No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Highlandspring Of Ft Thomas

960 Highland Avenue, Fort Thomas, KY 41075 · For profit - Corporation · 140 certified beds · (859) 572-0660 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (859) 572-0660 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 9 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★★ 5/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
85 N Grand Ave · (859) 301-2273 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
Gogomeds0.6 mi
525 Alexandria Pike · (888) 795-5826 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
16 N Fort Thomas Ave · (859) 916-8488 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Mayfield Ave · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
1080 Highland Ave · (859) 781-4510

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

Overall quality measures 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 3 of 5

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.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased4.2%13.8%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight14.6%6.6%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.2%0.5%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.2%1.6%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms46.8%17.7%6.5%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury3.9%3.9%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened4.8%14.0%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication27.6%29.8%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.4%96.2%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.1%4.8%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control27.7%19.0%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table22.2%16.1%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication2.0%1.7%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine97.0%83.5%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission24.0%24.2%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit10.5%13.7%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.471.941.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.592.141.80better

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

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.

49.1% 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 190 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

49.1%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
14.0%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
62.5%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.34U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.16hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.14hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.04hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 62.5% 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 80 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 0.34 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 57% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 6% 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.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF49.1%CMS range 41.2–56.451.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF14.0%CMS range 11.3–16.610.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge62.5%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge57.5%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge57.5%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay1.8%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened2.7%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.3%CMS range 4.3–10.77.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.091.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.81
RN hours/ resident / day
0.59
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.85
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.25
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.57
RN hoursweekends
48.3%
Total nursing turnover
31.6%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 140 beds and averages 135.4 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 5 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. 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 4.25 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.81 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.85 is at or above 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 3.36 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.61 on weekdays — 27% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.91 to 0.57 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 48% 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

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-02-11)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2024-12-06)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

9 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · F2026-02-11 · 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 review of the facility's policies, the facility failed to store food under sanitary conditions. Observations of the kitchen on 02/08/2026 revealed undated cans on the rack, four packages of vanilla wafers out of the box and not dated, a large clear plastic container with the appearance of white rice not labeled or dated, and one undated bag of chocolate chips out of the box. Continued observation on 02/08/2026 revealed three of five clear plastic covered cereal containers with no label or date in the second floor serve kitchen. Also, observation on 02/09/2026 in the kitchen revealed the bucket sanitizer had no documentation of the date or time the sanitizer was checked or changed. The deficient practice had the potential to affect all 136 current residents.The findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled, Food Storage, not dated, revealed it was the policy of the facility that food storage areas be maintained in a clean, safe, and sanitary manor. Food storage areas shall always be clean. All opened, potentially hazardous food items…

    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 · Dcited before2026-02-11 · 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 interview, record review, and review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive, person-centered care plan for each resident that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs and describe the services to be furnished to attain or maintain a resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 2 of 27 sampled residents, Resident (R) 52 and R79.The facility admitted R52 and R79 with known histories of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and histories of known triggers. However, in the residents' admission care plans, no interventions were in place to prevent potential adverse behaviors.The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Quality of Care-Care Planning, dated 10/2022, revealed the facility would provide resident centered care with the aim of providing individualized Comprehensive/Interdisciplinary Care Plans for each resident. Per the 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 · E2024-12-06 · 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 observation, interview, record review, review of the facility's policy, review of the Facility Assessment Tool, and review of the Payroll-Based Journal Staffing Data Report, the facility failed to have sufficient qualified nursing staff available at all times to provide nursing and related services to meet the residents' needs safely and in a manner that promoted each residents' rights, physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. During interviews with seven interviewable residents, Residents (R) 6, R34, R69, R82, R101, R108, and R116, they all stated they had concerns and care issues as a result of low staffing with wait times from 30 to 45 minutes for assistance. During interviews with Resident Representatives for R81 and R52, they stated they had concerns with low staffing. The findings include: The facility did not provide a policy regarding staffing. Review of the undated policy titled, [Facility] Federal Residents Rights and Facility Responsibilities, indicated the facility must treat each resident with respect and dignity and care for each resident in a manner and…

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

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-12-06 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
    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

    Based on observation, interview, review of medication package inserts, and review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to label drugs and biologicals in accordance with currently accepted professional principles and include the expiration date when applicable for 6 of 6 sampled medication carts. Review of the six medication carts revealed four opened bottles of eyedrops without a date on the container, one bottle of expired potassium chloride tablets, one opened Advair inhaler without a date on the container, three expired bottles of nasal spray, 10 opened bottles of nasal spray without a date on the container, and one opened/used vial of lidocaine that was undated. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Medication Storage, revised 12/2021, revealed medications and biologicals should not be retained longer than recommended by the manufacturer or supplier. Further review revealed once any medication or biological package was opened, the facility should follow manufacturer/supplier guidelines with respect to expiration dates for opened medications. Per…

    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 before2024-12-06 · 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 observation, interview, record review, and review of the facility's policies, the facility failed to implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident to meet the resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that were identified in the comprehensive assessment for 2 of 29 sampled residents, Resident (R)23 and R82. R23 and R82 were not provided Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care per their care plan. Reference F677 The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Quality of Care - Care Planning, dated 10/2022, revealed the facility would provide resident/patient centered care aiming to provide individualized Comprehensive/Interdisciplinary Care Plans for each resident. A care plan was developed to identify strengths or possible barriers to guide the resident in reaching their maximum functional level while encompassing a holistic approach including medical, nursing, psycho-social, nutritional, activities, therapy, spiritual, and educational interventions. Per the policy, the ultimate objective was to assist the resident in…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-12-06 · 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, record review, and review of the facility's policies, the facility failed to ensure residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal hygiene for 2 of 29 sampled residents, Resident (R) 23 and R82. R82 reported showers were not given as needed. Review of R82's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed showers/baths were to be given two days a week, but R82 only received three showers/baths in September 2024, three showers/baths in October 2024, and three showers/baths in November 2024. R23 stated she preferred bed baths, but they were not offered regularly. Review of R23's EMR revealed showers/baths were to be given two days a week, but from 11/07/2024 to 12/05/2024, R23 received only one bath/shower each week. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Bathing and General Hygiene, revised 03/2021, revealed the facility wanted to give patients as much choice as possible in relation to bathing and their general hygiene. Further review…

    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 · D2024-12-06 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    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, review of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) signage, and review of the facility's policies, the facility failed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 3 of 29 sampled residents, Resident (R)10, R231, and R26. Observation on 12/04/2024 revealed R10 was in Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP), but State Trained Nurse Aide (STNA) 11 and STNA12 changed R10's brief and the bed linen without wearing a gown. Observation on 12/04/2024 revealed STNA11 and STNA12 used a gait belt to transfer R10 to a wheelchair, and then they then attempted to use the same gait belt to transfer her roommate, R231. Observations on 12/03/2024 and 12/05/2024 revealed R26's wound vacuum (vac) tubing was on the floor. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Infection Control Transmission Based Precaution, revised 04/2024, revealed when possible,…

    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 · D2019-09-27 · 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 observation, interview, record review and review of facility Policy, it was determined the facility failed to treat each resident with respect and dignity and care for each resident in a manner and in an environment that promotes maintenance of his or her quality of life for one (1) of twenty-six (26) sampled residents (Resident #65). Interview with Resident #65 on 09/24/19, revealed State Registered Nurse Aide (SRNA) #10 told the resident that he/she was wetting his/her pants and vomiting purposefully and it made SRNA #10 mad (date unknown). Further, Resident #65 complained SRNA #10 was sometimes rude and accused him/her of frequently ringing the call light and always ringing the call light at the end of the shift when she needed to leave to get her kids on the school bus. The findings include: Review of the Resident Rights document, undated submitted by the facility for review, revealed each resident shall be treated with consideration, respect, and full recognition of his dignity and individuality, including privacy in treatment and care for his personal needs. 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · C2026-02-11 · tag F0577 — widespread
    Allow residents to easily view the nursing home's survey results and communicate with advocate agencies.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and review of the facility's documents, the facility failed to make the location of the results of the State Inspection book available to residents without asking. In an interview with the Resident Council members on 02/09/2026, they stated they did not know the state survey results were available for their review and did not know the location of the survey results without asking. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all 136 current residents.The findings include: Review of the facility's document Federal Resident Rights, not dated and found in the admission Agreement packet, revealed reports of the facility's survey certifications, complaint investigations, and plans of correction made during the three preceding years be available for any individual to review upon request. Review of the facility's document State Resident Rights, not dated and found in the admission Agreement packet, revealed a resident had the right to examine the results of the most recent survey of the facility conducted by federal or state surveyors and any plan 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.

    Resident Rights 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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to CARESPRING — 16 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 3 of 54.0-1.0 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 53.6-0.6 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 52.4+0.6 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.6-0.6 vs chain
The other 15 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.0★, per CMS)

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

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
CARESPRING HEALTH CARE HOLDINGS LPOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 10/31/2018
BARRY N BORTZ 06042009 TROrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST72%since 10/31/2018
BORTZ FAMILY TRUST/KEY BANK TRUSTEEOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST9%since 10/31/2018
EPPERS, DAVIDIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER15%since 10/31/2018
BROWN, MOLLYIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 03/14/2023
CHIRUMBOLO, CHRISTOPHERIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 10/31/2018
CARESPRING HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT, LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 10/31/2018

CMS files one row per role, so the 8 rows in the source record cover these 7 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

4 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.

$15.2M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+2.5%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$940K
Related-party expense6% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 57%Medicare 10%Other / private 33%

This home reported $940K 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

$341per resident / day
operating cost
$10,367per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$350per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Kentucky Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Kentucky
$9,718/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$11,254/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,528/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 185383. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-11, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next