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

Valhalla Post Acute

300 Shelby Station Drive, Louisville, KY 40245 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 162 certified beds · (502) 254-0009 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (502) 254-0009 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0600) — cited Feb 20244 immediate-jeopardy citations CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)$17,963 in federal fines
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Feb 2024
  • inspectors recorded 4 serious findings as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (17) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $17,963 in federal fines (most recent 2024-02-06)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
  • nursing-staff turnover (70%) runs well above the national median (45%)

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.

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

Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 4 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 — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Urgent care / clinic
13328 Shelbyville Rd · (502) 254-2223 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
13807 English Villa Dr · (502) 254-2535 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
14010 Shelbyville Rd · (502) 253-4565 · Call to confirm hours
Park
15712 Shelbyville Rd · (502) 584-0350 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
14001 Shelbyville Rd · (502) 244-2704

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 4 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 improved from 1 to 2 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 rating2★
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 increased6.6%13.8%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight5.1%6.6%5.4%typical
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.2%0.5%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%1.6%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms97.3%17.7%6.5%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury0.2%3.9%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened2.2%14.0%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication24.5%29.8%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine96.9%96.2%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.2%4.8%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control14.7%19.0%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table11.2%16.1%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.8%1.7%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine90.9%83.5%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission25.4%24.2%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit12.9%13.7%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.281.941.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.892.141.80typical

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.

63.7% 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 279 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

63.7%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
13.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
72.0%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.45U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.23hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.19hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.03hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 72.0% 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 93 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 0.45 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 75% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 25% 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 SNF63.7%CMS range 58.2–67.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF13.2%CMS range 10.6–16.110.7%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 discharge72.0%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 discharge47.3%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 discharge52.7%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge100.0%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 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 worsened1.3%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 5.2–10.67.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.841.02Oct 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

0.42
RN hours/ resident / day
0.98
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.33
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.73
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.19
RN hoursweekends
69.8%
Total nursing turnover
40.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 162 beds and averages 155.1 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 7 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.73 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.42 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.33 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 3.28 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.92 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.52 to 0.19 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 70% is well above 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

1
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-03-20)
2
at the previous standard inspection (2025-05-14)

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.

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

  • Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-05-17 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to provide a safe environment for residents. The facility's deficient practice had the potential to affect 24 of 24 residents who resided on the English Oak Terrace Unit. On 05/01/2024 a staff member was arrested under suspicion of arson after a fire occurred in Resident (R14) and R466's room. The facility failed to protect residents when a staff member, the Social Services Assistant (SSA), voiced frustration and threatened Resident (R) 14. On 05/01/2024 at approximately 4:45 PM, the Social Services Assistant (SSA) exited an elevator and stated to Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 2 he was going to get rid of R14. Subsequently, on 05/01/2024 the SSA was arrested for suspicion of arson after a fire occurred in the room of R14 and R466. Additionally, the fire was set while R14's roommate was in the room, R466. It was determined the facility's non-compliance with one or more requirements of participation caused or was likely…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-02-06 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY The facility alleged removal of the immediacy of the IJ on 01/01/2022 as follows: 1. On 05/10/2021, Resident #112 was assessed using the Elopement Risk Assessment by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #9. The resident was placed on 15-minute checks until he/she went to the hospital on [DATE]. The resident ' s care plan was updated. The resident has not had further elopements since 05/09/2021. 2. On 05/09/2021, the facility reviewed the State Operations Manual (SOM) and again on 02/03/2023, to go over the definition of elopement. The Interdisciplinary team (IDT), Administrator, Assistant Director of Nursing, Nurse Mangers, and Social Services reviewed the Wander Risk Assessment. Residents that were assessed to require a Wander-guard bracelet were placed in the binder located at each nursing station and front desk. Further, the residents assessed to be an elopement risk, care plans were updated. 3. On 05/10/2021, education began with all the facility staff. The Director of Nursing (DON) provided the education, and it…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2024-02-06 · tag F0835 — failed to run the facility competently — isolated
    Administer the facility in a manner that enables it to use its resources effectively and efficiently.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, record reviews, and facility document and policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that the Administrator of the facility took proper measures to ensure the safety of a resident for 1 (Resident #112) of three (3) sampled residents reviewed for elopement. Specifically, Resident #112, whom the facility assessed to have moderately impaired cognition and developed a care plan that directed staff to supervise the resident as needed, left the facility without notifying staff on 05/09/2021. The facility failed to notify the police that the resident was missing until approximately 18 hours after the resident left the facility. On 05/10/2021 at approximately 10:00 AM, Resident #112 was found on the side of a highway. It was reported that Resident #112, who had been walking around all night, was transported by local Emergency Medical Services (EMS) to a local hospital for cold exposure. It was determined the provider's non-compliance with one or more requirements of participation…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2024-02-06 · tag F0837 — isolated
    Establish a governing body that is legally responsible for establishing and implementing policies for managing and operating the facility and appoints a properly licensed administrator responsible for managing the facility.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, record reviews, and facility document and policy review, it was determined the facility's governing body failed to ensure policies regarding the management and operation of the facility were implemented. The governing body was aware that on 05/09/2021, at approximately 6:00 PM, a resident whom the facility assessed to have moderate cognitive impairment left the facility and was missing. The facility failed to implement its missing resident protocol and notify the police of the missing resident. The governing body was aware that the facility concluded Resident #112 left against medical advice (AMA) and took no further action to find the resident. The police found Resident #112 along a highway (unknown location) on 05/10/2021 at approximately 10:00 AM, approximately eighteen (18) hours after the resident left the facility. Emergency Medical Services (EMS) transported Resident #112 to a local hospital for cold exposure. It was determined the provider's non-compliance with one or more…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · E2026-03-20 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
    Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide food that was palatable. This had the potential to affect all residents receiving meals in the facility. The findings include:Review of the facility's Food and Nutrition Services policy (Administrative Policy and Procedure Manual for Long-Term Care, Version 2.3, October 2017) revealed the facility policy included that the facility will make reasonable efforts to accommodate resident choices and preferences; staff inspected food trays to ensure the correct meal was provided to residents and that food was served safe and at appetizing temperatures. Other provisions included nursing staff reported to the food service manager delivery of incorrect meals or meals that did not appear palatable; nourishing snacks would be available to residents 24 hours daily; and the food services department will offer a variety of foods from the basic food groups at each meal and provide access to nourishing snacks. Further review revealed resident input was considered during meal planning. A test tray observation during…

    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 · D2025-08-08 · tag F0687 — failed to care for feet properly — isolated
    Provide appropriate foot care.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, record review, and review of facility's policies, it was determined the facility failed to ensure that one (1) out of twenty-one (21) sampled residents, Resident (R)5, received proper treatment and care to maintain mobility and good foot health by failing to provide foot care and treatment, in accordance with professional standards of practice, including to prevent complications from the resident's medical condition(s). The findings included:Review of the facility's policy titled, Wound Care, dated 10/2010, revealed that the purpose of the policy was to provide guidelines for the care of wounds to promote healing. Further review revealed that staff should verify the physicians order prior to wound care. Per the policy, documentation of wound care should be recorded in the resident's medical record.Review of R5's Face Sheet revealed that he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including tobacco use, hypertension, diabetes mellitus type II with hyperglycemia (high blood sugar)…

    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 · Fcited before2025-05-14 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY AMENDEDBased on observation, interview, and review of the facilities policy the facility failed to store and prepare food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety which had the potential to affect 144 residents who consumed food from the kitchen. The findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled, [NAME] Corporate Dieticians Policy 152-Food Storage, revised 07/11/2024, revealed opened products should be placed in seamless plastic or glass containers with tight fitting lids and labeled and dated. Also to rotate stock utilizing first in and first out rotation. Further inquiry revealed no further policies on food handling. Observation on 05/11/2025 at 5:00 PM revealed in a walk-in refrigerator an opened container of a 2-pound roast beef with no epiration date. Further observations revealed a ham labelled as cheese wrapped in plastic wrap and dated 05/08/2025; pepperoni in plastic wrap undated and opened Two pieces of melon, wrapped separately in plastic wrap but undated 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-14 · tag F0730 — isolated
    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 facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a performance review was completed for every Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) at least once every 12 months for four out of five CNA's personnel records reviewed, CNA7, CNA8, CNA9, and CNA10. The finding include: Review of the facility's policy, titled, Performance Evaluations, revised, September 2020, revealed, The job performance of each employee shall be reviewed and evaluated at least annually. Additionally, the policy stated, A performance evaluation will be completed on each employee at least annually thereafter. The performance evaluation meeting will occur at the same time as the employee's compensation review. Furthermore, the policy indicated performance evaluations may be used to improve the quality of the employee's work performance. Review of CNA7's personnel file revealed a hire date of 12/07/2023. For dates of 12/07/2023-12/07/2024, there was a completed paper packet of annual training for 13 hours. However, there was no documentation for a performance evaluation in that…

    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 · Ecited before2024-04-20 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — pattern
    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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and review of the facility's policy, it was determined the facility failed to provide a safe environment for residents. One sampled resident (Resident (R) 57) was not assessed for smoking, in accordance with facility policy. This non-smoking facility failed to ensure that incendiary devices (lighters) were not accessible to R57, who was involved in two separate instances of fire in his room. R57 was found to be in possession of cigarettes and a lighter after a fire in his bathroom on 04/15/2024. The following day, 04/16/2024, R57 had a fire in his closet. This failure to assure lighters were secured had the potential to affect six additional sampled residents (R40, R503, R14, R87, R504, and R506) as well as up to 58 residents who resided on one of four units (English Oak Terrace (EOT)) which was evacuated due to the fires, out of a total census of 150 residents. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy, Smoking Policy - Residents, revised 02/28/2024, revealed that…

    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 · Fcited before2024-02-06 · 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 observations, interviews, and facility policy review it was determined that the facility failed to ensure staff stored, prepared, and served foods for 152 of 152 residents in a sanitary manner. Kitchen staff failed to implement proper hand hygiene practices during meal service to prevent potential contamination. Staff failed to ensure food items were not contaminated during food preparation when staff used a knife while handling raw meat, then without sanitizing, used the same knife to slice cooked meatloaf. In addition, staff should ensure that personal jewelry should not touch resident's food. Furthermore, staff should ensure that all food stored in the nourishment room refrigerators are properly labeled and dated and discarded if expired. The findings include: 1. Review of the facility's policy titled, Food Preparation and Service, revised in November 2022, revealed 7. Bare hand contact with food is prohibited. Gloves are worn when handling food directly and changed between tasks. Disposable gloves are single-use items and are discarded after each use. On 02/01/2024 at…

    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 · F2024-02-06 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespread
    Dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interviews, and review of the United States (U.S.) Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 2022 Food Code it was determined the facility failed to ensure 3 of 3 dumpsters were closed and the area around them was free of trash, and the elimination of debris prevented the potential for vermin and pest attraction. This had the potential to affect all 155 of 155 residents who resided in the facility. The facility failed to provide dumpters. The findings included: Review of Chapter 5. Water, Plumbing, and Waste, section 5-5 Refuse, Recyclables, and Returnables of the U.S. FDA 2022 Food Code, dated 01/18/2023, revealed, 5-501.15 Outside Receptacles. (A) Receptacles and waste handling units for REFUSE, recyclables, and returnables used with materials containing FOOD residue and used outside the FOOD ESTABLISHMENT shall be designed and constructed to have tight-fitting lids, doors, or covers. (B) Receptacles and waste handling units for REFUSE and recyclables such as an on-site compactor shall be installed so that accumulation of debris and insect and rodent attraction 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-02-06 · tag F0554 — pattern
    Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure Medication Aide (MA) #58 did not allow two (2) of three (3) residents (Resident #96 and Resident #18)observed during medication administration to self-administer their own medications. There were no physicians' orders and interdisciplinary team assessments to determine if the residents were able to safely do so. The findings include: A review of a facility policy titled Administering Medications, revised in April 2019, revealed, Medications are administered in a safe and timely manner, and as prescribed. The policy also specified, 27. Residents may self-administer their own medications only if the Attending Physician, in conjunction with the Interdisciplinary Care Planning Team, has determined that they have the decision-making capacity to do so safely. 1. Review of Resident #96's admission Record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 10/07/2021. According to the admission Record, the resident had a medical history that included diagnoses of chronic…

    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 · D2024-02-06 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, document reviews, video camera footage, interviews, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure (one) 1 of seven (7) sampled residents, Resident #311, reviewed for abuse was free from physical abuse. On 09/13/2022 at approximately 3:30 PM, Resident #311's Power of Attorney (POA) met with Administrator #77 and alleged Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #74 smacked at the resident's legs while care was being provided. The POA also alleged that another CNA ate food that was on the resident's meal tray and another CNA handled the resident roughly while care was being provided. Per the initial report, the three (3) staff identified were CNA #74, CNA #75, and CNA #76. The facility provided video coverage of the incident for State Survey Agency (SSA) Surveyor review. The findings include: A review of the facility policy titled Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation and Misappropriation Prevention Program, revised in April 2021, revealed Residents have the right to be free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-02-06 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
    Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure proper placement of a stability boot for one (1) of thirty-one (31) sampled residents, Resident #68. The findings include: A review of a facility policy titled, Medication and Treatment Order, revised in July 2016, revealed Orders for medications and treatments will be consistent with principles of safe and effective order writing. A review of Resident #68's admission Record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 06/15/2022. The admission Record revealed the resident had diagnoses to include a fracture of the right fibula, fracture of the lateral malleolus (bone on the outside of the ankle) of the right fibula, and displaced fracture of medial malleolus of the right tibia. A review of Resident #68's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 08/03/2023, revealed the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 0, which indicated the resident had severe cognitive impairment. The MDS revealed the resident required extensive…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-02-06 · tag F0678 — failed to provide CPR when needed — isolated
    Provide basic life support, including CPR, prior to the arrival of emergency medical personnel , subject to physician orders and the resident’s advance directives.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure one (Resident #463) of five (5) sampled residents reviewed for advance directors, with physician's orders that accurately reflected the resident's code status. The findings included: A review of the facility's policy titled, Do Not Resuscitate Order, revised in [DATE], revealed, Our facility will not use cardiopulmonary resuscitation and related emergency measures to maintain life functions on a resident when there is a Do Not Resuscitate Order in effect. A review of Resident #463's admission Record revealed the facility admitted the resident on [DATE], with diagnoses that included metabolic encephalopathy, cognitive communication deficit, and unspecified dementia. A review of Resident #463's Resuscitation Designation Form dated [DATE], revealed the resident had the code of do not resuscitate and wished for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) not to be initiated in the event they were found without 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-02-06 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
    Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure staff administered tube feeding formula at the rate prescribed by the physician. The facility also failed to accurately and consistently monitor the amount of tube feeding formula infused each shift to ensure one (Resident #135) of two (2) sampled residents reviewed for tube feedings consistently received the amount of tube feeding formula recommended by the Registered Dietitian (RD) and as ordered by the physician. The findings included: A review of the facility's policy titled Enteral Nutrition, revised in November 2018, revealed, Adequate nutritional support through enteral nutrition is provided to residents as ordered. Policy Interpretation and Implementation 1. The interdisciplinary team, including the dietitian, conducts a full nutritional assessment within current initial assessment timeframes to determine the clinical necessity of enteral feedings. The policy further indicated, 3. The dietitian, with input from the provider and nurse: a. Estimates…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-02-06 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when 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 observations, interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure proper respiratory care was provided to three (3) of five (5) sampled residents (Residents #62, #127, and #57) reviewed for respiratory care. The findings include: 1. A review of a facility policy titled Tracheostomy Care, revised in October 2023, revealed, The purpose of this procedure is to guide tracheostomy care and the cleaning of reusable tracheostomy cannulas. The policy further revealed, A suction machine, supply of suction catheters, exam and sterile gloves, and flush solution, must be available at the bedside at all times. The policy revealed the Procedure Guidelines for Preparation and Assessment included Check the physician order. The policy revealed it did not specifically address the proper storage of respiratory equipment, to include a suction machine. A review of Resident #62's admission Record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 09/24/2018, with diagnoses that…

    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

“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

$17,963 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

  • $5,909 — penalty dated 2024-02-06
  • $12,054 — penalty dated 2024-02-06

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to PACS GROUP — 274 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 2 of 52.9-0.9 vs chain
Health inspection 1 of 52.5-1.5 vs chain
Staffing 1 of 52.5-1.5 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 54.4+0.6 vs chain
The other 273 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
1 of 5Anchor Post AcuteAiken, SC 1 of 5Arbor Post AcuteChico, CA 1 of 5Artesia Palms Care CenterArtesia, CA 1 of 5Arvin Post AcuteArvin, CA 1 of 5Ashland Post AcuteAshland, OR 1 of 5Bakersfield Post AcuteBakersfield, CA 1 of 5Beachwood Post-Acute & RehabSanta Monica, CA 1 of 5Brookshire Post AcuteDenver, CO 1 of 5Brushy Creek Post AcuteGreer, SC 1 of 5Buckeye Care And RehabilitationLancaster, OH 1 of 5Carnegie Park Post AcutePittsburgh, PA 1 of 5Cascade Terrace Post AcutePortland, OR 1 of 5Centennial Post AcuteAnchorage, AK 1 of 5Chandler Creek Post AcuteGreer, SC 1 of 5Chehalem Post AcuteNewberg, OR 1 of 5Country Hills Post AcuteEl Cajon, CA 1 of 5Delhi Post-AcuteCincinnati, OH 1 of 5Dublin Post AcuteDublin, OH 1 of 5Edisto Post AcuteOrangeburg, SC 1 of 5Evan Terrace Post AcuteMcMinnville, OR 1 of 5Forest Acres Post AcuteColumbia, SC 1 of 5Grandview Post AcuteCookeville, TN 1 of 5Great Plains Post AcuteWichita, KS 1 of 5Hemet Hills Post AcuteHemet, CA 1 of 5Highland Hills Post AcutePittsburgh, PA 1 of 5Highline Post AcuteDenver, CO 1 of 5Johns Island Post AcuteJohns Island, SC 1 of 5Karcher Post AcuteNampa, ID 1 of 5Kennedy Care CenterLos Angeles, CA 1 of 5Kern River Transitional CareBakersfield, CA 1 of 5Lakeview Post AcuteFlorissant, MO 1 of 5Marion Valley Post AcuteMarion, OH 1 of 5Mirage Post AcuteLancaster, CA 1 of 5Monroeville Post AcuteMonroeville, PA 1 of 5Napa Post AcuteNapa, CA 1 of 5North Royalton Post AcuteParma, OH 1 of 5Northstar Post AcuteCarson City, NV 1 of 5Overland Park Post AcuteOverland Park, KS 1 of 5Pikes Peak Post AcuteColorado Springs, CO 1 of 5Ridgeway Post AcutePetaluma, CA

Showing 40 of 273; 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
PROVIDENCE GROUP INCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 06/01/2018
BABAR, MUHAMMADIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 06/01/2018
ESTES, TAYLORIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 10/17/2022
APT, FREDERICKIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2024
JERGENSEN, JOSHUAIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2024
MITCHELL, JOHNIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2024

1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$19.6M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+2.5%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.0M
Related-party expense5% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 60%Medicare 10%Other / private 30%

This home reported $1.0M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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

Cost & finances

$345per resident / day
operating cost
$10,494per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$354per 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 185455. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-20, 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