Rosewalk Village

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.

50.4% 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 68 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 35.5% 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 31 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 0.20 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 23% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 4% 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 140 beds and averages 90.6 residents a day — about 65% occupied, or roughly 49 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 3.68 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.27 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.24 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 3.08 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.92 on weekdays — 21% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.31 to 0.16 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 59% is well above the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are 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.

25 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 14 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2025-11-13 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident with a diagnosis of dementia who was at risk of elopement did not exit the facility unsupervised for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for accidents. (Resident B) Resident B was found in the community, had fallen, and was transported to the hospital for treatment.The immediate jeopardy began, on 10/28/25, when Resident B exited the facility unsupervised and without the staff's knowledge while wearing a wanderguard device (a wearable device used to alert staff when a resident approached restrictive areas/doors). The resident was located approximately 0.6 miles away from the facility. The resident was found lying face down on the ground by a concerned citizen. The resident was transported to the hospital and had sustained a laceration and hematoma to his forehead, preorbital edema (swelling around his eye), an abrasion to his left knee and shoulder, and skin tears to the 4th and 5th digit on his left hand. The Executive Director,…

  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 · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-06 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff were implementing the care plan with monitoring and documenting outputs for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for implementation of care plans. (Resident 3) Findings include:The clinical record for Resident 3 was reviewed on 3/2/26 at 11:30 a.m. The diagnosis included, but was not limited to: stroke with left side hemiplegia (loss of function/movement). An a.m. and p.m. assistance and monitoring of Activities of Daily Living care plan, dated 11/9/25, indicated the resident required assistance with elimination. One of the interventions on the care plan included staff documenting the residents urine and bowel outputs every shift. A toileting program care plan, dated 11/14/25, indicated Resident 3 was to be toileted by staff every shift; before and after meal service, upon rising and nightly checks. Resident 3's February 2026 and March 2026 output reports indicated the following days and shifts there were no recorded urine outputs: -On 2/1/26, no output was documented for the resident on day and evening shift,-On 2/2/26…

  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 before2026-03-06 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
  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

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to timely conduct interdisciplinary care plan meetings for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for hospice and 1 of 2 residents reviewed for care planning (Residents 4, 6, and 9).Findings include: 1 The clinical record for Resident 4 was reviewed on 3/2/26 at 11:24 a.m. The resident's diagnoses included, but were not limited to, diabetes and dementia (mental decline). A Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, completed 2/4/26, indicated the resident had severely impaired cognition and received hospice services. Resident 4's clinical record contained a Care Plan Summary observation note, dated 2/4/26, that was not completed. The clinical record did not contain information that an Interdisciplinary Care Plan Meeting had been held after the completion on the Quarterly MDS Assessment. 2. The clinical record for Resident 9 was reviewed on 3/3/26 at 10:15 a.m. The resident's diagnoses included, but were not limited to, stroke (when blood flow to part of the brain was interrupted leading to lasting disability) and diabetes. 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 Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-06 · tag F0685 — isolated
  Assist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
  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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident received vision services for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for vision services. (Resident 50) Findings include: The clinical record for Resident 50 was reviewed on 3/2/26 at 11:30 a.m. The diagnosis included, but was not limited to, stroke (when blood flow to the brain was interrupted causing cells to die lead to lasting disability). The resident was admitted on [DATE]. A quarterly 1/14/26 Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment indicated Resident 50 was moderately cognitively impaired. A vision care plan, dated 10/4/23, indicated Resident 50's vision was impaired. The resident wore eye glasses. The staff were to arrange for eye doctor visits as needed. An ancillary consent, dated 10/6/23, indicated Resident 50 did want eye care. An interview was conducted with Resident 50 on 3/2/26 at 2:34 p.m. She indicated she was suppose to receive a new set of eye glasses. She had been waiting for 3 years and had never received them. She had not been seen…

  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 · D2026-03-06 · tag F0740 — failed to provide behavioral / mental-health care — isolated
  Ensure each resident must receive and the facility must provide necessary behavioral health care and services.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to care plan behaviors and interventions for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for behavior management. (Resident 49) Findings include:The clinical record for Resident 49 was reviewed on 3/5/2026 at 4:00 PM. The medical diagnoses included, but were not limited to, anxiety, depression, and encephalopathy. An annual minimum data set assessment, dated 12/9/2025, indicated Resident 49 was cognitively intact, did not exhibit behaviors, hallucinations, delusions, or refusals of care. A care plan, dated 5/22/2024 and revised on 3/4/2026, indicated Resident 49 would refuse medications and weights. The interventions included, but were not limited to, providing space and educate Resident 49 on possible negative effects of refusing medications and weights. A care plan, dated 2/2/2026 and revised on 3/4/2026, indicated Resident 49 exhibited behaviors of becoming tearful. The interventions included, but were not limited to, provide psychosocial support and redirect as needed. A care plan, initiated 3/2/2026, indicated Resident 49 would become…

  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 · D2026-03-06 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolated
  Provide or obtain dental services for each resident.
  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 provide assistance with scheduling and tracking dental services for 2 of 2 reviewed for dental services. (Resident 7 and Resident 25).Findings include: 1 The clinical record for Resident 7 was reviewed on 3/3/26 at 9:27 a.m. The resident's diagnoses included, but were not limited to, diabetes and hypertension (high blood pressure). A Request for Information from the facility dental provider form, dated 10/3/24, indicated Resident 7 consented to receive dental services. A Concern/Grievance Form, dated 11/11/24, indicated Resident 7 wanted to be seen by dental services. The resident was added the list to be seen by dental services on 11/20/24. A progress note, dated 11/21/24, indicated the dental provider had contacted the facility about an outstanding bill with the provider. Resident 7 had paid a portion of the bill but still had an outstanding balance. The outstanding bill needed to be paid in full before the dental provider would provide services. A Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, completed…

  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 · F2025-03-13 · 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, and record review, the facility failed to ensure expired food was disposed of timely with the potential to affect 98 of 98 residents that receive food from the kitchen. (Facility) Findings include: The facility kitchen was observed with Culinary Aide 2 (CA) on 3/9/25 at 9:45 a.m. The inspection of the dry storage was conducted with CA 2. During an interview with CA 2, he indicated the top dates on the boxes were delivery dates and bottom dates were expiration dates. The following food items were observed outdated in the dry storage: One bag of graham cracker crumbs - expired 3/5/25, Eleven bags of sugar free Jell-O - expired 2/26/25, Fourteen bags of pork flavored gravy mix- expired 3/5/25, Six bags of cream soup base- expired 3/6/25, Brownie mix- opened 9/14/24 and expired 11/15/24, Cake mix- expired 8/28/24, Streusel topping- expired 11/8/24, Chocolate chips- expired 1/21/25, Two boxes of assorted Jell-O- expired 2/22/25, Twelve bags of vanilla pudding- expired 3/6/25, Cake mix- expired 2/28/25, Four bags of gravy mix- expired 2/28/25, Nine boxes…

  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 · E2025-03-13 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure infection control was maintained by not ensuring hand hygiene was performed prior to donning gloves, failed to utilize hand hygiene during a medication administration, popping pill medication in bare hands for 3 of 6 residents randomly observed for medication administration, and not donning personal protective equipment (PPE) during bathing and dressing for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for dialysis. (Resident 2, Resident 12, Resident 20, and Resident 24) Findings include: 1. The clinical record for Resident 20 was reviewed on 3/9/25 at 11:31 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, diabetes. On 3/9/25 at 11:31 a.m., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 25 was randomly observed performing a blood glucose check for Resident 20. LPN 25 gathered the supplies to conduct the blood glucose check from the medication cart, including a pair of disposable gloves. LPN 25 entered Resident 20's room and informed Resident 20 about the need to obtain a blood glucose check. LPN 25 donned the disposable gloves,…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-03-13 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents' dignity was respected for 3 of 4 residents reviewed for abuse. (Residents' J, K, and L) Findings include: 1. The clinical record for Resident K was reviewed on 3/10/25 at 10:00 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, heart disease. A Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 1/8/25, indicated Resident K was cognitively intact. An interview was conducted with Resident K on 3/10/25 at 10:09 a.m. She indicated she had reported Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 22 to the Executive Director (ED). He was always hateful and rude towards her. LPN 22 was changing her humidifier for her oxygen, and during that time, the interaction between LPN 22 and Resident K was not respectful. LPN 22 had made rude statements to her and stuck up his middle finger. She had stated to him, you're not my daddy, and he responded, you're not my mama. She expected LPN 22 to apologize to Resident K for being treated that way, but she had not received an apology. LPN 22 no longer worked at the facility. A reportable…

  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 · D2025-03-13 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a call light was in reach for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for call lights (Resident G). Findings include: The clinical record for Resident G was reviewed on 3/11/25 at 10:00 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, anemia, cancer, heart failure, diabetes, hemiplegia caused by stroke (weakness on one side of the body), and depression. A Quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment, completed 12/20/24, indicated Resident G's preferred language was Spanish, and she needed an interpreter to communicate with doctors or health staff. It also indicated Resident G was cognitively intact with impairment of her right upper extremity. An observation was conducted of Resident G on 3/12/25 at 9:39 a.m. Resident G was in bed and her call light cord was attached to the wall mount on the wall next to the bed. The cord went behind the resident's bed, and it was hanging in front of the headboard near the ground on the right side of the bed. The call light was out of sight and out of reach of the resident. In an…

  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 before2025-03-13 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to get residents up to a wheelchair and complete regular hair shampooing for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for ADLs (Activities of Daily Living). (Resident G) Findings include: The clinical record for Resident G was reviewed on 3/11/25 at 10:00 a.m. The diagnoses included, but were not limited to, anemia, cancer, heart failure, diabetes, hemiplegia caused by stroke (weakness on one side of the body), and depression. A Quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment, completed 12/20/24, indicated Resident G's preferred language was Spanish, and she needed an interpreter to communicate with doctors or health staff. It also indicated Resident G was cognitively intact with impairment of her right upper extremity. On 3/12/25 at 9:39 a.m., Resident G was observed in her room, lying in bed wearing a hospital gown. The resident's hair was oily, stringy, and tangled in the back. She indicated she had not had a shower, a full bed bath, or her hair shampooed in about 10-12 days. She asked the staff to wash her hair, but they 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.

  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

$14,901 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $14,901 — penalty dated 2025-11-13

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to AMERICAN SENIOR COMMUNITIES — 90 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 41 rows in the source record cover these 31 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.

3 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 83% 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 $1.0M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in IN