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

The Willows at Springhurst

3001 N. Hurstbourne Parkway, Louisville, KY 40241 · For profit - Corporation · 52 certified beds · (502) 412-3775 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (502) 412-3775 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 11 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
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
Worth asking about
  • its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)

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.

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 2 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 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

Hospital
Urgent care / clinic
9451 Westport Road, Suite 122B · (502) 446-5555 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
9702 Westport Rd · (502) 425-1434 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Kroger<0.1 mi
9501 Westport Rd · (502) 425-0065 · Call to confirm hours
Park
2300 Hounz Ln · (502) 456-8100 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 5 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 3 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 rating3★
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 increased12.0%13.8%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight1.9%6.6%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder1.8%0.5%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection4.6%1.6%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms1.0%17.7%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury0.9%3.9%3.3%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication39.3%29.8%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine92.6%96.2%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.5%4.8%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control23.2%19.0%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table8.7%16.1%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.7%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine90.4%83.5%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission23.5%24.2%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit7.2%13.7%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.061.941.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.702.141.80typical

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.

69.5% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 266 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

69.5%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.1%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
48.8%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.55U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.24hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.22hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.10hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 48.8% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 160 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 0.55 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 85% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 18% 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 SNF69.5%CMS range 64.3–74.351.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.1%CMS range 8.2–14.410.7%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 discharge48.8%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 discharge51.9%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 discharge47.5%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified99.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge97.1%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay1.5%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 worsened1.0%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 hospitalization7.8%CMS range 5.1–12.17.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.991.02Oct 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

1.28
RN hours/ resident / day
0.58
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.45
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.32
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.87
RN hoursweekends
38.6%
Total nursing turnover
42.9%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 52 beds and averages 48.8 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 3 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 4.32 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.28 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.453 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.78 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.53 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.45 to 0.87 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 39% 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

4
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-12-03)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2021-09-03)

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.

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

  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-12-03 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to prepare, store, and serve food under sanitary conditions for 51 of 52 residents who received food from the kitchen. The findings include: Review of the facility's Hair Restraint Policy' revised date 07/09/2025, revealed all dining service employees were required to wear hair restraints as required by the Federal Food Code, Hair Restraints 2-402.11. Review of the Federal Food Code dated 2009, revealed food employees shall wear hair restraints such as hats, hair covering or nets that are designed and worn to effectively keep their hair from contacting exposed food. Observation, on 09/16/2025 at 2:14 PM, revealed the Cook's hair net was not covering the side or back of her hair. There was approximately eight inches of hair without covering.During interview with the [NAME] at the time of the observation, she stated employees were to wear a hair net that covered all the hair when they were in the kitchen and around food. She further stated, I have a lot of hair. She also stated the facility discussed…

    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 · D2025-12-03 · tag F0644 — isolated
    Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to refer residents with newly evident or possible serious mental disorder, intellectual disability, or a related condition for Level II Pre-admission screening and resident review (PASRR) evaluation for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident (R) 5).The findings include: The facility did not provide a policy specific to PASRR evaluation. Review of Resident (R) 5's, Face Sheet revealed the facility originally admitted the resident on 07/01/2022 with the most recent re-admission date of 11/25/2024 with diagnoses including acute and chronic respiratory failure, bipolar disorder, dementia, major depressive disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and paranoid personality disorder. Review of R5's, Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR), dated 07/01/2022 revealed diagnoses of major depressive disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and dementia. Further review revealed a Level II referral was not indicated at that time. Review of R5's Comprehensive Care…

    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 · D2025-12-03 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolated
    Ensure 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 facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free of any significant medication errors and that medications were received at the right time for 1 of 8 sampled residents (Resident (R) 6).The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Medication Administration Times Procedural Guidelines, revised 12/01/2021 and reviewed 12/17/2024 revealed guidelines for determination of medication administration times based on a resident's preference unless a specific time is designated by the attending physician. Review of the facility policy titled, Specific Medication Administration Procedures/Injectable Medication Administration, revised 11/2018 revealed the procedure included guidelines to check the five rights (right patient, right drug, right route, right dose, right time) when medication selected, as dose is prepared, after dose prepared, before medication is put away, and before injection is administered. Review of Resident (R) 6's, Face Sheet revealed the facility admitted the resident on 02/20/2025…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-12-03 · 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, record review, and review of facility policies, the facility failed to follow infection prevention and control practices to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infection for 1 of 1 resident observed for subcutaneous injection administration. (Resident (R) 6.The findings include: Review of facility policy, Infection Prevention and Control Program, revised 11/15/2021 and reviewed 12/17/2024 revealed its purpose was to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the transmission of communicable diseases and infections. Review of the facility policy, Specific Medication Administration Procedures/Injectable Medication Administration, revised 11/2018 revealed examination gloves were part of the equipment required for injectable medication administration. Further review revealed procedures for subcutaneous injections included to sanitize hands with approved hand sanitizer and put on gloves prior to…

    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 · Fcited before2021-09-03 · 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, record review, and review of the facility's policy, it was determined the facility failed to store, prepare, and distribute food under sanitary conditions and in accordance with professional standards for food safety. Initial tour of the facility revealed undated and opened containers of salad dressing, and in the freezer unopened vegan trays, and meat and cheese packages. Additional observation of the freezer revealed a container of strawberries covered with a gray substance. Further observations revealed the freezer temperature log was incomplete for the dates of 08/20/2021 through 08/30/2021. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy, Food Labeling and Dating, dated March 2019, revealed any food product removed from its original container, or with a broken seal, or had been processed in any way, would be labeled. Per review, the label was to include the item's name, the date and time the food was labeled, the used by date, and initials of the person labeling the item. Review of the facility's policy titled, Refrigerators, dated May…

    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 · E2021-09-03 · tag F0730 — pattern
    Observe each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview, record review, and review of the facility policy, it was determined the facility failed to ensure performance reviews were completed every twelve (12) months, for six (6) of six (6) nurse aides personnel files reviewed. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy, Quarterly Wage Investment Timeline, undated, revealed employee eligibility for increases was dependent on disciplinary actions incurred resulting from performance and performance improvement plans, etc. Review of the facility's Skills Check-Off sheets revealed the facility evaluated employees on Hand Washing, and Guidelines for Donning and Doffing Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). The facility did not provide a policy specific to Nurse Aid performance evaluation. The facility failed to provide documented evidence of performance evaluations of nurse aides for six (6) of six (6) nurse aide files sampled. Interview, on 09/03/2021 at 9:40 AM, with the Staff Development Coordinator (SDC) revealed the nurse aide employment anniversary was utilized to meet training and educational timeframe's. She…

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

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2021-09-03 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review and facility policy review it was determined the facility failed to ensure resident care plans were implemented for one (1) of nineteen (19) sampled residents, Resident #14, related to use of a palm guard. Observations from 08/30/3031 through 09/03/2021, revealed no palm guard in place to the resident's right hand as per the Comprehensive Care Plan. The findings include: Review of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) RAI Version 3.0 Manual, dated October 2019, revealed the Comprehensive Care Plan was an interdisciplinary communication tool. Per review, the Comprehensive Care Plan described the services provided to a resident to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. In addition, review revealed the Comprehensive Care Plan was to reflect the care a resident received. Review of the facility's policy, Splints and Orthotic Devices, undated, revealed an orthotic device was used to support a…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2021-09-03 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review it was determined the facility failed to ensure quality of care for one (1) of nineteen (19) sampled residents, Resident #14, related to use of a palm guard. Observations each day of the survey revealed no palm guard present on the resident per care plan intervention and therapy recommendation. The findings include: Review of the facility policy Splints and Orthotic Devices, undated, revealed orthotic devices were used to support a joint or body part, inhibit abnormal tone, reduce pain, or position the joint in a functional position. Orthotic devices were used for joint range of motion, to reduce pain, reduce effects of disease, and reduce risk for skin breakdown or joint deformity. Review of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) RAI Version 3.0 Manual, dated October 2019, revealed the comprehensive care plan (CP) was an interdisciplinary communication tool that described the services provided to a resident to attain 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2021-09-03 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — isolated
    Dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
    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 unused kitchen equipment was removed and disposed of when no longer in use. Observation revealed the outside delivery area of the facility contained six (6) commercial coffee makers/dispensers, two (2) commercial beverage dispensers, an ice chest, a commercial toaster, a countertop microwave, three (3) empty milk crates, a portable gate, a mop and bucket full of liquid, and a wood pallet. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy entitled, Garbage and Refuse, dated 05/31/2016, revealed all garbage and refuse was stored and disposed of daily. Observation, on 09/01/2021 at 8:49 AM, revealed the facility's outside delivery area contained the following: a mop bucket filled with liquid and a mop; six (6) commercial coffee makers/dispensers; two (2) commercial beverage dispensers; three (3) black, empty milk crates; a countertop microwave oven; a blender base; a yellow rolling collapsible gate; a horizontal ice chest; a commercial toaster with rust on the top; a hose sprayer;…

    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 · D2021-03-05 · tag F0838 — failed to assess facility resources and resident needs — isolated
    Conduct and document a facility-wide assessment to determine what resources are necessary to care for residents competently during both day-to-day operations (including nights and weekends) and emergencies.
    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-wide assessment, CMS Form 672, and policy review it was determined the facility failed to accurately determine the number of residents in the facility with respiratory diagnoses or care needs. Review of the facility's resident population included three (3) residents with tracheostomy care and ten (10) resident who required a closed unit and isolation for COVID-19 care. Review of the facility's assessment found the facility failed to include the residents for the determination of the competent care to meet the needs of the resident population. The findings included: Review of the Facility Assessment Tool, dated 08/18/2017, revealed Long Term Care (LTC) facilities conducted the assessment to document and annually review a facility-wide assessment, which included both their resident population and the resources the facility needed to care for their residents. The purpose included to determine the necessary resources to care for residents competently with…

    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.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2021-03-05 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — isolated
    Keep all essential equipment working safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview and policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure safe, operating conditions of the fryer and freezer in the kitchen. Observation on 03/02/2021 at 8:28 AM, revealed two (2) boxes in close proximity to the ceiling of the walk-in freezer. Observation on 03/03/2021 at 1:35 PM, revealed liquid substance on the floor under fryer and four (4) boxes in the walk in freezer within close proximity to the ceiling. The findings include: Review of the document titled, Emergency Operations Plan, Hazardous Materials or Chemical Spills, undated, revealed hazardous materials included substances which were flammable and combustible. The policy revealed the proper steps for facility staff members during a hazardous materials emergency. Review of the document titled, Fryer, undated, revealed the cleaning process for the fryer which included draining the fryer, using cleaning solution, rinsing the fryer twice after cleansing solution, and replacement of oil after the fryer has dried. Review of the documents titled, Aides Cleaning List, dated December 2020…

    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.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to TRILOGY HEALTH SERVICES — 123 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 3 of 54.2-1.2 vs chain
Health inspection 2 of 53.5-1.5 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 53.3+0.7 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 54.8+0.2 vs chain
The other 122 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.2★, per CMS)
1 of 5Heritage TheFindlay, OH 1 of 5The Oaks Rehabilitation and Healthcare CenterZanesville, OH 2 of 5Homewood Health CampusLebanon, IN 2 of 5Violet Springs Health CampusPickerington, OH 2 of 5Woodmont Health CampusBoonville, IN 3 of 5Cobblestone Crossings Health CampusTerre Haute, IN 3 of 5Creasy Springs Health CampusLafayette, IN 3 of 5Cumberland Pointe Health CampusWest Lafayette, IN 3 of 5Forest Park Health CampusRichmond, IN 3 of 5Franciscan Health Care CenterLouisville, KY 3 of 5Greenleaf Health CampusElkhart, IN 3 of 5River Terrace Health CampusMadison, IN 3 of 5Scenic Hills At The MonasteryFerdinand, IN 3 of 5Smiths Mill Health CampusNew Albany, OH 3 of 5Springhurst Health CampusGreenfield, IN 3 of 5Springs Of Richmond, TheRichmond, IN 3 of 5St Mary Healthcare CenterLafayette, IN 3 of 5Stonegate Health CampusLapeer, MI 3 of 5Sun Prairie Senior LivingSun Prairie, WI 3 of 5Taylor Springs Health CampusGahanna, OH 3 of 5The Willows at Fritz FarmLexington, KY 3 of 5The Willows at HamburgLexington, KY 3 of 5The Willows at HarrodsburgHarrodsburg, KY 3 of 5Villages At Oak Ridge, TheWashington, IN 3 of 5Waunakee Valley Senior LivingWaunakee, WI 3 of 5Wellbrooke Of CarmelCarmel, IN 4 of 5Arlington Place Health CampusIndianapolis, IN 4 of 5Ashford Place Health CampusShelbyville, IN 4 of 5Aspen Place Health CampusGreensburg, IN 4 of 5Avalon Springs Health CampusValparaiso, IN 4 of 5Bethany Pointe Health CampusAnderson, IN 4 of 5Blair Ridge Health CampusPeru, IN 4 of 5Bridgepointe Health CampusVincennes, IN 4 of 5Cedar Creek Health CampusLowell, IN 4 of 5Clearvista Lake Health CampusIndianapolis, IN 4 of 5Forest Springs Health CampusLouisville, KY 4 of 5Glen Oaks Health CampusNew Castle, IN 4 of 5Glen Ridge Health CampusLouisville, KY 4 of 5Meadows Of Delphos TheDelphos, OH 4 of 5Meadows Of Ottawa TheOttawa, OH

Showing 40 of 122; 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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
CONTINENTAL MERGER SUB LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 01/03/2022
NORTHSTAR HEALTHCARE INCOME INCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 01/03/2022
NORTHSTAR HEALTHCARE INCOME OPERATING PARTNERSHIP LPOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 01/03/2022
TRILOGY HOLDINGS NT-HCI, LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 01/03/2022
CORBIN, KATHYIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 01/10/2011
FIGHTMASTER, LISAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 12/01/2015
SIECKERT, CARLAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 01/03/2021
BUFFORD, RANDALLIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 12/01/1997
BARNEY, LEIGHIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 11/01/2019
BRYANT, WILLIAMIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/05/2016
CONNER, GREGORYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 06/03/2021
DAVIS, DAVIDIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 08/21/2017
PROSKY, DANNYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 12/01/2015
STREIFF, MATHIEUIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 12/01/2015
TRILOGY MANAGEMENT SERVICES LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/03/2022

CMS files one row per role, so the 16 rows in the source record cover these 15 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

5 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.

$13.3M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-13.0%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.5M
Related-party expense10% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 19%Medicare 10%Other / private 71%

This home reported $1.5M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

Cost & finances

$352per resident / day
operating cost
$10,696per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$311per 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 185305. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-03, 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