Green Village Skilled Nursing & Rehabilitation LTD

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

Met the expected recovery: 48.2% 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 56 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 0.53 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 83% 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 69 beds and averages 62.5 residents a day — about 91% occupied, or roughly 6 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 3.60 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.74 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.94 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 3.40 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.68 on weekdays — 8% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.83 to 0.53 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 61% is well above 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.

15 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · F2025-04-28 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and policy review, the facility failed to have test strips at the three-sink manual dishwash area to test for proper sanitation levels. This had the potential to affect all 59 of 59 residents receiving dietary services. Findings include: On [DATE] at 8:30 A.M. an initial tour of the kitchen revealed Hydrion test strips to test for proper sanitation levels at the three-sink manual dishwash station expired 10/2024. An interview at the time of the observation with Dietary Manager (DM) #448 verified the expired test strips. DM #448 also stated they were unaware of an expiration date for test strips existed. A review of the policy titled; General Sanitation of Kitchen dated 2010 revealed the staff shall maintain the sanitation of the kitchen through compliance with a written, comprehensive cleaning schedule. A review of the policy titled; Cleaning Dishes-Manual Dishwashing dated 2010 revealed dishes and cookware will be washed after each meal to assure that all dishes are clean 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-28 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  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, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure insulin pens were only used for one resident and failed to follow infection control precautions for Resident #32 and #73. This affected Resident #5, Resident #32, and Resident #73 with the potential to affect five residents (#42, #70, #71, #72, and #73) who resided on the 100 hall. The facility census was 59. Findings include: 1. Observation of an insulin administration for Resident #5 on 04/21/25 at 4:28 P.M. revealed Registered Nurse (RN) #434 programmed a dose of 21 units of Humalog insulin from a Humalog Kwikpen device (a multi-use insulin injection syringe). Observation of the syringe revealed it was a previously-opened device labeled as belonging to Resident #46. The surveyor intervened before the resident was injected. Interview with RN #434 on 04/21/25 at 4:45 P.M. confirmed the above findings. Following surveyor intervention, she retrieved a new Humalog insulin vial from storage and used that to medicate the resident.…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-04-28 · 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 medical record review, interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure Resident #2 and Resident #18's comprehensive care plans included all goals and interventions needed to meet the residents' total care needs. This affected two residents (Resident #2 and Resident #18) of 27 residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #2 revealed an admission date of 02/19/22 with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), diverticulitis, type two diabetes mellitus with metabolic diabetic polyneuropathy, chronic pain syndrome, atrial fibrillation, gout, major depressive disorder, unspecified psychosis, mild cognitive impairment, and need for assistance with personal care. Review of the annual minimum data set (MDS) 3.0 assessment completed on 01/17/25 revealed Resident #2 had moderate cognitive impairment with no behavior, wandering, or rejection of care during the seven-day look-back period. Review of the care plan dated 02/19/22 through 05/05/25 revealed Resident #2 had refusal…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-04-28 · 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 review of the medical record, interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure the care plan for Resident #4 was updated with new fall interventions after a fall with injury. This affected one resident (Resident #4) of two residents reviewed for accidents. The facility census was 59. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #4 revealed an admission date of 10/14/24 with diagnoses including syncope and collapse, lower back pain, unspecified head injury, dizziness and giddiness, muscle weakness, unsteadiness on the feet, difficulty walking, and unspecified disorders of bone density and structure. Additional diagnoses listed with an onset date of 03/03/25 included nondisplaced fracture of the medial wall of the left acetabulum and unspecified fracture of the left pubis with routine healing. Review of the quarterly minimum data set (MDS) 3.0 assessment revealed Resident #4 had intact cognition and required moderate assistance with all transfers. Further review of the MDS revealed Resident #4 had one fall with major injury 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-04-28 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on review of the medical record, interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure Resident #2 received assistance with baths and showers per preferences or the care plan. This affected one resident (Resident #2) of six residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL). The facility census was 59. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #2 revealed an admission date of 02/19/22 with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), diverticulitis, type two diabetes mellitus with metabolic diabetic polyneuropathy, chronic pain syndrome, atrial fibrillation, gout, major depressive disorder, unspecified psychosis, mild cognitive impairment, and need for assistance with personal care. Review of the annual minimum data set (MDS) 3.0 assessment completed on 01/17/25 revealed Resident #2 had moderate cognitive impairment with no behaviors or rejection of care. Further review of the MDS revealed Resident #2 required substantial assistance for toileting hygiene and bathing and that it was very important to this resident to…

  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 · D2025-04-28 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  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 medical record review, interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure Resident #66's nicotine patch was administered as ordered. This affected one residents (Resident #66) of five residents reviewed for quality of care. Findings include:Review of the closed medical record for Resident #66 revealed an admission dated of 02/05/25. Diagnoses included spinal stenosis, lumbar region with neurogenic claudication, depression, and anxiety disorder. Review of the discharge return not anticipated Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #66 had intact cognition. Review of the physician orders for February 2025 revealed an order for nicotine transdermal patch 24 hour 21 milligrams (mg)/24 hour (hr.). Apply one patch transdermally one time a day related to tobacco use with a start date of 02/06/25. Review of the medication administration record (MARS) for February 2025 revealed on 02/07/25, 02/208/25, and 02/09/25 a number 9 indicating to see progress note for 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 · D2025-04-28 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on medical record review, interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure Resident #65's care needs were addressed related to a urine sample and the results of the urine analysis were properly followed up on. This affected one resident (Resident #65) of two residents reviewed for bowel and bladder continence. Findings include: Review of the closed medical record for Resident #65 revealed an admission date of 02/03/25 and a discharge date of 02/19/25. Diagnoses included COVID-19, sepsis, acute respiratory failure, history of cerebral infarction without residual deficits, polyneuropathy, hypertension, and urge incontinence. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment completed on 02/10/25 revealed Resident #65 was cognitively intact. Further review of the MDS revealed Resident #65 was occasionally incontinent of bowel and bladder. Review of the orders for Resident #65 revealed a laboratory order dated 02/17/25 at 11:54 A.M. for a urinalysis (UA) with culture and sensitivity (C&S). There was no indication/reason for the UA with C&S noted…

  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 · D2025-04-28 · 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 record review and interview, the facility failed to timely and accurately address and monitor significant weight loss. This affected one resident (#40) of four residents (#40, #47, #48, and #55) reviewed for nutrition. The facility census was 59. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #40 revealed an admission date of 10/05/23. Diagnoses included depression, muscle weakness, severe protein-calorie malnutrition, and type 2 diabetes mellitus with hyperglycemia. Review of the physician orders for April 2025 revealed active orders for weight upon admission, then weekly times four every day shift every Monday for four weeks with start date of 03/28/25 and end date of 04/28/25. Review of Resident #40's weight history revealed: • 02/27/25 187.2 pounds (lbs.) • 03/04/25 169.2 lbs. • 03/13/25 164.2 lbs. • 03/31/25 164.0 lbs. • 04/01/25 166.2 lbs. • 04/08/25 163.2 lbs. • 04/09/25 162.2 lbs. • 04/23/25 164.8 lbs. The weight on 03/04/25 had a line drawn through noted to be incorrect…

  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 · D2025-04-28 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolated
  Provide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on review of the medical record, interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure Resident #18 pain medications had proper indications for use, their pain was re-evaluated after administration of analgesics, and had interventions in place to ensure effective monitoring for adverse effects of opioid use. This affected one Resident (Resident #18) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 59. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #18 revealed an admission date of 05/05/22 with diagnoses including acute on chronic diastolic congestive heart failure (CHF), respiratory failure with hypoxia and hypercapnia, depression, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), osteoarthritis, left lateral neoplasm of the left kidney, systemic inflammatory response syndrome of non-infectious origin (SIRS), muscle spasms, shortness of breath, contracture of the right fingers and right elbow, and constipation. Review of the quarterly minimum data set (MDS) 3.0 assessment completed on 03/25/25 revealed Resident #18 had…

  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 · D2025-04-28 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
  Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to administer medications with an error rate of under 5%. Two medication errors out of 29 opportunities for error, creating a total medication error rate of 6.9%. This affected two (Resident #5 and #11) of five residents observed for medication administration. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #5 revealed he had an active order for 12 units of Humalog insulin to be given with meals dated 02/20/24, and an active order for sliding scale insulin dated 04/10/24. Observation of an insulin administration for Resident #5 on 04/21/25 at 4:28 P.M. revealed Registered Nurse (RN) #434 programmed a dose of 21 units of Humalog insulin from a Humalog Kwikpen device (a multi-use insulin injection syringe). Observation of the syringe revealed it was a previously-opened device labeled as belonging to Resident #46. Additionally, the nurse did not prime the needle with a two-unit push before programming the 21 units. The surveyor intervened before the resident was injected. Interview with RN #434 on 04/21/25 at 4:45…

  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.

  Pharmacy Service 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.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to VRC MANAGEMENT — 5 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 15 rows in the source record cover these 7 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 $1.3M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 15% 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. 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 OH