermally every Wednesday for behavior/mood.The Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed Resident#3 did not…

  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 · E2025-06-05 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Resident #50 On 6/02/25 at 1:17 PM, an interview was conducted with Resident #50. The resident looked disheveled and had her hair was unbrushed and oily. She stated she had only two showers since she was admitted to the facility. She further stated that both showers happened with Occupational Therapy (OT) staff members. A review of Resident #50's medical record was conducted. This resident was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included needing assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADL). The plan of care included ADL self-care deficit related to decreased functional mobility and activity tolerance and generalized weakness. Interventions included nursing staff providing ADL care to ensure daily needs. A review of documentation related to bathing indicated Resident #50 was scheduled for showers on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays. Bathing documentation revealed OT provided bathing services on 5/1/25 and 5/16/25 and Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) provided bathing on 5/16, 5/22 and 5/25. On 6/03/25…

  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 · D2025-06-05 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
  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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY room [ROOM NUMBER] On 06/02/2025 during the tour of the facility, it was noted that the floor in room [ROOM NUMBER] was sticky and a dried brown substance was noted on the floor and wall of the room in the corner left side of the doorway facing the hallway. (Photographic evidence obtained) On 6/3/26 a follow up observation was made of room [ROOM NUMBER] at approximately 12:00 PM, which revealed the dried brown substance in the left corner of the doorway had been removed from the floor, however remained on the wall. On 6/4/25 at approximately 2:45 PM, another observation was made of room [ROOM NUMBER]. The wall remained with a dried brown substance and the floor remained sticky. An interview was conducted with Nurse B, a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), who was responsible for the residents on this hallway. Nurse B confirmed that the floor was sticky and the wall with the dried brown substance needed to be cleaned. Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to provide a sanitary, orderly, 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-05 · tag F0641 — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based upon record review and interviews, the facility failed to identify and properly code an assessment correctly upon admission to facility. (Resident #27) The findings include: Resident #27 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with an admitting diagnosis of end stage renal disease, dependence on renal dialysis, Type 2 diabetes with neuropathy, Atherosclerotic Heart disease, Chronic ischemic heart disease, Hypertension, Cardiac pacemaker, Cirrhosis of the liver, Heart Failure, AFIB, Osteoarthritis, and Pneumonia. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment with a date of 04/28/25 reveals these diagnoses were not coded on the admission comprehensive assessment. An interview was conducted on 6/4/25 at 10:26 AM with the MDS Coordinator. The MDS Coordinator acknowledged that the admission diagnoses of Resident #27 was not coded correctly on the MDS assessment.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-05 · tag F0644 — isolated
  Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to forward a resident for a level 2 Preadmission Screening and Resident review (PASARR) for 1 of 2 residents residents sampled for PASARR. (Resident #51) The findings include; On 6/3/25, a record review was conducted for Resident #51. The resident had a PASARR form, dated 7/16/20. The formed had depression checked off at that time and had dementia checked off at that time. On the PASARR Completion sections, it was checked the facility needed to request a level 2 screening due to suspicion of serious mental illness. There was no documentation in the record for a level 2 screening. On 06/03/25 at approximately 12:15 PM an interview was conducted with staff development staff, a Registered Nurse (RN) who stated she assists with compliance with the PASARR being accurate and up to date. Stated when she started in 2021 has not updated his PASARR and it should have been done but she will start working on it today. 06/03/25 at approximately 02:40 PM an interview was conducted with the Administration who stated they do not have 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-05 · tag F0645 — isolated
  PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
  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 reviews and interviews, the facility failed to update the Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) for 1 of 2 residents sampled for PASARR. (Resident #51) The findings include: On 6/3/25, a record review was conducted for Resident #51. The resident had a PASARR form dated 7/16/20. The form listed depression and dementia as diagnoses at the time. On the PASARR Completion section, it was recommended that the facility needed to request a level 2 screening due to the suspicion of serious mental illness. There was no documentation in the record for a Level 2 screening. A diagnosis of bipolar disorder was added on 7/21/23. Anxiety disorder was diagnosed on [DATE]. However, no further actions on a Level 2 PASSAR review were noted. On 06/03/25 at approximately 12:15 PM, an interview was conducted with the Staff Development Nurse, who stated she assists with compliance with the PASARR being accurate and up to date. She stated when she started in 2021 and acknowledged the PASARR was not followed…

  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 · Dcited before2025-06-05 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Resident #27 Resident #27 was admitted to facility on 04/22/25 with admitting diagnoses of End stage renal disease, dependence on renal dialysis, Type 2 diabetes with neuropathy, Atherosclerotic Heart disease, Chronic ischemic heart disease, Hypertension, Cardiac pacemaker, Cirrhosis of the liver, Heart Failure, AFIB, Osteoarthritis, and Pneumonia. Resident 27's plan of care revealed he has a risk for falls, complications of anticoagulant medication use, activity involvement, ADL self-care performance, potential for complications related to dialysis, potential for complications related to diabetes, and the potential for complications related to cardiovascular disease with a pacemaker. No goals or interventions are documented for each focus problem identified. An interview with Staff Member Q was conducted on 06/04/25 at 10:26 AM. She revealed that they have 14-21 days to complete a care plan that was initiated from the admission assessment. She acknowledged Resident #27 had incomplete care plans in his medical…

  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 · D2025-06-05 · 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 upon interview, observation, and record review, the facility failed to consistently perform services to prevent pressure ulcers for 1 of 1 residents observed for pressure ulcers. (Resident #50) The findings include: On 06/02/25 at 1:17 PM, an interview was conducted with Resident #50. During the interview, she stated she had developed a pressure ulcer because staff was not helping her enough during incontinence episodes. A review of Resident #50's medical record was conducted on 6/4/25. The resident was admitted on [DATE]. The plan of care included a risk of skin breakdown due to decreased mobility, incontinence, and fragile skin. Interventions included weekly skin checks. The physician's orders included a skin assessment every week and to notify the physician of any breakdown. The most recent skin assessment was documented on 5/24/25 and stated groin, buttocks and perineal area redden with excoriation. There were no new orders or progress notes indicating resident's skin issues had been addressed. 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.

  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

$43,264 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $43,264 — penalty dated 2025-06-05

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 8 rows in the source record cover these 4 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.

About 81% 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.

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 FL