Golden Age Healthcare 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.

50.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 52 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 65.5% 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 29 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: not reported. This home filed no therapist hours at all in its payroll data for this quarter. That is a gap in what it reported, and we do not read it as an absence of therapy — the homes that file nothing here include ones that discharged hundreds of Medicare rehab patients in the very same period, who plainly received therapy from someone. Because we cannot tell a home that under-reports from one that genuinely provides little, this home is left out of the comparison above rather than scored at zero. Ask it directly how many therapist hours a rehab resident gets, and on which days.

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 175 beds and averages 170.8 residents a day — about 98% occupied, or roughly 4 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 3.31 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.12 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.93 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 2.76 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.53 on weekdays — 22% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.14 to 0.09 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 52% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

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 unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.

26 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 15 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2025-04-01 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from sexual abuse and psychological harm for 1 (#2) of 3 (#1, #2, and #3) sampled residents reviewed for sexual abuse. The facility implemented corrective actions, which were completed prior to the State Agency's investigation, thus it was determined to be a Past Noncompliance citation. This deficient practice resulted in actual psychological harm on 02/11/2025, when Resident #2, a cognitively intact resident, stated a visitor of the facility showed her unwanted pictures of his penis and then later forced his penis into Resident #2's mouth. Resident #2 reported the incident to the facility on [DATE] and stated she did not report it sooner because she was embarrassed. Resident #2 experienced psychosocial harm describing the sexual abuse as horrible and becoming tearful when speaking of it. Findings: Review of the facility's policy dated 03/2023 and titled, Abuse-Prevention and Prohibition Policy and Procedure…

  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 · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-03-18 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
  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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment was maintained for 2 of 2 (#5 and #58) residents reviewed for environment. Resident #5 Review of Resident #5's clinical record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses, which included Idiopathic Peripheral Autonomic Neuropathy, Chronic Ischemic Heart Disease, Morbid Severe Obesity due to Excess Calories, and Acute on Chronic Diastolic Congestive Heart Failure. Review of Resident #5's Quarterly MDS with an ARD of 03/04/2026 revealed a BIMS of 13, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. An observation was made on 03/15/2026 at 1:26 p.m. of Resident #5's room. Behind her bed was a brown substance splattered on the wall. An interview was conducted on 03/15/2026 at 1:27 p.m. with Resident #5. She stated the brown substance had been on the wall for months. She stated she had asked staff to clean it, but no one ever had. An observation was made…

  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 · E2026-03-18 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — pattern
  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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure services provided as outlined in the comprehensive care plan met professional standards of quality by failing to ensure nursing staff primed insulin pen needles prior to administering insulin for 3 (#12, #129, and #144) of 5 residents reviewed for insulin administration.Findings: Review of the facility's insulin pen needle product insert revealed the following: 2. Prepare the pen needle: Check that the pen needle is attached correctly and prime the pen according to the manufacturer's instructions for use. Select the insulin dose. Review of the Regular Insulin and Insulin Aspart insulin pen manufacturer's instructions for use revealed the following: Giving the airshot before each injection: Before each injection small amounts of air may collect in the cartridge during normal use. To avoid injecting air and to ensure proper dosing: E. Turn the dose selector to select 2 units. F. Hold your insulin pen with the needle pointing up.…

  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 · Ecited before2026-03-18 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — pattern
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living received necessary services to maintain good hygiene for 3 (#7, #98, and #144) of 3 residents reviewed for ADLs. The facility failed to ensure: Resident #7 and #144 received their shower as scheduled; and Resident #98 was dressed in clean attire daily. Findings: 1. Resident #7 Review of Resident #7's Clinical Record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had a diagnosis, which included Radiculopathy, Lumbar Region. Review of Resident #7's Quarterly MDS with an ARD of 12/12/2025 revealed BIMS of 11, which indicated the resident was moderately cognitively impaired. Further review revealed Section GG0130. Self-Care: Partial/moderate assistance for shower/bathe self. Review of Resident #7's current Care Plan revealed the following: Focus: The resident requires staff assistance for ADL care. Interventions: Assist resident with bathing. Review of…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-03-18 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — pattern
  Ensure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
  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, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure nursing staff had the specific competencies and skill sets necessary to care for resident's needs as identified through resident assessments and plans of care. The facility failed to ensure nursing staff had competencies and skill sets to:Accurately administer insulin via insulin pens for 3 (#12, #129, and #144) of 5 residents reviewed for insulin administration; andProperly clean a non-invasive mechanical ventilation mask and tubing for 1 (#10) of 2 residents reviewed for respiratory care.Findings: 1. Review of the facility's insulin pen needle product insert revealed the following: 2. Prepare the pen needle: Check that the pen needle is attached correctly and prime the pen according to the manufacturer's instructions for use. Select the insulin dose. Review of the Regular Insulin and Insulin Aspart insulin pen manufacturer's instructions for use revealed the following: Giving the airshot before each injection: Before each…

  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 · D2026-03-18 · 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 observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure respiratory care was provided consistent with professional standards of practice and the comprehensive care plan by failing to properly clean non-invasive mechanical ventilation equipment for 1 (#10) of 2 residents reviewed for respiratory care.Findings: Review of the facility's policy dated 11/04/2014 and titled, BiPAP and CPAP Machine Cleaning Policy and Procedure revealed the following, in part:Purpose: The keep BiPAP and CPAP machine and equipment clean.Policy: Resident's BiPAP and/or CPAP machine will be kept clean when in resident room.Procedure:4. Clean the tubing daily with warm water and soap. Rinse thoroughly and air dry.5. Clean the mask daily with warm water and soap, rinse thoroughly and air dry. Resident #10Review of Resident #10's Clinical Record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses, which included Acute and Chronic Respiratory Failure, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-18 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to implement and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. The facility failed to ensure staff:1. Properly utilized Enhanced Barrier Precaution (EBP) Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) during direct care for 2 (#6 and #45) of 3 residents observed who required EBP; and2. Performed appropriate Standard PPE glove precautions during incontinence care for 1 of 1 (#45) residents observed for urinary catheter care.Review of the facility's policy titled Enhanced Barrier Precautions Policy and Procedure dated 04/01/2024 revealed in part, the following:EBP refers to an infection control intervention designed to reduce transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms that employs targeted gown and glove use during high contact resident care activities.1. EBP are indicated for…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-08-27 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  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 and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident was treated with respect and dignity in a manner and in an environment that promotes maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life for 1 (#5) of 5 (#1, #2, #3, #4, and #5) residents reviewed for dignity. The facility failed to ensure staff treated Resident #5 with respect and dignity.Review of Resident #5's Medical Record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis of Unspecified Dementia. Review of Resident #5's most recent MDS (Minimum Data Set) with an ARD (Assessment Reference Date) of 07/25/2025 revealed Resident #5 had a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) of 11, which indicated the resident had moderately impaired cognition. Further review revealed Resident #5 required substantial assistance for ADLs.Review of the most current Care Plan for Resident #5 revealed the following:Problem: Resident #5 required assistance with ADLs. Interventions: Assist with ADLsOn 08/26/2025 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-19 · 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, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to maintain a sanitary environment for 1 (#163) of 3 (#56, #59, and #163) residents reviewed for environment in the final sample. Findings: Review of Resident #163's Clinical Record revealed an admission date of 05/02/2024. Review of Resident #163's MDS (Minimum Data Set) with an ARD (Assessment Reference Date) of 12/31/2024 revealed he was frequently incontinent of bowel. On 02/17/2025 at 10:09 a.m., observation of Resident #163's room revealed 8 quarter sized spots of dried brown liquid stool on the floor between his bed and the bathroom door. Observation further revealed a dried brown smear on the fitted sheet on Resident #163's bed. On 02/17/2025 at 10:11 a.m., an interview was conducted with Resident #163. He stated he an episode of stool incontinence on Saturday, 02/15/2025, evening while getting to the restroom. He stated staff did not clean all of the liquid stool from the floor and left his fitted sheet soiled. On 02/17/2025 at 10:23 a.m., an observation was made of S7CNA entering Resident #163's room.…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-19 · tag F0641 — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
  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 and record review, the facility failed to ensure the MDS assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 (#23) of 3 (#23, #75, and #135) residents reviewed for hospice. The facility failed to ensure Resident #23 was coded correctly for hospice. Findings: Review of Resident #23's Clinical Record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Adult Failure to Thrive. Review of Resident #23's Physician Orders revealed in part, the following: Admit to Hospice, active 05/31/2024. Review of quarterly MDS assessment with ARD of 07/30/2024 revealed in Section O0110.K1. Hospice care: While a resident: No. Review of quarterly MDS assessment with ARD of 10/02/2024 revealed in Section O0110.K1. Hospice care: While a resident: No. An interview was conducted on 02/18/2025 at 2:15 p.m. with S4MDS. She reviewed Resident #23's MDS assessments dated 07/30/2024 and 10/02/2024. She confirmed both quarterly MDS assessments were not coded correctly for Hospice and…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-02-19 · tag F0644 — isolated
  Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to coordinate assessments with the resident's Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) Level II by failing to incorporate a PASRR Level II determination and recommendations into a resident's care plan for 1 (#167) of 4 (#23, #50, #108, and #167) residents reviewed for PASRR. Findings: Review of Resident #167's Clinical Record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses, which included Generalized Anxiety Disorder, Schizophrenia, and Paranoid Schizophrenia. Further review revealed he was approved for admission by Level II Authority for a temporary period effective 12/07/2024 through 12/06/2025. Review of Resident #167's Level II Evaluation Summary & Determination Notice revealed the following, in part: OBH approving 365 days for nursing facility placement and the following to occur: Behavioral Health IOP, Crisis Planning, and Assessment for Dementia. On 02/19/2025 at 8:55 a.m., review of Resident #167's current Care Plan…

  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

“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

$8,044 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $8,044 — penalty dated 2025-04-01

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 PLANTATION MANAGEMENT COMPANY — 16 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 10 rows in the source record cover these 8 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 77% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $4.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 28% 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 LA