Resthaven Care 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.

55.0% 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 169 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 60.3% 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 63 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 0.25 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 36% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 17% 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 145 beds and averages 138.4 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 7 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.33 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.553 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.86 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.61 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.62 on weekdays — 22% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.67 to 0.26 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 36% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. 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.

29 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 18 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · Gcited before2025-08-05 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This citation pertains to intake # 2574196Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the safety of 1 resident (Resident #1) of 3 residents reviewed for accidents/hazards resulting in Resident #1 having a fall in the facility parking lot while she was left unattended and as a result suffered frontal and temporal lobe hemorrhages, a 4th left rib fracture and a change in capacity.Findings include:Resident #1 (R1)Review of the admission Record and Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed R1 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses including cerebral infarction (stroke), chronic fatigue and cognitive communication deficit. R1 was in the hospital from [DATE] to 7/16/2025. Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) on 5/5/2025 reflected a score of 10 out of 15 which indicated R1 was moderately cognitively impaired (8-12 is moderate cognitive impairment) prior to the fall and BIMS on 7/21/2025 reflected a score of 7 out of 15 which indicated R1 was severely cognitively…

  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 · E2025-06-25 · tag F0568 — pattern
  Properly hold, secure, and manage each resident's personal money which is deposited with the nursing home.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide quarterly resident trust fund financial statements to 8 of 8 residents utilizing resident trust accounts resulting in the residents not being systematically informed about personal funds. Findings include: Review of electronic correspondence received from Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) A on 6/25/25 at 1:36 PM revealed, We currently have 8 residents utilizing resident trust. In an interview on 6/25/25 at 10:27 AM, Accounting Associate (AA) ZZ reported that resident trust fund financial statements were provided annually and upon request to the residents utilizing resident trust accounts. AA ZZ reported she did not provide quarterly trust fund financial statements but thought Resident Services Coordinator (RSC) V might send them. In an interview on 6/25/25 at 10:46 AM, RSC V reported she did not provide quarterly trust fund financial statements to the residents utilizing resident trust accounts but could let the resident know the balance of their account if they inquired about it. In an interview on 6/25/25 at 1:04…

  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 · E2025-06-25 · 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 observation, interviews and record review, the facility failed to maintain a comfortable ambient temperature between 71-81 degrees for 20 residents within a memory care unit (Rooms 401-415), resulting in resident's experiencing ambient room temperatures higher than 81 degrees and a potential for overheating and dehydration.Findings include: Review of Heat and Older Adults published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 6/25/24 revealed People aged 65 years or older are more prone to heat-related health problems .older adults .are more likely to have a chronic medical condition that changes normal body responses to heat .they are more likely to take prescription medicines that affect the body's ability to control its temperature or sweat .During an observation on 6/23/25 at 10:21am, a wall mounted oscillating fan was blowing in the common area of the memory care unit but could not be felt in the area where several residents sat.During an observation on 6/23/25 at 11:01am, Resident #112 in…

  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 before2025-06-25 · 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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed provide a dignified environment and assist residents with care needs in 1 (Resident #52) of 2 residents reviewed for dignity, resulting in feelings of frustration and the potential for depression, loss of self-worth, and an overall deterioration of psychological well-being.Findings include:Resident #52 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #52 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included dysphagia (difficulty swallowing) and depression. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #52, with a reference date of 5/23/25 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 7/15 which indicated Resident #7 was severely cognitively impaired. Review of Resident #52's Orders revealed, Aspiration precautions: Sit upright for all PO(by mouth) intake and 30 minutes after, check for oral residue, excellent oral care including denture cleaning, encourage small bites, slow rate,…

  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 · D2025-06-25 · 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 interview and record review the facility failed to ensure accurate documentation of advance directives - code status (resident wishes for life sustaining interventions an emergency) for 1 (Resident #389) of 28 residents reviewed for advance directive - code status documentation resulting in the lack of an order or other documentation for the first 5 days of Resident #389's stay. Findings include:Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #389 was a female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had pertinent diagnoses which included: vascular dementia (dementia related to blood flow through narrowed blood vessels) and Alzheimer's disease. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #389, with a reference date of [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 6/15 which indicated Resident #389 was severely cognitively impaired. (BIMS score 0-7 indicates severe cognitive impairment).Review of Order Summary for Resident #389 on [DATE] revealed no noted order in…

  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 · D2025-06-25 · tag F0645 — isolated
  PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a Preadmission Screening (PAS) / Annual Resident Review (ARR) Level I Screening Form DCH-3877 was completed annually for 1 (Resident #37) of 2 residents reviewed for preadmission screening / annual resident review screening, resulting in the potential for unmet mental health care needs. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #37 was a male, with pertinent diagnoses which included: anxiety disorder, unspecified; dementia in other diseases classified elsewhere, unspecified severity, with psychotic disturbance; and delusional disorders. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #37, with a reference date of 3/14/25 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13, out of a total possible score of 15, which indicated Resident #37 was cognitively intact. Review of an OBRA (Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act) PASARR Correspondence letter for Resident #37 dated 3/7/23 revealed, .The recipient may be admitted to or remain in the nursing facility and receive mental…

  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 before2025-06-25 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
  Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure professional standards of nursing were followed for treatment of a skin tear for 1 (Resident #43) of 1 resident reviewed for professional standards of nursing practice. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #43 was a female with pertinent diagnoses which included Alzheimer's disease, dementia with behavioral disturbance, and pressure inducted deep tissue damage of right heel. Review of Care Plan for Resident #43 revised on 6/8/25 revealed the focus, .The resident has potential impairment to skin integrity due to limited mobility and incontinence. She can be resistant and refuse care and toileting at times with combativeness - hitting, kicking - that could cause skin injury and delay in care . with the intervention .Derma Sleeves- to bilateral arms when up . Review of Treatment Administration Record (TAR) for June 2025 revealed, documentation of Resident #43 with bilateral derma sleeves noted as on for day, evening, and night shifts. Review of Order for Resident #43 revealed,…

  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 before2025-06-25 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide the necessary care and services to prevent, treat, and promote healing of pressure ulcers in 1 of 2 residents (Resident #126) reviewed for pressure ulcers, resulting in the lack of repositioning and implementation of care planned interventions, delayed healing of pressure ulcers for the resident, and the potential for infection and the development of new ulcers.Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #126 was a female with pertinent diagnoses which included pressure ulcer of right buttock, stage 3, dementia, diabetes and adult failure to thrive. Review of Care Plan for Resident #126 revised on 06/09/2025, revealed the focus, .The resident has open area to right buttocks. Healing complicated by poor intake, incontinence and diabetes . with the interventions .Administer treatments as ordered and monitor for effectiveness .Assess/record/monitor wound healing Measure length, width and depth where possible.…

  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 before2025-06-25 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and ensure appropriate transfer techniques were implemented for 2 (Resident #96 and Resident #102) of 9 residents reviewed for accidents resulting in an increased risk for falls and injuries. Findings include: Resident #96Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #96 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included: unspecified dementia (general term for loss of memory, language, problem-solving and thinking abilities that are severe enough to interfere with daily life). Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #96 with a reference date of 4/21/25, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 0/15 which indicated Resident #96 was severely cognitively impaired. Section GG revealed Resident #96 needed supervision or light touching to transfer from sitting to standing. Review of a Care Plan for Resident #96 with a reference date 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 · D2025-06-25 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
  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 residents received food items within their preferences for 1 (Resident #27) of 2 residents reviewed for food, resulting in dissatisfaction and the potential for nutritional decline and gastrointestinal upset. Findings include: Review of Choice on the menu in residential aged care: An underrated tool for maintaining resident autonomy [NAME] PhD, APD, [NAME] L. [NAME] PhD, APD, [NAME] M. [NAME] PhD, Adv APD First published: 25 February 2025, revealed Food and mealtimes are areas where residents want to express their autonomy. In the community, individuals make decisions about food based on preferences, which have been shaped by a lifetime of experiences. Being able to choose foods that align with these preferences is a sign of normality and a continuation of self-identity. Resident #27 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #27 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included: vascular…

  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 before2025-06-25 · 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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to properly sanitized resident shared equipment, specifically a glucometer between uses during medication administration for 1 (Resident #129) of 5 residents observed for medication administration, resulting in the potential for the spread of infection, cross-contamination, and disease transmission. Findings include: Resident #129 Review of an admission Record revealed Resident #129 was a female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had pertinent diagnoses which included: Type 1 diabetes (a chronic condition where the pancreas produces little to no insulin for the body). Review of Order Summary for Resident #129 revealed .blood glucose scans QAC (before every meal) and HS (bedtime). Notify physician if blood glucose is less than 60 or over 400 unless individual parameters dictate otherwise four times a day for Type 1 Diabetes with a start date of 3/14/2025. On 6/24/25 at 11:45 am, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) C was observed completing…

  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

“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

No federal fines in the current CMS record. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.

• Medicare payment denial — starting 2025-08-29 for 5 days

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 19 rows in the source record cover these 15 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

This home reported $1.7M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 10% 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 MI