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

Jordan Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center

270 E Clayton Lane, Louisa, KY 41230 · For profit - Corporation · 104 certified beds · (606) 638-4586 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (606) 638-4586 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 13 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • 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
Worth asking about
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)

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.

1/5
CMS overall
1 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 2 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 1 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
40 Medical Hts · (606) 638-0033 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
Grocery
Rt. 7 · (606) 638-3605 · Call to confirm hours
Park
150 E Main St · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
1121 Meadowbrook Ln · (606) 638-3409

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 1 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 1 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 1 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 fell from 4 to 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.

Overall rating1★
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 increased29.6%13.8%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight8.8%6.6%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.7%0.5%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.3%1.6%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%17.7%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.3%0.2%0.1%worse
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury4.6%3.9%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened27.2%14.0%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication21.4%29.8%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%96.2%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers15.6%4.8%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control10.0%19.0%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table24.2%16.1%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.1%1.7%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.1%83.5%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission22.0%24.2%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit24.1%13.7%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.821.941.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days6.302.141.80worse

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

§ 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.

44.6% 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 33 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

44.6%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.8%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
50.0%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.19U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.11hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.03hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.06hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 50.0% 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 20 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 0.19 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 20% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 17% 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 SNF44.6%CMS range 31.4–58.951.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.8%CMS range 6.8–20.210.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge50.0%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 discharge30.0%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 discharge40.0%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 settingnot reported — Newly certified nursing home with less than 12-15 months of data available or the nursing home opened less than 6 months ago, and there were no data to submit or claims 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 stay0.0%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 worsened10.0%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 hospitalization7.1%CMS range 3.8–15.17.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.191.02Oct 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

0.95
RN hours/ resident / day
0.48
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.17
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.60
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.64
RN hoursweekends
47.4%
Total nursing turnover
22.2%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 104 beds and averages 88.6 residents a day — about 85% occupied, or roughly 15 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 3.60 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.95 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.17 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.39 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.69 on weekdays — 8% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.08 to 0.64 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 47% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

5
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-04-16)
7
at the previous standard inspection (2025-06-05)

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.

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

  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-22 · 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 policy it was determined the facility failed to follow the care plans for 1 of 3 sampled residents, Resident (R) 4. Resident 4 was identified as requiring a mechanical lift for transfers on her care plan. On 05/21/2026, during interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 1, she stated CNA8 and CNA9 transferred R4 to the bed without using a mechanical lift on 05/08/2026.The findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled, Comprehensive Care Plans, 2025 revision, revealed it was the policy of the facility to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with resident rights, that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs and services that were identified in the resident's comprehensive assessment and meet professional standards of quality.Review of R4's admission Record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 01/16/2023 with diagnoses to include dementia, stroke, 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2026-04-16 · tag F0552 — pattern
    Ensure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview, record review, and review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to ensure each resident's right to be informed in advance, by the physician or other practitioner or professional, of the risks and benefits of proposed care, of treatment and treatment alternatives or treatment options and to choose the alternative or option he or she preferred for 6 of 28 sampled residents, Resident (R) 7, R9, R10, R28, R76, and R82.Review of each resident's document Behavior Modification Consent revealed the name of the medication, risks and benefits of the medication, and treatment alternatives/options were not specified.The findings include:Review of the facility's document Resident Rights, undated and found in the facility's admission packet, revealed the resident had a right to be informed of and participate in their treatment, which included the right to be fully informed in advance of the risks and benefits of proposed care, of treatment, and treatment alternatives.1. Review of R82's admission Record revealed the facility admitted R82 on 05/11/2012 with diagnoses 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
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-04-16 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, record review, information from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and review of the facility's policies, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 7 of 40 sampled and supplemental residents, Resident (R) 66, R77, R35, R13, R42, R71, and R33.R66 was diagnosed with a communicable skin infection on 04/10/2026 and a contact precautions order was placed by the physician. However, observation on 04/14/2026 revealed no transmission-based precaution signage posted outside R66's room, and after Contact Precaution signage was posted, staff entered the room without donning (putting on) required personal protective equipment (PPE). Observation on 04/14/2026 revealed the common sinks shared between two resident-occupied rooms by R77, R35, and R13 were completely covered in clear plastic and inaccessible for use.Observations 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-16 · 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, review of the facility's job description, and review of the facility's document and 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 that were identified in the comprehensive assessment for 3 of 9 sampled residents, Resident (R) 10, R17, and R28, related to falls.The findings include:Review of the facility's undated policy titled, Comprehensive Care Plans [CCP], revealed it was the policy of the facility to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with resident rights that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs and all services that were identified in the resident's comprehensive assessment and met professional standards of quality but were not provided due to the resident's exercise of his/her right to refuse. The…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-16 · 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 policy, the facility failed to provide necessary activities of daily living care to maintain 1 of 2 sampled dependent residents in a clean manner, Resident (R) 11. The facility failed to ensure R11 had clean clothing, clean bed linens, and grooming assistance. The findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled, Activities of Daily Living [ADL] dated 2025, revealed the facility would provide care and services consistent with each resident's comprehensive assessment, needs, and choices. The policy further stated residents unable to perform activities of daily living would receive necessary services for bathing, dressing, grooming, and personal hygiene.Review of R11's admission Record revealed the facility admitted R11 on 10/18/2024 with diagnoses of dementia, atrial fibrillation, and limited mobility.Review of R11's quarterly Minimum Data Set [MDS], with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 02/12/2026, revealed R11 was severely cognitively impaired, had no Brief Interview for Mental Status [BIMS]…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-16 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolated
    Provide activities to meet all resident's needs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, record review, review of the Activity Director job description, and review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to provide an ongoing program to support the residents' choice of activities based on their comprehensive assessment, care plan, and preferences, specifically one-to-one interaction, as directed for 2 of 2 sampled residents, Resident (R) 12 and R13. Observations from 04/14/26 through 04/16/2026 revealed R12 and R13 were in bed, dressed in bed clothing or a shirt only. No observations were made of staff providing one-to-one interaction.The findings include:Review of the undated policy titled Activities, revealed the facility provided an ongoing program to support residents in their choice of activities based on their comprehensive assessment, care plan, and preferences. It also stated individual activities would be designed to support their physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being and encourage interaction within the community. Review of the undated job description for the Activity Director (AD) revealed it was the…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2025-06-05 · tag F0809 — failed to serve meals on a reasonable schedule — widespread
    Ensure meals and snacks are served at times in accordance with resident’s needs, preferences, and requests. Suitable and nourishing alternative meals and snacks must be provided for residents who want to eat at non-traditional times or outside of scheduled meal times.
    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, review of the facility's daily bedtime snack list, and review of the scientific article referenced by the National Institute of Health (NIH), the facility failed to provide substantial snacks to residents who needed assistance at meals as determined by review of the time between supper and breakfast was greater than 14 hours. Review of the facility meal service times, not dated, revealed total assist residents received supper at 4:30 PM and breakfast at 7:00 AM. The findings include: Review of the scientific article referenced by the National Institute of Health (NIH) in Nutrients titled What is Nutritious Snack Food? A Comparison of Expert and Layperson Assessments? 2017 [DATE]; 9(8):874 revealed the definition of a nutritious snack that contained preferred nutrients was food with a high percentage of essential nutrients relative to the energy content. Observation on 06/04/2025 at 8:10 AM revealed there was no ice cream observed in the [NAME] Unit nourishment refrigerator…

    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 · F2025-06-05 · 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, review of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) web site, and review of the facility's policies, the facility failed to store and serve food in a safe manner as determined by observations during the initial tour on 05/02/2025. These observations revealed food not labeled or dated in the dry storage, walk-in refrigerator, and the freezer. In addition, observations of the supper meal tray line on 06/02/2025 at 4:16 PM revealed the Dietary Manger and [NAME] improperly used the food thermometer, and Dietary Aide 1 used open utility carts with a wet top shelf. This had the potential to affect 92 residents that received food from the kitchen. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Food Storage, dated 2010, revealed all stock must be rotated with each new stock received. Per the policy, rotating stock was essential to ensure the freshness and highest quality of all foods. The policy stated old stock was always used first (first in-first out method), and food should be dated as it was placed onto the shelf. Review of the…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-06-05 · tag F0576 — pattern
    Ensure residents have reasonable access to and privacy in their use of communication methods.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview, record review, review of the Postal Service Reform Act of 2022, and review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to ensure residents the right to receive mail, letters, and packages delivered to the facility. In interviews with Resident Council members, they stated they did not receive mail on Saturdays. This practice had the potential to affect all current 92 residents. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Resident's Rights For Residents in [State] Long-Term Care Facilities, not dated, revealed the resident had a right to exercise his or her rights as a resident of the facility and as a citizen of the United States. Review of the Postal Service Reform Act of 2022 (PSRA) confirmed mandated six-day mail delivery services (Monday through Saturday). In an interview with Resident (R) 71 during the Resident Council meeting on 06/03/2025 at 10:00 AM, the resident stated there was no one to bring mail to residents on Saturdays. In an interview with R12 during the Resident Council meeting on 06/03/2025 at 10:00 AM, she stated she knew 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
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-05 · 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 policy, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights, that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that were identified in the comprehensive assessment, for 1 of 24 sampled residents, Resident (R) 81. R81's Comprehensive Care Plan (CCP) stated his preference for individual activities. It did not, however, reflect any history of service-related, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) potential triggers, or how to address them. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Care Planning - Interdisciplinary Team, revised 09/2013, stated the facility's Care Planning/Interdisciplinary Team was responsible for the development of an individualized comprehensive care plan (CCP) for each resident. Review of R81's admission Record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 03/26/2025 with diagnoses of end stage renal disease…

    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 · D2025-06-05 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) guidelines, the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as was possible to ensure the safety of 1 of 5 residents reviewed for vaping safety. Observation on 06/02/2025 revealed R62 using a vape (e-cigarette) while wearing a nasal cannula that was delivering four liters of oxygen (O2) with R44 exposed to R62's second hand vaping aerosol. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Electronic Cigarettes Policy [e-cig, vape, vapor pen], undated, revealed the vaping policy did not address oxygen use. Further review revealed there was no provision for the storage of Nicotine liquid (e-juice), and the policy did not address the exposure risk of others to second hand smoke. Review of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) guidelines, Tips to Help Avoid Vape Battery Fires or Explosions, dated 04/12/2024, revealed there could be added dangers, for example, if a vape battery caught fire or exploded near flammable…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-05 · 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

    Based on observation, interview, review of the manufacturers' directions for use (DFU), and review of the facility's policies, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 of 24 sampled residents, Resident (R) 46. Observation on 06/03/2025 revealed R46's tube feeding, tubing, and continuous bladder irrigation tubing were left uncovered when disconnected from the resident. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Infection Control Program, last review date 08/24/2024, revealed the primary purpose of the facility's infection control program policies and procedures was to establish guidelines to follow to provide a safe and sanitary and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of disease and infection. It also stated it was the responsibility of the process improvement (PI) committee, through the Infection Control…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-06-05 · tag F0926 — failed to keep the home smoke-free / fire-safe — isolated
    Have policies on smoking.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, review of a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) document, and review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to develop and implement effective policies to ensure the smoking safety for all residents that used electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes or vapes) for 1 of 5 residents that used e-cigarettes, Resident (R) 62 and R44, who was exposed to R62's second hand vaping aerosol. Observation on 06/02/2025 at 2:50 PM revealed R62, with R44 present, using a vape while wearing a nasal canula that was delivering four liters of oxygen (O2), and the facility's vaping policy did not address oxygen use or the exposure risk of others to second hand smoke. Refer to F689 The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Electronic Cigarettes Policy [e-cig, vape, vapor pen], undated, revealed the vaping policy did not address oxygen use. Further review revealed there was no provision for the storage of Nicotine liquid (e-juice), and the policy did not address the exposure risk of others to second hand smoke. Review of a CDC document…

    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.

    Environmental 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.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
MHC PROPERTIES, LLCOrganizationDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2020
MABEL MCKENZIE ESTATEOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 03/09/2025
BAILEY, BETHIndividualINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2020
MCKENZIE, DAVIDIndividualINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2020
BAILEY, TERRYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 10/01/2020
KLEIN, JEREMYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 12/31/2012
LEHMAN, JANINEIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/16/2025
WELLS, GREGORYIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/16/2025
WELLS, JACKIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/16/2025
SKAGGS, TERRYIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2008

CMS files one row per role, so the 23 rows in the source record cover these 10 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

2 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.

$5.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-5.4%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 84%Medicare 5%Other / private 11%

About 84% 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. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

Cost & finances

$274per resident / day
operating cost
$8,329per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$260per 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 185131. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-16, 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