Shirley Chapman Sholom Home East

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.

66.8% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 228 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 51.4% 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 109 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 0.68 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 91% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 33% 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 118 beds and averages 91.7 residents a day — about 78% occupied, or roughly 26 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 5.21 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.47 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.72 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 4.73 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.40 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.55 to 1.27 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 30% is below 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 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.

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

• Immediate jeopardy · K2023-03-30 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — pattern
  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 document review, the facility failed to ensure residents wishes regarding code status were accurately reflected throughout medical records for 4 of 94 residents (R25, R41, R86, R349). The facility staff also lacked a consistent process on where to find the code status. This failure resulted in an immediate jeopardy (IJ) for R25, R41, R86, R349, when their medical records failed to identify the residents' wishes accurately. The IJ began on [DATE], when R25's providers order for life sustaining treatment (POLST) signed by provider indicated do not resuscitate (DNR) with selective treatment. However, the physician orders dated [DATE], indicated full code. The code status was not reflected consistently in R25, R86, R41, and R349's medical record. The IJ was identified on [DATE]. The corporate director of clinical services and the director of nursing (DON) were notified of the IJ on [DATE], at 10:58 a.m. The IJ was removed on [DATE], but noncompliance remained at the lower scope and severity…

  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 · Ecited before2025-04-17 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and document review the facility failed to ensure dietary staff was wearing beard guards/restraints when preparing food. This had the potential to affect all 93 residents who reside at the facility and consume food from the kitchen. During observation on 4/16/25 at 10:03 p.m., cook (C)-A had a beard and was preparing roast beef and slicing it on the meat slicer. C-A was not wearing a beard guard/restraint. During observation on 4/16/25 at 10:11 a.m., the culinary manager (CM) had a beard and was stiring a large vat of beef stew. Then he started taking food temperatures and putting the food into an insulated food cart. The CM was not wearing a beard guard/restraint. During interview on 4/16/25 at 10:33 p.m., the CM verified the staff with beards were not wearing beard guards and it had never been an expectation for them to do so. He further verified the facility didn't have any beard guards/restraints available to use, stating if it had been an expectation to wear one he wouldn't have a beard. During interview on 4/16/25 at 2:08 p.m., the…

  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 before2025-04-17 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
  Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
  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 document review, the facility failed to notify the provider of the use of antibiotics concurrent with warfarin, and to obtain a new INR monitoring date for 1 of 2 residents (R76) reviewed for medication administration. Findings include: R76's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified intact cognition, no behaviors, needed partial/moderate assistance for upper and lower body dressing, and substantial/maximal assistance with bed mobility. Diagnoses included hip and knee replacement. R76's medications included an anticoagulant. R76's care plan dated 3/18/25, identified a potential complication: bruising, bleeding, hemorrhage R/T (related to) a dx (diagnosis) of HX (history) of DVT (deep vein thrombosis a type of blood clot) m/b (manifested by) chronic anticoagulation use. Be aware of risk for drug-to-drug interactions. Inspect for signs of bleeding. PT/INR (blood clotting test which checks whether medicine to prevent blood clots is working) per order; report results to MD/NP…

  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 · D2025-04-17 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and document review the facility failed to ensure a sanitary and homelike environment for 1 of 1 residents (R48) who had dried tube feeding formula on the base of the tube feeding pole. Findings include: R48's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R48 had moderate cognitive impairment, was dependent on staff for all activities of daily living (ADL), and received 51 percent or greater daily nutrition through a feeding tube. R48's diagnoses included malnutrition, type 2 diabetes, anxiety, and major depressive disorder. R48's care plan dated 3/21/25, indicated R48 had little to no oral intake and relied on tube feeding to meet my nutrient needs. R48's physician orders indicated the following: -Formula Type: ISOSOURCE 1.5, per pump 45 ml/hour continuous gastrostomy. Start date: 11/27/24. - Wipe down pole and pump with damp cloth daily on pm shift. Start date: 10/24/24. R48's medication administration record (MAR) dated 4/1/25 through 4/15/25, indicated received…

  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 · D2025-04-17 · 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 document review, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 1 residents (R61) received treatments and services to promote the healing of a pressure ulcer per the comprehensive care plan. Findings include: The State Operations Manual (SOM) revised 2/3/23, defines a pressure ulcer as an area of damaged skin and/or underlying soft tissue normally over a bony prominence or from a device. The injury occurs due to intense or prolonged pressure, or pressure in combination with shear. Other contributing factors include skin temperature and moisture, nutrition, perfusion (the blood flow through tissue), co-morbidities and the condition of the skin and soft tissue. The SOM defines a deep tissue pressure injury (DTPI) as intact skin with localized area of persistent non-blanchable deep red, maroon, purple discoloration due to damage of underlying soft tissue. This area may be preceded by tissue that is painful, firm, mush, boggy, warmer or cooler as compared to adjacent tissue. Furthermore, the…

  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 · D2025-04-17 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
  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 document review, the facility failed to ensure a hand brace and palm protector was used consistently for 1 of 1 resident (R71) reviewed for range of motion (ROM). Findings include: R71's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R71 was cognitively intact, had limited ROM with impairment of upper and lower extremities on one side, required substantial/maximal assistance with upper body dressing, and received zero minutes of ROM or splint/brace assistance in the 7 day lookback period. R71's diagnoses included hemiplegia and hemiparesis (weakness/paralysis affecting one side of the body) following a stroke affecting left non-dominant side, type 2 diabetes and lymphedema. R71's care plan dated 3/31/25, indicated R71 had decreased ROM to left upper extremity (LUE) and was at risk for contractures (condition where muscles or tendons become permanently shortened, causing loss of movement). R71's care plan instructed staff to DON [apply] Brace to L Arm @ [at] HS…

  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 before2025-04-17 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
  Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
  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 document review, the facility failed to fully assess and follow up on weight loss and meal intakes for 1 of 2 resident (R73) reviewed for nutrition. Findings include: R73's Optional State Assessment (OSA) dated 3/17/25, indicated intact cognition, required supervision and set up support with eating. R73's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R73 had an impairment in range of motion on one side of the upper extremity, required supervision with eating, did not have a swallowing disorder, was 63 inches and weighed 146 pounds, had no or unknown weight loss or gain in the past 6 months, and had the following diagnoses: displaced comminuted fracture of the shaft of the right humerus (right arm), urinary tract infection, age related macular degeneration, other disorders of electrolyte and fluid balance, hearing loss, and history of malignant neoplasm of the large intestine. R73's Nutrition Care Area Assessment (CAA) dated 3/17/25, indicated R73 had functional…

  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 · D2025-04-17 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
  Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and document review the facility failed to ensure a feeding tube tubing and nutrition bag were labeled according to professional standards to avoid the possibility of feeding tube complications and or related infections for 1 of 1 residents (R48). Findings include: R48's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R48 had moderate cognitive impairment, was dependent on staff for all activities of daily living (ADL), and received 51 percent or greater daily nutrition through a feeding tube. R48's diagnoses included malnutrition, type 2 diabetes, anxiety, and major depressive disorder. R48's care plan dated 3/21/25, indicated R48 had little to no oral intake and relied on tube feeding to meet my nutrient needs. R48's physician order dated 11/27/24, indicated, Formula Type: ISOSOURCE 1.5, per pump 45 ml/hour continuous gastrostomy. R48's medication administration record (MAR) dated 4/1/25 through 4/15/25, indicated received daily continuous tube feedings. R48's…

  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 · D2025-04-17 · 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, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure respiratory equipment was properly maintained for 1 of 1 resident (R23) reviewed for respiratory care. Findings include: R23's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified R23 had severe cognitive impairment, was dependent on staff for all activities of daily living (ADL), and required continuous oxygen therapy. R23's diagnoses included acute respiratory failure with hypoxia (low oxygen levels in tissues), Alzheimer's disease, dementia, and congestive heart failure. R23's care plan dated 4/4/25, indicated R23's diagnoses of Acute respiratory failure but failed to provide guidance for monitoring respiratory status or oxygen therapy. R23's physician orders dated 3/20/25, indicated the following: -Discard and replace oxygen tubing weekly - Sun 11-7 shift. -Discard and replace oxygen humidifier/bubbler weekly. R23's treatment administration record (TAR) dated 4/1/25 through 4/15/25, indicated, Discard and replace oxygen…

  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 before2025-04-17 · 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 document review the facility failed to ensure the recommended personal protective equipment (PPE) was utilized during high-contact cares for 2 of 3 residents (R48 and R53) reviewed for enhanced barrier precautions (EBP). Findings include: R48's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified moderately impaired cognition, no behaviors or rejection of care, dependent on staff for dressing, hygiene, bathing and rolling left to right in bed. Had an indwelling catheter, feeding tube, was at risk for pressure ulcers but had none during the lookback period. Diagnoses included malnutrition, neurogenic bladder, diabetes, and dementia. R48's care plan dated 1/30/25, identified EBP were in place due to indwelling medical devices of urinary catheter and feeding tube. Goals included remain free of infection and prevent the spread of MDROs (multidrug-resistant organisms) within the community. Approaches included sign on resident's door to alert staff and visitors of EBP. PPE per…

  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 · D2024-09-25 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
  Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to review and revise the care plan with current interventions for the care of a new catheter and enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) for 1 of 1 residents (R2) reviewed. Findings include: R2's physician order dated 9/10/24, indicated R1 required a foley catheter related to diagnosis of urinary retention due to neurogenic bladder. R2's progress note dated 9/10/24, indicated R2 had returned to the facility following hospitalization. R2 was admitted to the hospital for septic shock due to bacteremia (blood stream infection) caused by an infected kidney stone. R2 came back to the facility with a foley catheter. R2's care plan revised on 9/20/24, indicated R2 had an actual alteration in elimination related to impaired mobility, overactive bladder exhibited by frequently incontinent of bowel and bladder. R2 had a diagnosis of neurogenic bladder and was at risk for skin breakdown and urinary tract infection (UTI). Further, R2's care plan directed staff to offer toileting at start of shift, every two to three hours and as needed,…

  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

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 29 rows in the source record cover these 25 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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 $712K 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 MN