Lake Way Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center

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

Met the expected recovery: 55.8% 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 0.33 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 54% 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 96 beds and averages 86.4 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 10 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 3.50 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.88 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.03 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 3.00 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.69 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.97 to 0.65 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 51% 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 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.

23 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 12 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2019-01-10 · 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 interview, record review and review of facility policy, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that each resident was free from mistreatment, abuse or neglect for one (1) sampled resident out of a selected sample of twenty-four (24) residents (Resident #17). Resident #17 alleged State Registered Nurse Aide (SRNA) #1 made rude or demeaning comments to him/her and he/she felt bullied. On [DATE], State Registered Nurse Aide (SRNA) #1 made the statement towards Resident #17 Gahh, Attitude much during lunch time tray pass. Resident #17's family member #1 reported the incident to Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 who then reported the incident to Registered Nurse (RN) #3 the on duty weekend supervisor. However, RN #3 did not report the incident to the Administrator. Resident #17 stated SRNA #1's behavior causes him/her a significant amount of anxiety and made him/her feel helpless. Resident #17 was tearful when explaining the effects these interactions had on him/her. The findings include: Review of…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2025-07-09 · tag F0882 — widespread
  Designate a qualified infection preventionist to be responsible for the infection prevent and control program in the nursing home.
  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 review of facility policies, the facility failed to have a designated Infection Preventionist (IP) who was responsible for the facility's Infection Control Program which had the potential to affect 84 of 84 residents. The findings include:During the entrance conference on [DATE] at 9:21 AM, the Administrator stated the facility had an Infection Preventionist (IP).Review of the facility policy titled, Infection Prevention and Control Program dated 04/2023, revealed, the Infection Prevention and Control Program (IPCP) of the facility was designated to establish and maintain an effective program that provided a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment. Further review revealed the facility's IPCP attempted to prevent the development and the transmission of diseases and infections. Review of the facility policy titled, Infection Control Preventionist dated 04/2023, revealed the facility would designate an Infection Control Preventionist (ICP) in compliance with federal, state, or local laws.…

  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 · D2020-10-08 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolated
  Protect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview, record review, review of the facility investigation, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure medications were not misappropriated for two (2) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #47 and Resident #57). On 05/20/2020, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 notified the Director of Nursing that they were unable to reorder narcotic's for Resident #47 and Resident #57, because the pharmacy stated they had already sent them out on 04/13/2020 and 05/08/2020. The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, or Misappropriation of Resident Property Policy, last revised 03/10/2017, revealed the facility believes residents have the right to be free from abuse, neglect, involuntary seclusion, exploitation, or misappropriation of property. The facility will do whatever is in its control to prevent mistreatment, neglect, exploitation, and abuse of our residents or misappropriation of their property. 1. Record review revealed the facility admitted Resident #47 on 08/22/2013 with diagnoses which included Major…

  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 · D2020-10-08 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
  Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
  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 facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure expired medications were not stored and accessible in one (1) of three (3) medication storage carts. The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Provider of Pharmaceutical Services, dated September 2020, revealed the facility and [NAME] Medical Group shall provide appropriate methods and procedures for the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of drugs and biologicals to meet the needs of each resident. Pharmaceutical services are provided in accordance with accepted professional standards and appropriate federal, state and local laws. Consulting and clinical services shall be provided by [NAME] Medical Group. Review of facility policy titled, Return of Unused Medications dated September 2020, revealed medications may be returned to [NAME] Medical Group for reasons that a medication reached its expiration date. The policy outlined appropriate procedure for returning…

  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 · Dcited before2020-10-08 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
  Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure medical records, were complete and accurately documented for one (1) of three (3) sampled residents (Resident #30). The findings include: Review of facility policy titled, Medication Administration Person-Centered Care, last revised September 2020, revealed the facility guidelines was medications are administered as prescribed in accordance with good nursing principles and practices and only by persons legally authorized to do so. Further review of facility policy revealed the individual who administers the medication dose records the administration on the resident's Medication Administration Report (MAR) at the time of administration. At the end of each medication pass, the person administering the medications reviews the MAR to ensure necessary doses were administered and documented. In no case should the individual who administered the medications report off-duty without first recording the administration of any medications. Record review revealed the facility admitted…

  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 · F2019-01-10 · 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 facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure food was stored, prepared, distributed and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Kitchen observations on 01/08/19, revealed expired foods were being kept in the walk-in refrigerator, [NAME] #1 used her bare hand to place hard boiled eggs on a resident's lunch tray, and the side oven was visibly dirty with build up. In addition, observations of staff during dining room observation, revealed staff were handling residents' rolls, bread and straws with their bare hands. Review of the Census and Condition, dated 01/08/19, revealed seventy-five (75) of seventy-seven (77) residents received their food from the kitchen. The findings include: 1. Review of facility policy titled, Use and Storage of Leftovers, last revised 01/23/18, revealed each day staff will check leftovers and throw out any foods that have been kept up to the maximum length of time allowed. Observation of the kitchen on 01/08/19 at 09:27 AM, revealed in the walk-in refrigerator 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2019-01-10 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — pattern
  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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review and review of facility policy, it was determined the facility failed to ensure one (1) of twenty-four (24) sampled residents (Resident #17) and five (5) unsampled residents (Resident #35, Resident #34, Resident #39, Resident #70 and Resident #37) residents were treated with dignity and respect . On 12/22/18, a staff member asked Resident #17 if he/she wanted a lunch tray and the resident responded yes, then no, then yes and the staff member responded inappropriately by saying to the resident gahh, Attitude much. In addition, observations on 01/09/19 revealed a staff member entered Resident #35's, Resident #34's, Resident #39's, Resident #70's and Resident #37's rooms without knocking and/or identifying herself to residents before entering. The findings include: Review of the facility policy, Dignity, dated July 2013, revealed residents are given care and treatment in a manner that helps preserve their dignity, self-esteem, and self-respect. Each resident is valued…

  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 · E2019-01-10 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — pattern
  Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview, record review and review of facility policy, it was determined the facility failed to have evidence allegations of abuse, or mistreatment, were thoroughly investigated by the facility or prevent further potential abuse while investigation in progress for one (1) of twenty-four (24) sampled residents (Resident #17) and three (3) unsampled residents (Residents #14, #58 and #46). Resident #17's Family Member #1 reported to Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 that State Registered Nurse Aide (SRNA) #1 made a rude and belittling comment to Resident #17. LPN #1 reported the alleged abuse/mistreatment to Registered Nurse (RN) #3, the weekend supervisor, on 12/22/18; however, RN #3 did not report the incident to the Administrator. The facility failed to remove SRNA from resident care and investigate the incident. SRNA was not removed from resident care until 01/08/19 at approximately 6:00 PM (approximately seventeen {17} days later). In addition, Resident #14 expressed concerns with aides shoving residents to hurry them up during resident council on 9/21/18. However, 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2019-01-10 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of facility policy, it was determined the facility failed to ensure one (1) of twenty-four (24) sampled residents has the opportunity to exercise his or her autonomy regarding those things that are important in his or her life. Staff failed to provide Resident #49 the opportunity to choose which clothes he/she wanted to wear on a daily basis. The findings Include: Review of the facility policy, Residents Rights, not dated, revealed the discussion of Residents Rights will be included in the orientation of the new employees. The Administrator assumes the responsibility for the implementation of the Residents Rights. The facility also will ensure that their employees are trained on a regular basis regarding Resident Rights. Record review, revealed the facility admitted Resident #49 on 02/19/17 with diagnoses which included Major Depressive Disorder, Panic Disorder, and Anxiety Disorder. Review of Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 12/07/18, revealed the facility assessed Resident #49's cognition as intact with 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 Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2019-01-10 · 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 observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure they developed and/or implemented a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights that includes measurable objectives and timeframe's to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment for three (3) of twenty-four (24) sampled residents, (Residents #15, #18, and #75). Staff failed to ensure Resident #15 was wearing bunny boot to left heel to prevent pressure ulcers and Resident #75 was wearing Multi Podus AFO boots to prevent foot drop; on 01/08/19 and 01/09/19, per care plan. In addition, the facility failed to develop a person-centered plan of care for infections although, Resident #18 had been hospitalized twice for a UTI, treated once for fever of unknown origin, and twice for an abscess to his/her right cheek. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy,…

  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 · D2019-01-10 · 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 observation, interview, record review, and review of the facility's policies and procedures, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that the comprehensive care plan is reviewed and revised by an interdisciplinary team composed of individuals who have knowledge of the resident and his/her needs for one (1) of twenty-four (24) sampled residents (Residents #38). Review of Resident #38's Comprehensive Care Plan revealed the facility failed to review and revise the care plan to address the resident's decline in bowel and bladder continence and put interventions in place to restore Resident #38's bowel and bladder continence to the extent possible. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy, Resident Care Plan, last revised 11/13/17, revealed it is the policy of the facility to provide a written resident-centered care plan based upon physician's orders, the assessment of the resident needs, and preferences, and pre-admission screening and resident review (PASRR). Any new problem or need of the resident, which is identified between his/her scheduled care plan…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning 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 PRINCIPLE LONG TERM CARE — 40 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 11 rows in the source record cover these 9 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.

This home reported $1.8M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 22% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. 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 KY