Fair City Health And Rehab

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.

38.6% 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 53 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 40.5% 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 42 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 121 beds and averages 98.2 residents a day — about 81% occupied, or roughly 23 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 3.68 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.26 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.30 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 2.94 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.99 on weekdays — 26% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.32 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 48% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

Inspection trend

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.

25 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 13 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · Kcited before2023-10-05 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — pattern
  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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from sexual abuse for 1 (Resident #5) of 6 (Residents #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, and #6) sampled residents reviewed for sexual abuse. The deficient practice resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy situation on 08/29/2023 when Resident #4, a moderately cognitively impaired resident, returned to the facility from a psychiatric hospital stay for sexually inappropriate behaviors. Upon Resident #4 returning to the facility on [DATE], he continued to exhibit sexually inappropriate behaviors with staff. On 09/13/2023 at 1:45 p.m., Resident #4 grabbed Resident #5's breast. After the incident, Resident #4 was placed on 1:1 supervision for 72 hours. After 72 hours, the 1:1 supervision was discontinued and no new interventions were implemented to ensure Resident #4 would not sexually abuse another resident. Staff interviews revealed Resident #4 continued to exhibit sexually inappropriate behaviors after the incident on 09/13/2023.…

  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
• Immediate jeopardy · K2023-10-05 · tag F0835 — failed to run the facility competently — pattern
  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 and record review, the facility failed to ensure it was administered in a manner that enabled it to use its resources effectively and efficiently to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident. The facility failed to ensure 1 (Resident #5) of 6 (#1, #2, #3, #4, #5, and #6) sampled residents reviewed for sexual abuse were free from sexual abuse by failing to: 1. Protect 1 (Resident #5) female resident from sexual abuse by Resident #4, a resident with known sexually inappropriate behaviors; and 2. Implement interventions to prevent further sexual abuse by Resident #4. The deficient practice resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy situation on 08/29/2023 when Resident #4, a moderately cognitively impaired resident, returned to the facility from a psychiatric hospital stay for sexually inappropriate behaviors. Upon Resident #4 returning to the facility on [DATE], he continued to exhibit sexually inappropriate behaviors with staff. On…

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

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-03-18 · tag F0847 — pattern
  Inform resident or representatives choice to enter into binding arbitration agreement and right to refuse.
  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 review and interview, the facility's binding arbitration agreement failed to explicitly grant the resident or his/her representative the right to rescind the agreement within 30 calendar days of signing it for 3 of 3 (#9, #31, and #102) Residents sampled for signing the facility's binding arbitration on admission. This deficient practice had to the potential to affect the 98 residents residing in the facility. Review of Resident #9's admission records revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and included a signed binding arbitration agreement which revealed it did not explicitly grant the resident or his/her representative the right to rescind the agreement within 30 calendar days of signing it as required. Review of Resident #31's admission records revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and included a signed binding arbitration agreement which revealed it did not explicitly grant the resident or his/her representative the right to rescind the agreement within 30 calendar…

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

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-03-18 · 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 interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff accurately implemented the comprehensive care plan requiring a 2-person total body mechanical lift transfer for 1 (#85) of 21 residents reviewed for care plans.Review of Resident #85's medical record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Lack of Coordination, Dementia, Parkinsons, Repeated Falls, Transient Cerebral Ischemic Attack, Abnormalities of Gait and Mobility, Forms of Tremor, and Muscle Weakness. Review of Resident #85's MDS with an ARD of 12/22/2026 revealed a BIMS of 15, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #85's medical record revealed Transfer/Mobility Criteria assessment dated [DATE] revealed he was totally dependent on staff for activities of daily living support and the total mechanical lift with full body sling to be used. Review of Resident #85's current Plan of Care revealed he was at risk for falls with an ADL intervention that included total…

  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 · Dcited before2026-03-18 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
  Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted 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 Based on record review and interviews, on readmission, the facility failed to accurately document a cardiopulmonary resuscitation code status in the resident's clinical record for 1 (#9) out of 3 residents reviewed for readmission clinical records.Review of Resident #9's clinical record revealed she was originally admitted on [DATE] and then readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #9's admission MDS with the ARD of [DATE] revealed she had a BIMs score of 14, which indicated she was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #9's physical hard chart revealed a document titled Resident/Family Consent for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation signed and dated [DATE] by Resident #9's representative, S6AD, and physician. Further review revealed Resident #9's representative initials next to the following statement:I understand that CPR constitutes an extraordinary measure and should not be done on this resident. However I wish that other interventions be performed unless specifically noted in advance directives…

  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 · F2025-04-02 · 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 record review the facility failed to store and prepare food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. The facility failed to ensure: 1. Food was properly labeled in the refrigerators of the facility's kitchen; 2. Food products had not exceeded their expiration date; 3. Safe practices for thawing pork chops; and 4. Liquid pasteurized egg were maintained at a holding temperature of 41 degrees F or below. This deficient practice had the potential to affect 87 residents who were served food and beverages from the kitchen. Findings: Review of the facility's policy last revised November 2022 and titled, Food Receiving and Storage revealed the following, in part: Policy Statement: Foods shall be stored in a manner that complies with safe and handling practices. Refrigerated/Frozen Storage 1. All foods stored in the refrigerator . are . labeled and dated. 2. Potentially Hazard Food and Time/Temperature Control for Safety foods are stored at or below 41degrees Fahrenheit. On 03/31/2025 at 8:45 a.m., an initial tour was made 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-02 · tag F0641 — pattern
  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 resident's MDS assessments accurately reflected the resident's status for 5 (#19, #27, #46, #73, and #91) out of 19 residents reviewed in the final sample. The facility failed to ensure: 1. Resident #19 was coded accurately for urinary tract infections within the last 30 days; 2. Resident #27 and Resident #46 were accurately coded for PASRR (Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review); 3. Resident #73 was coded accurately for use of Physical Restraints; and 4. Resident #91 was coded accurately for discharge. Findings: 1. Resident #19 Review of Resident #19's Clinical Record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included Urinary Tract Infections. Review of Resident #19's Annual MDS with an ARD of 02/06/2025 revealed she was coded as no for having a urinary tract infection (UTI) within the past 30 days. Review of the Infection Log dated January 2025 revealed Resident #19 was diagnosed with a UTI on 01/24/2025.…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-04-02 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — pattern
  Provide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
  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 ensure pain management was provided to residents who require such services, consistent with professional standards of practice and the comprehensive person-centered care plan for 1 (#2) out of 3 (#2, #25, and #88) residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility failed to 1. Administer scheduled narcotics to Resident #2; and 2. Document narcotic administration for Resident #2. Findings: A review of the facility's policy titled Administering Pain Medication, with a revision date of October 2022, revealed the following, in part: Steps in the Procedure 6. Administer pain medications as ordered Documentation Document the following in the resident's medical record: 2. Medication Review of Resident #2's Clinical Record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Pressure Ulcer of Left Buttock and Pressure Ulcer of Sacral Region. Review of Resident #2's current Care Plan revealed the following, in part: Focus:…

  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 · E2025-04-02 · tag F0809 — failed to serve meals on a reasonable schedule — pattern
  Ensure meals and snacks are served at times in accordance with resident’s needs, preferences, and requests. Suitable and nourishing alternative meals and snacks must be provided for residents who want to eat at non-traditional times or outside of scheduled meal times.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure meals were served at regular times comparable to normal times in the community or in accordance with residents preferences for 2 of 2 (Hall A and Hall B) halls observed for dining. Findings: Review of the facility's policy last revised July 2017 and titled, Frequency of Meals revealed the following, in part: Policy: Each resident shall receive at least three meals daily, at times comparable to typical mealtimes in the community, or in accordance with resident needs, preferences, requests . Policy interpretation and implementation: 3. A schedule of meal times and snacks shall be posted in resident area. Review of the facility's posted meal times revealed lunch should be served at 11:00 a.m. on resident hallways. On 04/01/2025 at 10:45 a.m., an interview was conducted with S6LPN. She stated she worked Hall B. She stated meals were consistently served late. She stated the residents complained and would start to look and ask for their food. On 04/01/2025 at 10:50 a.m., an interview was conducted with…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-02 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — pattern
  Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted 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 Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents' Medication Administration Records (MAR) were accurately documented for 2 (#63 and #66) of 37 ( #2, #4, #7, #10, #11, #13, #18, #19, #20, #22, #25, #27, #29, #37, #38, #44, #46, #48, #49, #58, #61, #63, #66, #71, #73, #76, #83, #85, #88, #91, #92, #93, #244, #245, #344, #345 and #346) residents reviewed for pharmaceutical services. This deficient practice had the potential to affect any of the 89 residents residing in the facility. Findings: Review of the facility's policy Documentation of Medication Administration, with a revision date of November 2022 revealed in part: Policy Statement: A medication administration record is used to document all medications administered. Policy Interpretation and Implementation: 2. Administration of medication is documented immediately after it is given. 3. Documentation of medication administration includes, as a minimum: f. reason(s) why a medication was withheld, not administered, or refused (as…

  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 · D2024-12-12 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
  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 review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure all medical records regarding the resident's code status consistently reflected the resident's wishes for 1 (#3) of 3( #1, #R1 and #R2) residents reviewed for advanced directives. Findings: Review of Resident #3's clinical record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #3's Physician Orders in the electronic health record (EHR) revealed: Date [DATE]- Full Code. Review of Resident #3' Physician Orders in the physical chart revealed: Date [DATE]- DNR. On [DATE] at 10:40 a.m., an interview was conducted with S10LPN. She stated in the event of an emergency she would refer to the physical chart to determine a resident's code status. On [DATE] at 10:50 a.m., an interview was conducted with S11LPN. She stated in the event of an emergency she would refer to the physical chart to determine a resident's code status. On [DATE] at 10:52 a.m., an interview was conducted with S12LPN. She stated in the event of an emergency she…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-12-12 · 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 record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 (#3) of 3 ( #1, #2, and #3) sampled residents. The facility failed to ensure Resident #3's status correctly reflected he had an Advanced Directive. Findings: Review of Resident #3's Clinical Record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #3's Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 09/27/2024 revealed no Advanced Directive was selected in Section S. Review of Resident #3's Care Plan dated 08/07/2023 revealed he had an Advanced Directive. On 12/12/2024 at 11:15 a.m., an interview was conducted with S3SSD. She stated she was responsible for completing Section S in the MDS. S3SSD reviewed the Electronic Health Record and verified Resident #3 had an Advanced Directive. She confirmed the Significant Change MDS had not indicated he had one. On 12/12/2024 at 11:45 a.m., an interview was…

  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

$198,912 in federal fines across 3 penalties.

• $3,147 — penalty dated 2023-10-23
• $193,667 — penalty dated 2023-10-05
• $2,098 — penalty dated 2023-10-02

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.

Who owns this facility

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

About 73% 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 $480K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

Cost & finances

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