Arbor Walk Healthcare 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.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.38 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 65% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 96% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy at close to weekday levels right through the weekend. 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 60 beds and averages 55.3 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 5 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. 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 3.43 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.71 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.11 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 2.68 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.73 on weekdays — 28% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.73 to 0.65 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

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.

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

• Actual harm · Gcited before2024-07-10 · 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

  Based on staff interview, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to notify the Nurse Practitioner (NP) of Registered Dietitian (RD) recommendations for a resident with significant weight loss (Resident #1) and a change in condition (Resident #2) for two (2) of six (6) residents reviewed for physician notification. Findings include: Record review of the facility policy titled, Change in a Resident's Condition or Status revealed, Policy Statement, Our facility shall promptly notify the resident, his or her Attending Physician .of changes in the resident's medical/mental condition and/or status . Resident #1 A record review of Registered Dietitian Assessment Summary for Resident #1, dated 10/16/2023, indicated that Resident #1's weight was 160 pounds (lbs.) with a weight change of 6.98 percent (%) since admission, which indicated a significant weight loss. A record review of weights documented for Resident #1 revealed: 9/29/23 weight 172 lbs (pounds)., 10/2/23 weight 160 lbs., 10/18/23 weight 151.2 lbs. and 11/3/23 weight 127.4 lbs. Record review of a Subjective,…

  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
• Actual harm · Gcited before2024-07-10 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review, staff interview and facility policy review the facility failed to implement care plan interventions to prevent significant weight loss for one (1) of seven (7) care plans reviewed. Resident #1. Findings include: Record review of the facility policy titled, Care Plans-Comprehensive revised September 2010, revealed, Policy Statement: An individualized comprehensive care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychological needs is developed for each resident .5. Care plan interventions are designed after careful consideration of the relationship between the resident's problem areas and their causes. Record review of Resident #1's summary of weights revealed: 9/29/23 weight 172 lbs, 10/2/23 weight 160 lbs, 10/18/23 weight 151.2 lbs and 11/3/23 weight 127.4 lbs. A record review of Registered Dietitian Assessment Summary for Resident #1, dated 10/16/2023, indicated that Resident #1's weight was 160 pounds (lbs) with a weight change of 6.98 percent (%) since admission, which indicated a significant…

  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
• Actual harm · G2024-07-10 · 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

  Based on record review, staff interview and facility policy review the facility failed to put interventions in place for a resident identified as having had significant weight loss for one (1) of four (4) residents reviewed for weight loss. Resident #1. Findings include: Review of the facility policy, titled Weight Assessment and Interventions, revised September 2008, revealed Policy Statement: The multidisciplinary team will strive to prevent, monitor and intervene for undesirable weight loss for our residents. Policy Interpretation and Implementation, Weight Assessment .5. Any Registered Dietitian Recommendations will be forwarded to the resident's Physician for action as indicated. Subsequent Physician orders will be provided to the facility within 72 hours. A record review of Registered Dietitian Assessment Summary for Resident #1, dated 10/16/2023, indicated that the resident received a Renal Diet and Isosource 1.5, three (3) times a day by percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube (PEG). Resident #1's weight was 160 pounds (lbs.) with a weight change of 6.98 percent (%) since…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-12 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on staff and resident interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure each resident's right to remain free from sexual abuse for one (1) of three (3) residents reviewed for abuse. Resident #1. Based on the implementation of corrective actions on 1/5/26, the State Agency (SA) determined the deficiency to be Past Non-Compliance and the facility was in compliance as of 1/6/26, prior to the SA entrance on 1/12/26. Findings Included: Record review of the facility policy titled, Abuse Prohibition revealed Policy Statement, To assure the prohibition of abuse, neglect, mistreatment, and the misappropriation of property of all residents . Record review of the facility investigation revealed that on 12/31/25 at 3:00 PM, the Administrator (ADM) received an allegation of sexual abuse that occurred on the afternoon of 12/27/25, when Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #1 observed Resident #2 in the room of Resident #1 with his hand in her brief and his mouth on her breast. Further review of the investigation revealed Resident #2 was placed on every…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-23 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's right to be free from verbal abuse when a staff member engaged in a loud, profane verbal exchange with a resident in the dining room, for one (1) of four (4) resident reviewed for abuse. Resident #1.Top of Form Findings included: Review of the facility policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, and Misappropriation Prevention Program revised April 2021 revealed, Policy Statement, Residents have the right to be free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property and exploitation. This includes but is not limited to freedom from corporal punishment, involuntary seclusion, verbal, mental, sexual or physical abuse . Record review of the facility investigation revealed that on 8/15/25 Resident #1 was in the dining room yelling profanities. As Housekeeper #1 walked by, staff heard her yelling the same profanities back at the resident. The incident was witnessed by four staff members: the Maintenance Director (MD) , Housekeeping Supervisor (HS), Activities…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-27 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from verbal abuse for two (2) of three (3) residents reviewed for abuse. Residents #1 and #2 Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Resident Rights, with no revision date, revealed under Policy Interpretation and Implementation: 1. Federal and state laws guarantee certain basic rights to all residents of this facility. These rights include: the resident's right to: .c. be free from abuse . An observation and interview on 6/27/25 at 8:40 AM with Resident #1 revealed she had asked a Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) to notify her nurse that she needed pain medication. Resident #1 stated that RN #1 came into her room and yelled at her, saying she was always asking for pain medicine and would get it when RN #1 was ready. Resident #1 stated the nurse often spoke ugly to her and others and that she had never reported it, believing other residents had not either. She said RN #1 would often say, You better be good today or else. Resident #1 confirmed another nurse…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-19 · 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

  Based on staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to notify the Resident Representative (RR) of changes in condition for one (1) of three (3) residents reviewed for notification of change. Resident #1. Findings Include: Record review of the facility policy titled Change in a Resident's Condition or Status with a revision date of February 2021 revealed the following policy statement: Our facility shall promptly notify the resident, his or her Attending Physician, and the resident representative of changes in the resident's medical/mental condition and/or status . In a telephone interview with Resident #1's RR on 5/19/25 at 12:19 PM, he stated that one weekend in late April 2025, he visited his brother during lunch and noticed that his diet was pureed. He said he had never been notified that his brother's diet was changed to pureed, nor was he informed of the reason for the change. A record review of the Physician Order Summary for Resident #1 revealed an order for Regular diet, Pureed texture, Regular/Thin consistency, state frozen nutritional…

  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 · E2025-04-16 · tag F0623 — pattern
  Provide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal 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 staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide proper notice of a hospital transfer for one (1) of two (2) residents reviewed for hospitalizations. (Resident #41) Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Transfer or Discharge-Facility Initiated, last revised October 2022, revealed, Notice of Transfer or Discharge (Emergent or Therapeutic Leave)- 4.) Notice of Transfer is provided to the resident and representative as soon as practicable before the transfer and to the long-term (LTC) Ombudsman when practicable (e.g. in a monthly list of residents that includes all notice content requirements). Review of a progress note dated 01/11/25 for Resident #41 revealed the resident was transferred to the hospital on 1/11/25 at 6:46 AM related to dislodgement of a gastrostomy tube. During an interview with the Interim Administrator on 4/15/25 at 2:30 PM, she revealed that the facility had not been providing any transfer notice to the residents or their…

  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 · E2025-04-16 · tag F0625 — pattern
  Notify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
  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 staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide a Bed-Hold notice of a hospital transfer/admission for one (1) of two (2) residents reviewed for hospitalizations. (Resident #41) Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Bed-Hold and Return, last revised October 2022, revealed the following policy statement: Policy Statement: Resident and/or representatives are informed (in writing) of the facility and state (if applicable) bed-hold policies. Record review of a progress note for Resident #41 dated 01/11/25 revealed that the resident was transferred to the hospital on 1/11/15 at 6:46 AM due to dislodgement of a gastrostomy tube. During an interview with the Interim Administrator on 4/15/25 at 2:30 PM, confirmed that the facility should be providing these notices to inform residents and their representatives of the bed-hold policy. She revealed that the facility had not been providing any written documentation regarding the per diem charges and…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-04-16 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
  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 resident and staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to honor a resident's choice for bathing preference for one (1) of 24 sampled residents. Resident #33. Findings Include A review of the facility policy titled, Resident's Rights revealed the following: Policy Statement: Employees shall treat all residents with kindness, respect, and dignity. Policy Interpretation and Implementation: 1. Federal and State laws guarantee certain basic rights to all residents of this facility. These rights include the resident's right to . e. self-determination. On 4/14/25 at 9:35 AM, during an interview, Resident #33 stated that he does not like taking showers. He expressed a preference for tub baths but reported that staff would not provide him with one. A record review of the Annual Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 7/1/24, revealed under Section F - Preferences for Customary Routine and Activities, that in response to How important is…

  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 · D2025-04-16 · tag F0606 — failed to not employ staff found guilty of abuse — isolated
  Not hire anyone with a finding of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or theft.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a criminal history record was reviewed and that a criminal conviction investigation was completed for one (1) of (8) eight new hire personnel files reviewed. Maintenance Assistant (MA) Findings include: A review of the facility policy titled Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation and Misappropriation Prevention Program revealed the following under Policy Interpretation and Implementation: The resident abuse, neglect and exploitation prevention program consists of a facility-wide commitment and resource allocation to support the following objectives: . 4. Conduct employee background checks and not knowingly employ or otherwise engage any individual who has a. been found guilty of abuse, neglect, exploitation, misappropriation of property, or mistreatment by a court of law . A review of the facility policy titled Background Screening Investigation revealed, Our facility conducts employment background screening checks, reference checks, and criminal conviction investigation checks on all applicants…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-04-16 · 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 staff interview, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was accurately coded for one (1) of 24 sampled residents reviewed. (Resident #53) Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Certifying Accuracy of the Resident Assessment, last revised November 2019, revealed the following statement: Any person completing a portion of the Minimum Data Set/MDS (Resident Assessment Instrument) must sign and certify the accuracy of that portion of the assessment. Record review of the Discharge Planning Review for Resident #53 dated 2/7/25 revealed that the resident was discharged to a nursing home (long-term care facility). Record review of Section A2105 of the Discharge MDS for Resident #53, with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 2/06/25, revealed the discharge status was coded as short-term general hospital. During an interview with the MDS nurse on 4/16/25 at 9:21 AM, she confirmed that the discharge MDS for Resident #53 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
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-16 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident and staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to implement a care plan related to resident preferences for baths (Resident #33) and failed to develop a care plan related to nail care (Residents #12 and #33) for two (2) of 24 sampled residents reviewed. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered with a revision date of March 2023 revealed, A comprehensive, person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs is developed and implemented for each resident. Resident #12 On 4/14/25 at 10:39 AM, an observation of Resident #12 revealed long fingernails that measured one-half (1/2) inch in length with a brown substance underneath. The resident revealed he would like to have his nails cut. Record review of Resident #12's care plan titled, Resident has an Activities of Daily Living (ADL) Deficit r/t (related…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Fines & penalties

$8,165 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

• $4,082 — penalty dated 2024-07-10
• $4,083 — penalty dated 2024-07-10

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 7 rows in the source record cover these 5 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.

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 83% 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 $362K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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 MS