Colonial Manors of Columbus Community

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.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.16 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 13% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

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

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 39 beds and averages 30.6 residents a day — about 78% occupied, or roughly 8 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 3.46 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.37 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.40 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 3.18 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.57 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.40 to 0.31 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 21% 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.

20 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 10 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · D2025-07-24 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, clinical record review, facility policy review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure accurate resident code status (resident decision to have cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) performed or do not resuscitate (DNR) in the event of cardiac arrest) information recorded and readily available for 1 of 16 residents (Resident #24) reviewed for code status. The facility reported a census of 30 residents. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #17, dated [DATE], identified the resident had a diagnoses of cerebral vascular accident and dementia, and a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 11 out of 15 (indicative of moderate mental impairment). On [DATE] at 3:44 PM, observation of the outside cover of Resident #17's hard clinical chart revealed an attached label, titled CPR (which indicated staff were to perform CPR in the event of a respiratory or cardiac arrest). Review of the contents of the clinical record in the hard chart revealed a a form located in the front…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-07-24 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolated
  Develop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on clinical record review, review of facility incident reports, review of facility policy, family member and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure staff followed their policy for reporting allegations of abuse for 1 of 1 sampled residents (Resident #17) reviewed with an allegation of abuse. The facility reported a census of 30 residents. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #17, dated 6/9/25, identified the resident had a diagnosis of dementia. The assessment included a Staff Assessment for Mental Status which indicated Resident #17 had short term and long term memory problems. The Cognitive Skills for Daily Decision Making assessed the resident as Severely impaired (defined as never/rarely made decisions). The MDS identified the resident required supervision or touch assistance to for a chair/bed-to-chair transfer, transfer to toilet, and tub/shower transfer; and partial or moderate assistance for sit to stand, sit to lying, and lying to sitting on side of bed. Review of the Care Plan for Resident #17,initiated 8/9/23, revealed a Focus area 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-08-15 · tag F0636 — pattern
  Assess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
  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 review, staff interview, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments completed timely for four of four residents reviewed for completion of comprehensive assessments (Resident #5, Resident #13, Resident #26, Resident #29). The facility reported a census of 28 residents. Findings include: 1. Review of the electronic health record for Resident #26 revealed the resident admitted to the facility 12/27/23. Review of the resident's admission MDS assessment with Assessment Reference Date (ARD) 1/9/24 revealed the assessment completed 1/19/24. The Facility Policy titled MDS-Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) and Care Planning, undated, revealed the following: 1. A schedule will be established by the Care Plan Coordinator. This schedule will identify the date the MDS is due and the date the plan-of-care is due. All disciplines will complete their sections within the required timeframe's. All disciplines will assist in identifying those…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-08-15 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — pattern
  Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview, and facility policy review the facility failed to update the Care Plan following initiation of anticoagulant medication, failed to ensure updated fall interventions were included following resident falls, failed to include a wound, and failed to address Clostridium Difficile for four of thirteen residents reviewed for Care Plan revision (Resident #6, Resident #15, Resident #20, Resident #27). The facility reported a census of 28 residents. Findings include: 1. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was rarely to never understood, and further revealed the resident took anticoagulant medication. Review of the Care Plan for Resident #15 lacked a focus area for anticoagulant medication. The Physician Order active 2/25/22 through 12/15/22 revealed a Physician Order for Eliquis 5 mg (milligram), an anticoagulant medication. It was noted the anticoagulant medication initiated for Resident #15 in the month following the resident's…

  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 · D2024-08-15 · tag F0641 — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
  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 the facility policy, the facility failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for a resident's medications they took for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Resident #5). The facility reported a census of 28 residents. Findings include: The MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #5 scored a 15 out of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) exam, which indicated cognition intact. The MDS revealed the resident took a hypnotic and antidepressant. The MDS revealed a diagnosis for depression. The Care Plan revealed a focus area revised on 7/26/24 that the resident received Escitalopram, an antidepressant and Lamotrigine, an anti-convulsant for mixed obsessional thoughts, hoarding disorder, and major depressive disorder. The EHR (Electronic Health Record) lacked documentation the resident took a hypnotic medication. During an interview on 8/15/24 at 1:47 PM, Staff C, LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse) stated she didn't believe…

  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 · D2024-08-15 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on the record review, staff interview, and the facility policy, the facility failed to resubmit a PASRR (Preadmission Screening and Resident Review) with new mental health diagnoses and psychotropic medications added to the plan of care for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for PASRR (Resident #19 and Resident #20). The facility reported a census of 28 residents. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #19 scored a 10 out of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) exam, which indicated cognition moderately impaired. The MDS revealed diagnoses for non-Alzheimer's Dementia, anxiety disorder, depression, and psychotic disorder (other than schizophrenia). The MDS revealed the resident took an antipsychotic and an antidepressant medication. The MDS revealed the resident took antipsychotics on a routine basis. The Notice of PASRR Level 1 Screen Outcome dated 1/26/23 revealed no Level II required. The PASRR revealed no mental health diagnoses;…

  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 · D2024-08-15 · 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 Based on clinical record review, staff interview, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure diuretic medication was included in the comprehensive Care Plan for one of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Resident #26). The facility reported a census of 28 residents. Findings include: Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #26 scored 00 out of 15 on a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) exam, which indicated severe cognitive impairment. Per this assessment, the resident took diuretic medication. Review of the resident's Care Plan did not address diuretic medication. Review of the Physician Order dated 12/27/23, noted to be the date of the resident's admission, revealed, Furosemide (diuretic) Oral Tablet 20 MG (milligram) with directions to give 1 tablet by mouth every day shift for bilateral lower extremity edema. On 8/14/24, review of Resident #26's Physician Orders revealed the order remained current for Resident #26. On 8/15/24 at 1:40…

  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 · D2024-08-15 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
  Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure diuretic medication administered per physician order for one of two residents reviewed for edema (Resident #7). The facility reported a census of 28 residents. Findings include: Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #7 dated 7/29/24 revealed the resident scored 15 out of 15 on a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) exam, which indicated intact cognition. Per this assessment, the resident took diuretic medication. The Care Plan for Resident #7 dated 2/10/20, revised 4/2/23, revealed the following: [Resident #7] utilizes diuretic therapy Furosemide r/t (related to) diagnoses of hypertension and unspecified heart failure. The intervention dated 4/2/23 revealed, Weight daily in AM per PCP (Primary Care Physician) orders. Report gains of 3 lbs. or greater in 24 hours to PCP. The Physician Order dated 8/30/21 revealed, Lasix Tablet 40 MG (Furosemide) with instruction to give 40 mg (milligram) by mouth in the morning related to heart failure, unspecified. The Physician Order 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-08-15 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, resident interview, and the staff interviews, the facility failed to provide a shower twice a week for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for ADLs (Activities of Daily Living) (Resident #13). The facility reported a census of 28 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #13 scored a 11 out of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) exam, which indicated cognition moderately impaired. The MDS revealed the resident dependent with shower/bathing self and tub/shower transfers. The MDS revealed the diagnosis for Parkinson, unspecified. The Care Plan revealed a focus area revised on 4/2/23 for the resident's ability to complete ADLs had deteriorated related to advanced Parkinson's disease symptoms. The interventions dated 11/14/23 revealed the resident required a mechanical lift for transfer. The interventions revised on 4/2/23 revealed not to rush the resident and allow extra time to complete ADLs. The POC (Plan of Care) Response…

  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 · Dcited before2024-08-15 · 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, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure daily weights obtained per Physician Order for two of two residents reviewed for edema (Resident #7, Resident #9), and failed to ensure timely, consistent follow up after documentation of no bowel movement (BM) for greater than three days for one of one resident reviewed for bowel and bladder (Resident #9), and failed to ensure thorough assessment completion for a resident's heel wound for one of two residents reviewed for wounds (Resident #20). The facility reported a census of 28 residents. Findings include: 1. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #7 dated 7/29/24 revealed the resident scored 15 out of 15 on a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) exam, which indicated intact cognition. Per this assessment, the resident took diuretic medication. The Care Plan for Resident #7 dated 2/10/20, revised 4/2/23, revealed the following: [Resident #7] utilizes diuretic therapy Furosemide r/t (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.

  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

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 23 rows in the source record cover these 20 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.

7 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.

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 IA