Meridian Meadows Transitional Care

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.

59.0% 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 106 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 38.5% 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 52 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 0.50 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 81% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 12% 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 52 beds and averages 41.9 residents a day — about 81% occupied, or roughly 10 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 3.73 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.47 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.15 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 3.12 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.97 on weekdays — 21% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.46 to 0.48 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

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.

31 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 20 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2025-09-04 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  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 interviews, and review of the Long-Term Care Reporting Portal, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure residents were free from neglect. This was true for 3 of 6 residents ( #3, #10, and #20) whose records were reviewed for abuse and neglect. This failure resulted in harm when Resident #3 was injured during a transfer and created the potential for embarrassment and psychosocial harm when Resident #10 and Resident #20 were not provided timely incontinence care. Findings include:The facility's Abuse and Neglect policy, dated 12/2/24, documented that the facility will identify events, occurrences, patterns, and trends that may constitute neglect-defined as the failure of the facility, its employees, or service providers to provide goods and services to a resident that are necessary to avoid physical harm, pain, mental anguish, or emotional distress.The facility's Safe Resident Handling/Transfer policy, dated 12/20/24, documented that two staff members must be utilized when…

  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 · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · E2026-04-03 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — pattern
  Provide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on resident interviews, representative interviews, staff interviews, observations, review of grievances, and review of the three-week nursing schedule, it was determined the facility failed to ensure sufficient staffing was available to meet resident needs according to their plan of care. This failure had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility if staff were not available to ensure resident needs and safety measures were provided. Findings include: The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) website accessed on 4/8/26, article titled The National Imperative to Improve Nursing Home Quality (2022) documented, inadequate staffing contributes to delayed care, missed care tasks, and reduced resident safety. Staffing must be aligned with resident acuity, not just minimum numbers.A review of facility grievances dated 10/1/25 through 3/31/26, documented the following:-A Grievance Form dated 1/12/26, documented a resident reported not receiving incontinence care from 6:00 PM to 6:00 AM and was found wet the following morning. 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.

  Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-04-03 · 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 and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents were informed in advance of the care and treatment to be furnished, including the risks and benefits of that treatment. This was true for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #5) whose records were reviewed for informed consent. This failure created the potential for miscommunication and adverse effects when Resident #5 was not informed in advance of the risks and benefits of the ordered medication. Findings include:Resident #5 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple diagnoses including palliative care encounter, congestive heart failure, and acute kidney disease.Resident #5's medical record included the following physician orders:-Lorazepam (a controlled substance anti-anxiety medication) Oral Concentrate 2 mg/mL: Give 0.5 mL by mouth every 8 hours as needed for anxiety.-Lorazepam Oral Concentrate 2 mg/mL: Give 0.5 mL by mouth every 8 hours as needed for terminal agitation for 180 days.A review of Resident…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-04-03 · tag F0554 — isolated
  Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
  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, policy review, resident interview, and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to ensure an interdisciplinary team assessment, physician orders, or care plan documentation were in place for self administration of glucose tablets. This was true for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #15), whose record was reviewed for medication administration. This failure created the potential for harm when unsafe medication practices and unmonitored treatment of hypoglycemia were identified. Findings include:The facility's Resident Self-Administration of Medication policy reviewed 12/30/25, documented residents may only self-administer medications after the facility's interdisciplinary team (IDT) has determined which medications may be self-administered safely. The results of the IDT assessment are recorded on the Medication Self-Administration Safety Screen. The care plan must reflect resident self-administration and storage arrangements for such medications. A re-assessment of safety at minimum…

  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 before2026-04-03 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolated
  Ensure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
  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, policy review, and staff interview it was determined the facility failed to assess a resident for safety related to bed rail use or informed consent was obtained prior to use of the bed rail. This was true for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #18) reviewed for restraint assessment. This deficient practice had the potential for physical and psychosocial harm if Resident #18 were injured, trapped, or felt she was being restrained unnecessarily. Findings include:The facility's Use of Assistive Devices policy, dated 12/29/25, documented the facility's process for the proper and consistent use of assistive devices for residents requiring equipment to maintain or improve function and/or dignity is based on the residents' comprehensive assessment, in accordance with the residents' plan of care. The facility's Restraint Free Environment policy, reviewed 12/31/25, defined the use of bed rails as one type of physical restraint.Resident #18 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-03 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure resident care plans accurately reflected the use of assistive devices. This was true for 1 of 16 residents (Resident #18) reviewed for comprehensive person-centered care plans. This failure had the potential to result in unmet care needs and increased risk to resident safety. Findings include:Resident #18 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple diagnoses including leukemia, dementia, anxiety, and depression.On 3/30/26 at 10:52 AM, Resident #18 was observed in her bed with a transfer pole on the left side of her bed, and a 1/4 bed rail on the right side of her bed.A review of Resident #18's care plan did not document the use of a transfer pole or 1/4 bed rail on her bed.On 4/3/26 at 10:28 AM, the CRN stated Resident #18 did not have a care plan implemented related to the 1/4 bed rail and transfer pole, and there should have been.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-04-03 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure physician orders were clarified to verify the correct route of medication administration. This was true for 1 of 16 residents (Resident #4) reviewed for professional standards of practice. This failure created the potential for harm if Resident #4 were to receive oral medications despite having difficulty swallowing. Findings include:According to the National Council of State Boards of Nursing (NCSBN) website, accessed 4/6/26, nurses are professionally obligated to clarify and verify any order that is incomplete, inaccurate, unclear, or contraindicated before implementing it.Resident #4 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple diagnoses including dysphagia, disease of the esophagus, and gastrostomy.Resident #4's nutritional care plan, revised 4/3/26, documented the resident was NPO (nothing by mouth).A review of Resident #4's physician orders showed the following medications were ordered to be administered…

  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 · D2026-04-03 · 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 observation, record review, policy review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents who were dependent on staff for activities of daily living assistance received services for their fingernails. This was true for 1 of 1 residents (Resident #50) reviewed for nail care. This placed Resident #50 at risk of embarrassment which could affect him socially due to the appearance of his fingernails. Findings include: The facility's Nail Care policy, implemented 12/20/24 and revised 12/31/25 documented:The purpose of this procedure is to provide guidelines for the provision of care to a resident's nails for good grooming and health.Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines:Assessments of resident nails will be conducted on admission and readmission to determine the resident's nail condition, needs, and preferences for nail care, if possible.Report unusual or abnormal conditions of the nails to the physician and the responsible party (e.g., curling, color changes, separation…

  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 · D2026-04-03 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, resident interview, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents had an active physician's order. This was true for 1 of 16 residents (Resident #15) whose record was reviewed for quality of care. This deficient practice created the potential for adverse outcomes when Resident #15 self-administered a medication not ordered by a physician. Findings include: Resident #15 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple diagnoses including type 1 diabetes, partial paralysis of left side, and ataxia after a stroke.On 3/30/26 at 1:07 PM, it was observed Resident #15 had a bottle of glucose tablets on his desk. When asked why there were glucose tablets on his desk, Resident #15 stated he took glucose tablets whenever he felt his blood sugar going low.A physician's note dated 2/13/26, documented the physician had seen Resident #15 for low blood sugars, and referenced Resident #15 was taking glucose tablets whenever his blood sugar was in 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-04-03 · 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 review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure wound care was provided according to physician orders and acceptable standards of practice. This was true for 1 of 1 residents (Resident #5) observed for wound treatment. This failure created the potential for delayed healing and wound deterioration. Findings include:a.Resident #5 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple diagnoses including palliative care encounter, congestive heart failure, and acute kidney disease.A physician order directed staff to cleanse Resident #5's left heel with wound cleanser, apply normal saline-moistened gauze, and cover with a dry dressing every shift.On 4/3/26 at 10:01 AM, RN #1 was observed performing wound care for Resident #5. RN #1 removed the soiled dressing, cleansed the wound with wound cleanser and gauze, patted the wound dry, applied skin prep, and applied a clean dry dressing.The treatment provided did not include the ordered normal saline-moistened…

  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 before2026-04-03 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when 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 observation, record review, policy review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents received oxygen therapy per physician orders. This was true for 1 of 1 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for oxygen therapy. This deficient practice created the potential for adverse outcomes if residents' did not receive the proper amount of oxygen. Findings include:The facility's Oxygen Administration policy, implemented 12/30/25 documented, Oxygen is administered under orders of a physician, except in the case of an emergency.Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple diagnoses including chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia and congestive heart failure.Resident #1's care plan revised on 3/7/26, documented Resident #1 used oxygen per physician order.A physician order dated 3/26/26, documented oxygen at 0-2 LPM via nasal cannula as needed to keep oxygen saturations equal to or greater than 88% and to check oxygen saturation every shift.Resident #1's March…

  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.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to TANABELL HEALTH SERVICES — 5 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 40 rows in the source record cover these 20 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

11 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.

This home reported $322K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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 ID