Liberty Care & Rehabilitation Center
616 S Wallace Wilkinson Boulevard, Liberty, KY 42539 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 97 certified beds · (606) 787-6889 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0609) — most recent Dec 2023
- inspectors cited 4 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (17) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $65,196 in federal fines (most recent 2024-06-14)
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- about 20% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
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
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 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 1 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.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 6.8% | 13.8% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 8.5% | 6.6% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.5% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.4% | 1.6% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 20.8% | 17.7% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.4% | 0.2% | 0.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 3.5% | 3.9% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 6.9% | 14.0% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 35.4% | 29.8% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 96.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.8% | 4.8% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 21.5% | 19.0% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 22.5% | 16.1% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.0% | 1.7% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 90.7% | 83.5% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 16.7% | 24.2% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 23.2% | 13.7% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.70 | 1.94 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 6.88 | 2.14 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ 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.
46.1% 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 110 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 66.7% 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 30 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
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 46.1%CMS range 39.8–55.2 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 14.8%CMS range 11.1–20.8 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | worse 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 discharge | 66.7% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 53.3% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 60.0% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 identified | 88.2% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 discharge | not 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 stay | 2.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 7.8% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.1%CMS range 4.5–12.1 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.02 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS 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
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 97 beds and averages 85.6 residents a day — about 88% occupied, or roughly 11 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 3.47 hrs/resident/day is below 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 2.05 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 2.92 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.69 on weekdays — 21% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.97 to 0.43 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 56% 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.
17 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2023-12-15 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect 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 observation, interview, record review, and review of the facility's policy, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents were protected from abuse, including resident to resident abuse for four (4) of seven (7) sampled residents (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #6, and Resident #7). 1. On 09/05/2023, Resident #2 was observed by staff in Resident #1's bed (a resident of the opposite sex) with his/her hand in Resident #1's genital area. In addition, facility staff confined Resident #1 and Resident #2 to their rooms after the incident in order to allow one (1) staff member to monitor both residents at the same time. 2. On 04/16/2023, Resident #2 was observed by staff sitting on Resident #6's bed with his/her hands under a blanket covering Resident #6's lap. 3. On 09/14/2023, Resident #6 was observed by staff to hit Resident #7 in the chest area. The facility's failure to have an effective system in place to ensure residents were free from abuse, has caused or is likely to cause serious…
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.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2023-12-15 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
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, it was determined the facility failed to ensure allegations of abuse were reported to the State Agencies and local law authorities immediately, but no later than two (2) hours, after the allegation was made for four (4) of seven (7) sampled residents (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #6, and Resident #7). 1. On 09/05/2023, Resident #2 was observed in Resident #1's bed (a resident of the opposite sex) with his/her hand in Resident #1's genital area. However, the facility failed to notify the appropriate State Agencies and local law authorities. 2. On 04/16/2023, Resident #2 was observed sitting on Resident #6's bed with his/her hands under a blanket covering Resident #6's lap. However, the facility failed to notify the appropriate State Agencies and local law authorities. 3. On 09/14/2023, Resident #6 was observed to hit Resident #7 in the chest area. However, the facility failed to notify the appropriate State Agencies and local law…
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.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2023-12-15 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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, review of the facility's policies, review of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual 3.0, and review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Coordinator Job Description, it was determined the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive person-centered care plan was developed and implemented to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs for four (4) of seven (7) sampled residents (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #6, and Resident #7). 1. On 09/05/2023, Resident #2 was observed in Resident #1's bed (a resident of the opposite sex) with his/her hand in Resident #2's genital area. There was no documented evidence Resident #1's Comprehensive Care Plan (CCP) was implemented related to safety checks on 09/05/2023 prior to the incident with Resident #2, even though both residents required redirection earlier in the day due to habitually seeking out contact with one another. Additionally, Resident #2's CCP was 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.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2023-12-15 · tag F0835 — failed to run the facility competently — isolatedAdminister the facility in a manner that enables it to use its resources effectively and efficiently.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, record review, review of the Director of Nursing and Administrator's Job Description, and review of the facility's policies, it was determined the facility failed to ensure it was administered in a manner to use its resources effectively and efficiently to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychological well-being of each resident and to ensure prevention of abuse. Staff interviews and record review revealed the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to residents to prevent abuse, failed to ensure the Comprehensive Care Plans (CCPs) were developed and implemented to prevent abuse, and failed to notify the appropriate State Agencies and local law authorities of allegations of abuse. The facility's failure to have an effective system in place to ensure it was administered in a manner that enabled it to use its resources effectively and efficiently to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident has caused or is likely to cause serious injury, harm, impairment, or…
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.
- Actual harm · G2024-06-14 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, record review, and review of the facility's policies, the facility failed to review and revise the comprehensive care plan (CCP) for three (3) of 42 sampled residents, (Residents (R), R29, R37, and R49). Although staff was aware R37 had a history of grabbing onto the wheelchair wheels of her Evolution Mobility wheelchair when she did not want to be transported by staff, the facility did not revise her Comprehensive Care Plan (CCP) with safety interventions to prevent injury related to this behavior. On 06/09/2024, R37 was being transported by staff to her room when her hand was caught in the wheel spokes of her wheelchair, causing her to sustain a fracture and lacerations to her left index finger. Additionally, R29 sustained a fall on 06/10/2024 when searching for something in his closet, causing a skin tear to his right forearm (RFA). However, there was no documented evidence the resident's CCP was revised to prevent recurrence. Furthermore, R49's CCP, dated 12/07/2023, revised 04/17/2024,…
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.
- Actual harm · G2024-06-14 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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, record review, and review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to ensure each resident received adequate supervision and assistive devices to prevent accidents for two (2) of eight (8) sampled residents reviewed for accidents out of a total sample of 42 residents, Resident (R), R29 and R37. On 06/09/2024, during transfer back to R37's room, staff allowed the resident's left hand to become entangled in the Evolution Mobility (brand of wheelchair) wheelchair's wheel spokes. The resident was transferred to the local Hospital Emergency Department and was noted to have two (2) lacerations on the left second finger. One (1) laceration, measured 2.0 centimeters (cm), with exposed bone in the proximal region of the finger, while the other, measured 1.5 cm, and was located at the medial joint. R37 was subsequently transferred to the University Hospital Emergency Department to seek evaluation by a hand specialist where the resident was diagnosed with an open fracture to her left…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2025-07-09 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure 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, the facility failed to maintain 1 (south side nourishment room refrigerator) of 2 nourishment room refrigerators in a clean and sanitary manner.Findings included: A facility policy titled, Equipment, revised 09/2017, indicated, All foodservice equipment will be clean, sanitary, and in proper working order. The policy specified, 4. All non-food contact equipment will be clean and free of debris. During an observation of the south side nourishment room on 07/07/2025 at 1:13 PM , the ice machine was noted to be dirty and had a pink and black substance on the interior ice deflector shield. The refrigerator had a dried, sticky dark brown liquid substance that had dripped down the interior back wall of the refrigerator. The bottom left drawer of the refrigerator had a dried, sticky, yellow substance in it. There was an unlabeled black lunch box that contained a dried white substance and an empty carton of milk that was stuck to dried white substance in the lunch box. During an observation of the south side nourishment room on…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-09 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure 1 (Resident #34) of 5 sampled residents reviewed for unnecessary medications was assessed for self-administration of medication.Findings included: A facility policy titled, Medication Administration Self-Administration by Resident, dated 01/2023, indicated, Residents who desire to self-administer medications are permitted to do so with a prescriber's order and if the nursing care center's interdisciplinary team has determined that the practice would be safe and the medications are appropriate and safe for self-administration. A Resident Face Sheet indicated the facility admitted Resident #34 on 01/10/2023. According to the Resident Face Sheet, the resident had a medical history that included diagnoses of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and acute and respiratory failure with hypoxia. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 05/12/2025, revealed Resident #34 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2024-06-14 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
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 review of the facility's documents and policies, the facility failed to provide a clean and homelike environment for residents. Observations on 06/10/2024 and 06/11/2024, revealed the facility failed to ensure the interior of the building including residents' room walls and residents' room doors were in good repair. The observations revealed peeling paint or missing paint on the walls and some areas had wood missing from the doors leaving rough edges or gouges. Additionally, residents' rooms and bathrooms had a strong odor of urine. This affected the rooms and/or bathrooms for rooms 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225, and 226. Additionally, the shared bathroom between rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] had two (2) open urinals containing urine, hung on the handrail which were not bagged. One (1) of the urinals was not labeled for identification. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Resident Rights, revised March 2017, revealed the resident had a right…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2024-06-14 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide 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) guidelines, review of the Manufacturer's Instructions for use of the Assure Platinum Blood Glucose Monitoring System and review of the facility's policies, the facility failed to develop and implement an ongoing infection prevention and control program (IPCP) to prevent, recognize, and control the onset and spread of infection to the extent possible. The facility failed to develop a water management program based on nationally accepted standards, specific to their building description, in order to prevent, detect and control water-borne contaminants and reduce Legionella growth. This had the potential to affect the entire population of the facility. Observation of a fingersick revealed staff failed to clean the glucometer according to facility policy and the Manufacturer's Instructions. Observation of medication pass revealed that staff failed to clean the shared blood pressure cuff and the shared pulse…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-14 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
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 make the appropriate Level II Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) referral based on the positive Level 1 PASARR screening results for one (1) of two (2) sampled residents reviewed for PASARR Screening (Resident (R)19) out of a total sample of forty-two residents. The facility assessed R19 to have a positive Level I PASARR screen at admission on [DATE]. This screening indicated the resident required a Level II Screening; however, the facility failed to ensure a Level II Screening was completed in the required timeframe. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR), revised 09/15/2023, revealed a positive Level I screen necessitates an in-depth evaluation of the individual by the state-designated authority, known as PASARR Level II, which must be conducted prior to admission to a nursing facility. PASARR Level II is a comprehensive…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-14 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide 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 facility policy, it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident who was unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for two (2) of 42 sampled residents, Resident #55 and #55 (R55 and R58). R55 complained on 06/12/2024, staff had not brushed her teeth or swabbed her mouth, and she did not receive assistance with mouth care very often. R55 further complained she was given a bed bath twice a week and her privates were washed only when she had a bowel movement. Additionally, observation of R58, on 06/10/2024 and 06/11/2024, revealed his fingernails were long and dirty and he had not been shaved. R58 was wearing the same dark gray shirt both days. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), created on 09/15/2023, revealed ADL assistance would be provided on a level appropriate to the resident's level of functioning and learning and/or the responsible party's level of support…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-14 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to ensure residents requiring respiratory care received care consistent with professional standards of practice for one (1) resident reviewed for respiratory care out of a total of 42 sampled residents, Resident #58 (R58). Observation on 06/10/2024 and 06/11/2024, revealed R58 was receiving oxygen at two (2) liters per minute per nasal cannula as per Physician's Orders. However, the oxygen tubing was not dated. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Oxygen Administration Policy, revised 05/30/2024, revealed oxygen tubing was to be changed monthly or as needed. Review of R58's electronic medical record (EMR) Face Sheet, revealed the facility admitted the resident on 05/06/2024 with diagnoses including congestive heart failure, dementia, benign prostatic hyperplasia, and atherosclerotic heart disease. Review of R58's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 05/13/2024, revealed the resident required continuous oxygen therapy. 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-14 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, record review, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to have prescribed medications available to administer for one (1) of 42 sampled residents, Resident #332 (R322). R322's Physician's Orders, dated 06/07/2024, untimed, revealed orders for rifampin 300 milligrams (mg), two (2) tablets, to be administered daily between 7:00 AM and 11:00 AM. However, the medication was not delivered to the facility until 06/10/2024 at 8:15 PM, four (4) days after it was ordered. Refer to F761. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Medication Administration, General Guidelines, revealed medications were to be prepared only by licensed medical or pharmacy personnel authorized by state regulations to prepare medicine. Review of R322's electronic medical record (EMR) Face Sheet revealed the facility admitted the resident on 06/07/2024 with a diagnosis of latent tuberculosis (TB). Review of R322's Physician's Orders, dated 06/07/2024, untimed, revealed orders for rifampin 300 milligrams (mg), two (2) tablets, to be administered daily between 7:00 AM…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-14 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
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 policy, the facility failed to ensure residents were free of significant medication errors for one (1) of 42 sampled residents, Resident 332 (R322). On 06/07/2024, R322 was prescribed two (2), 300 milligram (mg) tablets of rifampin (antibiotic to treat Tuberculosis) to be given once daily. However, R322 received half the dose (1 table, 300 mg) on 06/11/2024, and 06/12/2024. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Medication Administration General Guidelines, revealed medications were to be administered in accordance with written orders of the prescriber. Further review revealed those giving a medication should verify the medication is correct three (3) times before administering: when pulling the medication package from the medication cart, when the dose was prepared, and before the dose was administered. Review of R322's electronic medical record (EMR) Face Sheet revealed the facility admitted the resident on 06/07/2024 with a diagnosis of latent tuberculosis (TB). Review of R322's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-14 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure 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 review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to ensure drugs and biological's used in the facility were labeled, dated, and stored in accordance with currently accepted professional principles for one (1) of four (4) medication carts. Observation of the North Wing's A-C Medication Cart, on [DATE] at 10:15 AM, revealed two (2) opened vials of Insulin Glargine U100 with no opened date. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Medication Storage, dated 2007, revealed the purpose of the policy was to ensure medications and biological's were stored properly, following the manufacturer's or the provider's pharmacy recommendations, to maintain their integrity and to support safe effective drug administration. Per the policy, medications should remain in packaging provided by the pharmacy. Observation of the North Wing's A-C Medication Cart, on [DATE] at 10:15 AM, revealed two (2) opened vials of Insulin Glargine U100 which were not marked with the opened…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-05-02 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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 The facility failed to ensure implementation of the comprehensive care plan for two (2) of twenty (20) sampled residents (Residents #6 and #78). The care plan for Residents #6 and #78 required staff to ensure the resident's urinary catheter bag was covered. However, observations of the residents revealed the residents did not have urinary catheter drainage bag privacy/dignity covers as was care planned for each resident. The findings include: Review of the facility's Comprehensive Care Plan Policy, revised 07/19/18, revealed care plan interventions were implemented after consideration for the resident's problem areas and their causes. The policy further revealed the interventions would reflect the action, treatment, or procedure to meet the objectives toward achieving the resident's goals. 1. Review of Resident #78's medical record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 03/14/16 with diagnoses of Hypertension, Obstructive Uropathy, Dementia without behaviors, Parkinson's disease, and Depression. 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.
“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.
- 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.
Fines & penalties
$65,196 in federal fines across 3 penalties. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.
- $6,500 — penalty dated 2024-06-14
- $8,044 — penalty dated 2024-06-14
- $50,652 — penalty dated 2023-12-15
- Medicare payment denial — starting 2024-01-20 for 10 days
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 SIGNATURE HEALTHCARE — 67 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 1 of 5 | 3.1 | -2.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 2.9 | -1.9 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 3.9 | +0.1 vs chain |
The other 66 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.1★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 66; lowest-rated first.
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 / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SHC LP HOLDINGS II LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 12/19/2014 |
| JJLA LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 08/01/2013 |
| LPSNF LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 08/01/2013 |
| SPRING HOLDINGS, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/01/2018 |
| WHEATEN LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 08/01/2013 |
| STEIER III, ELMER | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 08/01/2013 |
| KUEHNLEIN, JENNIFER | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 07/21/2022 |
| HARRISON, JOHN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 08/01/2013 |
| SIGNATURE HEALTHCARE LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 08/01/2013 |
6 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 77% 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 $1.9M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 20% 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.
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
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.
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 185408. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-09, 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.