River Haven Nursing And Rehabilitation Center

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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.

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.

42.5% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 49 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 27.3% 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 33 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 0.38 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 65% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 12% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 103 beds and averages 77.8 residents a day — about 76% occupied, or roughly 25 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 3.39 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.81 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.08 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.96 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.57 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.90 to 0.59 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 59% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

28 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 15 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2020-09-15 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview, record review, hospital record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure the person centered comprehensive care plan was implemented for one (1) of four (4) sampled residents (Resident #1). The facility care planned Resident #1 as a choking risk due to behaviors of reaching and grabbing food not on his/her diet, The resident required a pureed diet. In addition, one to one (1:1) supervision, when out of bed. The facility failed to implement the nursing care plan interventions to prevent Resident #1 from getting food not on his/her diet, nor the 1:1 supervision when out of bed. On 08/07/2020, Resident #1 obtained a peanut butter sandwich from the snack tray on the medication cart. Resident #1 grabbed and consumed half of the half of peanut butter sandwich before staff intervention and choked. Staff performed the Heimlich maneuver (abdominal thrusts to remove object causing to choke) and Resident #1 coded with staff initiating Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) (chest compressions often with artificial ventilation).…

  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
• Immediate jeopardy · J2020-09-15 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, record review, hospital record review, review of Nurse's book, Staff Assignment Sheet, and facility education review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure one (1) of four (4) sampled residents (Resident #1) received adequate supervision to prevent accidents. The facility assessed Resident #1 required one to one (1:1) supervision when out of bed; however, the facility did not ensure this assessed need was met. Interviews and record review revealed, on 08/07/2020, there was no staff to provide 1:1 supervision. One Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) was outside providing supervision during the residents' smoke break, one CNA was providing resident care in a resident room, and the nurse was administering medication. Resident #1 was sitting beside the medication cart while the nurse prepared medication to administer to a resident. There was a snack tray on the medication cart. Resident #1 grabbed a half of a peanut butter sandwich off the tray and ate half of the sandwich before the nurse could stop him/her. Resident #1 choked and staff provided…

  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
• Immediate jeopardy · J2020-09-15 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — isolated
  Provide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, record review, review of the Staff Assignment Sheet, facility education documentation, hospital records, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure sufficient staff had the appropriate competencies and skill sets to provide nursing and related services to ensure one (1) of four (4) sampled residents (Resident#1) safety as determined by resident assessments and care plans. The facility assessed and care planned Resident #1 with a history of grabbing food off trays, was at risk for choking, and required 1:1 supervision when out of bed. However, on 08/07/2020, the facility did not assign staff to provide 1:1 supervision, due to insufficient staffing. Interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 revealed Resident #1 was kept within line of sight during medication pass due to not having enough staff to implement the required 1:1 supervision. In addition, LPN #1 stated she placed a tray of snacks on top of the medication cart with Resident #1 near the cart.…

  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 · Dcited before2026-05-12 · 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 review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, mental, and psychosocial needs that were identified in the comprehensive assessment for one out of five sampled residents (Resident (R)2). Review of the Diabetes Mellitus Care Plan for R2, revealed the care plan included interventions to provide regular podiatry care as ordered by the medical doctor (MD), which was not implemented.The findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled Comprehensive Care Plans Standard of Practice, reviewed 04/2025, revealed the facility's care planning / Interdisciplinary Team, in coordination with the resident, family, and/or representative were to develop and maintain a comprehensive care plan for each resident that identified the highest level of functioning the resident…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-05-12 · 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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that residents received proper treatment and care to maintain good foot health. Additionally, the facility failed to provide foot care and treatment for Resident (R) R2 in accordance with professional standards of practice that included preventing complications from the resident's medical condition(s), assisting the resident in making appointments with a qualified person, and arranging for transportation to and from such appointments, if needed for one of five sampled Residents (R2). An observation on 05/11/2026 at 4:08 PM revealed R2's left great toenail was thick, long, and curved to the left halfway over and was touching the 2nd digit.The findings include:During an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 05/12/2026 at 2:02 PM, she stated the facility did not have a policy related to foot or nail care.Review of the Facesheet revealed the facility admitted R2 on 12/16/2025. Resident 2's diagnoses included diabetes mellitus,…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-26 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents had a right to a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment which had the potential to affect all of the facility's 81 residents.The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Homelike Environment Standard of Practice, reviewed 04/2025, revealed the facility was to provide residents with a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment. In addition, policy review revealed the facility was to encourage residents to use their personal belongings to the extent possible. Further review revealed the facility's protocol included cleanliness and order. Review of the facility policy titled, Resident Rights Standard of Practice, reviewed 04/2025, revealed the facility was to ensure each resident was treated with respect and dignity, and cared for in a manner that promoted maintenance or enhancement of his/her quality of life. Further review revealed the facility's residents had the right to a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment.…

  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 · D2025-08-26 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
  Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to report an alleged violation of abuse related to an allegation that occurred on or around 03/10/2025 for 1 of 5 residents sampled for abuse out of the total 26 sampled residents, (Resident (R)8). The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Abuse Prohibition Standard of Practice reviewed 04/2025, revealed sexual abuse was defined as nonconsensual sexual contact of any type with a resident/patient. Continued review revealed it was the policy of the facility to report allegations of sexual abuse to the State Survey Agency (SSA), Adult Protective Services (APS), and all other required agencies within the specified time frames. Further policy review revealed the results of all investigations were to be reported to the appropriate state agency within 5 working days of the alleged violation's initial report. Review of the admission Facesheet for R8 revealed the facility admitted the resident on 01/17/2025, with diagnoses that included acute upper respiratory infection, alcohol abuse,…

  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 · Dcited before2025-08-26 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
  Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
  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 thoroughly investigate an alleged abuse violation related to an allegation that occurred on or around 03/10/2025 for 1 of 5 residents sampled for abuse out of the total sample of 26, (Resident (R)8). The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Abuse Prohibition Standard of Practice reviewed 04/2025, revealed sexual abuse was defined as nonconsensual sexual contact of any type with a resident/patient. Per review, the facility's Administrator or designee was to oversee the center in conducting an internal investigation of any violation/alleged violation of abuse. Continued review revealed a report of the results of the investigation to the enforcement agency was to occur in accordance with state law, including the State Survey Agency (SSA) within five working days of the incident. Policy review revealed the (facility's) investigations were to be prompt, comprehensive, and responsive to the situation. Review of the policy revealed the facility's investigation was to include:…

  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 · Fcited before2024-10-25 · 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 policies, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. These failures had the potential to affect eighty-two (82) of eighty-eight (88) residents in the facility who consumed food from the kitchen. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Food Storage: Cold Foods, dated 04/2018, revealed All Time/Temperature Control for Safety (TCS) foods, frozen and refrigerated, were to be appropriately stored in accordance with guidelines of the FDA [Food and Drug Administration] Food Code .All foods will be stored wrapped or in covered containers, labeled and dated, and arranged in a manner to prevent cross contamination. Observation during the initial kitchen tour on 10/22/2024 at 9:10 AM, with the Certified Dietary Manager (CDM), revealed the walk in cooler contained a larger plastic container half full of cut up raw potatoes in water that were not labeled or dated; a larger plastic container half full of prepared apple crisp 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-25 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet the resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs as identified in the comprehensive assessment for 2 of 21 sampled residents (Resident (R)39 and R42). 1. R39 developed a facility acquired stage 4 pressure ulcer in 05/2024. However, there was no documented evidence the facility reviewed and further developed R39's care plan with additional interventions. Further, R39's comprehensive care plan (CCP) did not include measurable data elements to monitor progress towards the expected outcomes and goals. 2. R42 received tube feeding and was care planned to have the head of bed (HOB) elevated. However, observations on 10/21/2024 at 1:15 PM and 3:18 PM, revealed R42's HOB was flat. The findings include: Review of the facility policy, Comprehensive Care Plans Standard of Practice, dated 10/2020, revealed an individualized comprehensive…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-10-25 · 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, the facility failed to ensure residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choices for 2 of 21 sampled residents (Resident (R)43, and R54). 1. R43 was tested for symptoms of a urinary tract infection (UTI) on 10/13/2024 and the laboratory (lab) results were finalized on 10/16/2024. However, the facility failed to ensure the lab results were received resulting in R43 not receiving the necessary treatment for a UTI until 10/23/2024, seven days later. 2. R54 received a recommendation for a gradual dose reduction on 09/15/2024. The recommendation was approved and signed by the facility Nurse Practitioner on 09/17/2024. However, the facility failed to initiate the recommendation until 10/18/2024, 33 days after the recommendation was made. The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Lab and Diagnostics Standard of…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-10-25 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure residents received care consistent with professional standards for 1 of 3 residents sampled as at risk for developing pressure ulcers out of the total sample of 21 (Resident (R)39). In interview on 10/22/2024 at 9:48 AM, R39 stated she had been at the facility since January and had a wound on her foot. Observation, at the time of interview, revealed R39 lying on her back on an alternating pressure mattress (APM), with two wedge cushions and a heel boot stored on a shelf in the corner of the room. R39 stated she received the heel boot for her left heel at the hospital; however, staff removed it when she returned to the facility. She stated the left heel boot had not been placed back on her since. R39 stated staff did not utilize wedge cushions or pillows for positioning her. Additional observations on that date at 11:08 AM, 1:50 PM, 4:18 PM, and 8:15 PM, revealed R39 remained lying on her back on the pressure reducing mattress. In addition, review of R39's EMR revealed R39…

  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 · D2024-10-25 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident fed by enteral means (feeding tube) received the appropriate treatment and services to prevent complications of enteral feeding including but not limited to aspiration pneumonia for 2 of 7 residents receiving enteral feeding (Resident (R)39, R42). In interview the Director of Nursing (DON) stated it was a standard of practice for a resident's head of bed (HOB) to be elevated during (tube) feedings and for the tube feeding to be changed every 24 hours. 1. However, observation on 10/21/2024 at 1:15 PM, revealed R42's HOB was flat when the resident was receiving enteral feeding. Additionally, the enteral feeding R42 was receiving was dated 10/20/2024 at 10:08 AM (over 24 hours). Observation revealed R42 continued lying flat two hours later at 3:18 PM. Observation on 10/22/2024 at 9:58 AM, revealed R42's feeding pump was turned off and was not attached to the resident. In addition, R42's feeding bottle remained unchanged (as it was still dated 10/20/2024 at 10:08 AM).…

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

  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.

Fines & penalties

$1,398 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $1,398 — penalty dated 2023-11-06

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 BENJAMIN LANDA — 48 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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 11 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

About 88% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $1.0M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 13% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

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

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in KY