Kingston of Ashland
20 Amberwood Pkwy, Ashland, OH 44805 · For profit - Corporation · 110 certified beds · (419) 289-3859 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0604) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has citations for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565, F0569)
- it has 2 actual-harm citations
- a high number of inspection citations overall (36) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (59%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- its last standard health inspection was over 3 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
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
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 of 5 |
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.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 2.5% | 5.3% | 15.4% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 7.9% | 6.2% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 0.4% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 29.8% | 30.1% | 6.5% | typical for the state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 1.4% | 3.2% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 6.8% | 6.1% | 16.1% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 22.0% | 25.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.6% | 94.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.1% | 3.4% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 33.0% | 21.4% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 4.6% | 8.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.9% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 91.0% | 75.6% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 29.6% | 24.9% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 19.3% | 12.9% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.07 | 1.73 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.84 | 1.80 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
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.
67.7% 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 285 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 69.5% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 128 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 0.64 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 90% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 22% 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.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 67.7%CMS range 62.4–71.9 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.9%CMS range 7.3–12.1 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 69.5% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 67.2% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 57.0% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 99.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 89.7% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 4.9% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.5%CMS range 4.0–9.8 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.08 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 110 beds and averages 88.1 residents a day — about 80% occupied, or roughly 22 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 4.21 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.67 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.47 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.77 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.39 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.80 to 0.33 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 59% is well above the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 3 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.
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.
36 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 24 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · G2025-04-04 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, interviews with staff, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive post-surgical pain management program was maintained to achieve adequate pain control for Resident 93. This resulted in Actual Harm on [DATE] at 1:38 A.M. when Resident #93, who had a surgical amputation of the left leg (below the knee) on [DATE] and had an order for Oxycodone 10 milligrams (mg) immediate release every four hours for moderate pain, complained of severe post-operative pain rated at a 10 out of 10 (on a 0-10 pain scale with 0 representing no pain and 10 representing the worst pain the resident had ever experienced); however, the resident's Oxycodone had not been reordered timely, resulting in no narcotic pain medication available for administration and the resident had to be transferred to the emergency room to receive pain medication. This affected one (Resident #93) of two residents reviewed for pain management. The facility census was 92. Findings Include: Review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · G2025-04-04 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
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 review of medical records, interviews with staff and residents, facility policy review, and medication manufacturer guidelines review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free of significant medication errors. This resulted in actual harm for one resident on 02/16/25 at 7:23 P.M. when Resident #111, who received long-acting insulin and blood glucose monitoring for the management of Type II diabetes, was administered insulin despite a physician order to hold the insulin when the blood glucose level was below 200 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL) of blood. The resident's blood glucose level was 109 mg/dL (normal range is 70-100 mg/dL). The resident experienced hypoglycemia (low blood glucose level) with a blood glucose level of 44 mg/dL at 1:30 A.M. and was unresponsive. Resident #111 required the administration of glucagon (injection medication to treat hypoglycemia) and emergency medical transport observation until the resident was stable and hourly blood glucose checks per glucometer to monitor…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-10-30 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately 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 medical record review, resident representative interview, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to notify the physician of a resident fall. This affected one resident (#91) of three residents reviewed for falls. The facility census was 90.Findings Include: Review of the medical record for Resident #91 revealed an admission date of 10/06/25 and a discharge date of 10/11/25. Diagnoses included metabolic encephalopathy, osteomyelitis of the left radius and ulna, endocarditis, type two diabetes mellitus, chronic pulmonary edema, pneumonia, hypertensive heart disease with heart failure, cardiomegaly, cellulitis of the left upper limb, iron deficiency anemia, congestive heart failure, benign prostatic hyperplasia, urinary retention, anxiety, depression, and peripheral vascular disease. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #91 dated 10/11/25 revealed the resident had moderately impaired cognition. Interview on 10/28/25 at 8:52 A.M. with Registered Nurse (RN) #147…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-10-30 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, resident representative interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a complete and accurate medical record for residents regarding documentation of fall incidents. This affected one (#91) of three residents reviewed for falls. The facility census was 90. Findings Include: Review of the medical record for Resident #91 revealed an admission date of 10/06/25 and a discharge date of 10/11/25. Diagnoses included metabolic encephalopathy, osteomyelitis of the left radius and ulna, endocarditis, type two diabetes mellitus, chronic pulmonary edema, pneumonia, hypertensive heart disease with heart failure, cardiomegaly, cellulitis of the left upper limb, iron deficiency anemia, congestive heart failure, benign prostatic hyperplasia, urinary retention, anxiety, depression, and peripheral vascular disease. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #91 dated 10/11/25 revealed the resident was assessed with moderately impaired cognition.Interview on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-10-30 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide 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, staff interview, medical record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure indwelling urinary catheter drainage bags were maintained in a manner to prevent infections. This affected two (#23 and #69) of three residents reviewed for urinary catheters. The facility census was 90. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #23 revealed an admission date of 04/01/21 with diagnoses including chronic respiratory failure with hypercapnia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, type two diabetes mellitus, hypertensive heart disease with heart failure, congestive heart failure, nonrheumatic aortic valve stenosis, atrial fibrillation, hyperlipidemia, obstructive sleep apnea, morbid obesity, anxiety, obstructive and reflux uropathy, COVID-19, depression, insomnia, and transient ischemic attack. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #23 was assessed with moderately impaired cognition. Observation on 10/28/25…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-04 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, interview and facility policy review the facility failed to maintain accurate medical records by not transcribing physician orders correctly. This deficient practice affected one resident (Resident #348) out of five residents reviewed for medication errors. The facility census was 92. Findings Include: Review of the medical record for Resident #348 revealed admission date on 02/22/25 with diagnoses including but not limited to high blood pressure, type two diabetes, Congestive Heart Failure (CHF), and osteoporosis. Review of the hospital discharge orders dated 02/22/25 for Resident #348 revealed an order for Ergocalciferol oral capsule 1.25 milligrams (mg) (50,000 units) give one capsule orally in the morning every Monday for supplemental use. Review of the physician orders for Resident #348 revealed an order dated 02/22/25 for a vitamin D2 supplement Ergocalciferol oral capsule 1.25 milligrams (mg) (50,000 units) give one capsule orally in the morning for supplemental use (daily). Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) dated 02/22/25 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-31 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to complete the medical record and accurately document the clinical status for one resident (Resident #105) of four resident's sampled. The census was 101. Findings Include: Review of the medical record for Resident #105 revealed an admission date of [DATE] with diagnoses including anemia, type two diabetes, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, congestive heart failure, protein calorie malnutrition, macular degeneration, spinal stenosis, presence of cardiac pacemaker, chronic kidney disease stage three, and cardiomyopathy. Resident #105 expired on [DATE]. Review of the vital sign record on [DATE] revealed Resident #105's vital signs were documented as blood pressure 122/84; temperature was 97.4; pulse was 66; respirations 18; oxygen saturation 95% on room air. No vital signs were documented on [DATE]. Review of physician orders revealed an order to monitor residents confusion and altered mental status, if it progresses, daughter would like resident sent 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-13 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to provide timely toileting assistance to Resident #1 who required staff assistance for activities of daily living (ADL). This affected one resident (#1) of three residents reviewed for assistance with ADLs. The facility census was 91. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included hemiplegia following a cerebral infarction, intracerebral hemorrhage in the brain stem, respiratory failure, dysarthria, obstructive hydrocephalus, depression, hepatitis, osteoarthritis, and history of transient ischemic attack. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #1 had intact cognition and was occasionally incontinent of bladder and always continent of bowel. Resident #1 required staff assistance for toileting and dressing. Review of Resident Council Minutes dated 08/14/24 revealed the residents at the meeting voiced concerns it…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-13 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 record review and interview the facility failed to ensure daily weights and laboratory tests were obtained and/or reported as ordered for Resident #110. This affected one resident (#110) of four residents reviewed for quality of care. The facility census was 91. Finding included: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #110 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included surgery to the digestive system, colostomy, malignant neoplasm of the sigmoid colon, congestive heart failure, chronic kidney disease, insomnia, dilated cardiomyopathy, and pacemaker. She was discharged to the hospital on [DATE]. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #110 had intact cognition and had a surgical wound and ostomy. She needed set up assistance for eating and weighed 134 pounds (lbs). Review of the physician's orders revealed Resident#110 was order daily weights and to notify the provider of a weight gain of three pounds (lbs) in one day or five pounds…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-13 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the medical record and interview with staff the facility failed to complete a thorough and timely post-fall assessment and notify the family of a fall for Resident #109. This affected one resident ( Resident #109) of three reviewed for falls. The facility census was 91. Findings included: Review of the closed medical record revealed Resident #109 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included hemiplegia of the right side following a cerebral infarction, intracerebral hemorrhage, encephalopathy, pulmonary fibrosis, dysphagia, respiratory disorders, begin prostatic hyperplasia, kidney failure, hypertension, and atherosclerotic heart disease. He was discharged to the hospital on [DATE] where he later expired. Review of the physician's orders dated [DATE] revealed Resident #109 had orders for fall mats to both sides of the bed at bedtime and a low bed. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #109 had severely impaired cognition and 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-13 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
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 ensure medication was obtained timely from the pharmacy for Resident #20. This affected one resident (#20) of four residents reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility census was 91. Finding included: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #20 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, pulmonary fibrosis, chronic duodenal ulcer, hypertensive heart, kidney disease, atrial fibrillation, major depressive disorder, anxiety, chronic pain syndrome, glaucoma, and macular degeneration. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #20 had intact cognition. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed Resident #20 had not received her Entresto (heart failure medication) 24-26 milligram tablet twice a day from admission on [DATE] to [DATE]. Review of the progress notes on [DATE] at 11:08 A.M. revealed Resident #20 to have two plus…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2024-03-07 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — patternHonor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of the resident council meeting minutes, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide the group with responses, action regarding their concerns of call light response times. This affected seven (#22, #24, #30, #47, #48, #52 and #70) of seven residents who regularly attend council meetings. The facility census was 97. Findings include: Review of the resident council meeting minutes was completed with the Activities Director (AD) #1 on 03/06/24 at 2:11 P.M. AD #1 identified she takes the notes for the resident council meetings and documents the concerns resident have. AD #1 identified she started at the facility in October 2023 and is new to the position. The interview confirmed the council did not conduct a meeting in December 2023 due to a COVID outbreak. The minutes identified concerns for call light response times in January and February 2024. The interview identified she has no evidence the resident concerns were shared with anyone and follow up completed. The interview confirmed she also has no evidence the Council President or Administrator…
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.
Show the remaining 24 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-10-05 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolatedProvide timely, quality laboratory services/tests to meet the needs of residents.
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 policy review, staff interview, and record review the facility facility failed to transcribe and implement physician ordered laboratory testing for Resident #90. This affected one (Resident #90) of three residents reviewed for laboratory services. The facility census was 88. Findings include: Closed medical record review for Resident #90 revealed an admission date of 09/08/23. Diagnoses included osteomyelitis (bone infection) of the right foot and ankle status post surgical debridement and malnutrition. Resident #90 was transferred to the hospital on [DATE]. Review of Resident #90's physician orders, dated 09/08/23, revealed an order for Vancomycin (antibiotic) one gram daily intravenously and Zosyn (antibiotic) 3.375 grams three times daily intravenously to treat osteomyelitis. Review of Resident #90's hand-written physician's orders, dated 09/11/23, revealed laboratory testing to include a complete blood count (CBC), a basic metabolic panel (BMP), a C-Reactive Protein (CRP) level, and a Vancomycin…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-26 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, medical record review, resident interview, family interview and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident was provided with assistance of removing facial hair. This affected one (#64) of three residents reviewed for assistance with activities of daily living. The facility census was 93. Findings include: Review of Resident #64's medical record revealed an admission on [DATE], with medical diagnoses including: chronic lymphedema, Alzheimer's disease, history of Covid-19 virus and benign prostatic hypertrophy (BPH) with indwelling urinary catheter. The most recent facility quarterly minimum data set assessment (MDS) dated [DATE] identified the resident had moderately impaired cognition. The assessment identified Resident #64 required one-person physical assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADL's). Review of a physician order dated 09/09/23 revealed an order for Resident not to shave himself. Observation on 09/25/23 at 8:02 A.M., revealed Resident #64 was in bed 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-26 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolatedProvide timely, quality laboratory services/tests to meet the needs of residents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record reviews, urinary drainage bag instructions, policy review, resident interview, family interview and staff interviews, the facility failed to obtain a urine specimen from urinary catheter and failed to ensure staff was knowledgeable of the procedure. This affected one (#55) of three residents reviewed with urinary catheters. The facility identified nine current residents utilizing urinary catheters. The facility census was 93. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #55's medical record identified admission to the facility occurred on 10/07/22, with diagnoses including: stroke, diabetes, and congestive heart failure. Resident #55 was noted in the medical record to have an indwelling urinary catheter. The progress notes identified on 09/22/23 a urine sample was obtained to check for infection. According to the records identified on 09/24/23, the laboratory identified the sample was contaminated and a new sample needed to be recollected. Review of a physician order dated 09/24/23, revealed to recollect Urine for Urinalysis, culture and sensitivity (UA C&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.
- Potential for harm · F2023-05-18 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the kitchen was clean and sanitary. This had the potential to affect all 76 residents who received food from the kitchen. The facility identified three (#17, #21 and #284) residents who received nothing by mouth. The facility census was 79. Findings include: Observation during the initial tour of the kitchen on 05/15/23 from 8:02 A.M. through 8:15 A.M. revealed the ceiling and wall were peeling in the dry storage area, the exhaust fan above the dish machine had grease and dust covered on the louvers on the exhaust fan, and the tabletop mixer had dried food on the top where the attachments are inserted and on the bowl holder. Observation in the walk-in refrigerator revealed precooked French toast outside of its original container and sausage patties with no label or date on it. Observation of the reach-in refrigerator revealed standing water inside the refrigerator and there was dried food on the interior walls. Interview with Dietary Manager #298 verified the findings at time of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-05-18 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — patternEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
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, medical records review, resident and staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were not administered antibiotics without an appropriate indication for use or a stop date per facility policy. This affected three (#17, #18 and #31) of seven sampled residents reviewed for antibiotic use. The facility identified 16 residents were currently receiving antibiotics. The facility census was 79. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #18's medical record revealed an admission date to the facility occurred on 06/15/22 with medical diagnoses including chronic kidney disease, urinary tract infection, anxiety, and chronic respiratory failure. Further review of the medical record revealed Resident #18 was in the hospital from [DATE] through 04/19/23 with urosepsis related to an indwelling Foley catheter. The hospital discharge orders included removal of the urinary catheter. Review of the physician orders for Resident #18 revealed an order written by Certified…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-18 · tag F0569 — isolatedNotify each resident of certain balances and convey resident funds upon discharge, eviction, or death.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of resident personal needs accounts (PNA), staff interview, and review of a facility policy, the facility failed to notify residents or resident representatives when resident accounts reached $200 less than the Social Security Income (SSI) resource limit. This affected two (#2 and #12) of five resident PNAs reviewed. The facility census was 79. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #2's PNA account identified the current balance as of 05/17/23 was $3,911.31. The PNA account included monies from the CARES Act of $2,245.09 that was received on 04/09/21. The PNA account records identified no notifications of the need to spend down following 12 months from the receipt of the CARES Act stimulus check. 2. Review of Resident #12's PNA account identified the current balance as of 05/17/23 was $2,792.41. The PNA account included monies from the CARES Act of $1,617.24 that was received on 04/09/21. The PNA account records identified no notifications of the need to spend down following 12 months from the receipt of the cares act stimulus check. Interview with the 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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-18 · tag F0622 — isolatedNot transfer or discharge a resident without an adequate reason; and must provide documentation and convey specific information when a resident is transferred or discharged.
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 and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the appropriate documentation was contained in the medical record for residents who were discharged . This affected one (#281) of five residents reviewed for hospitalization. The facility census was 79. Findings include: Review of Resident #281's medical record revealed an admission date of 04/20/23. The resident was discharged from the facility while in the hospital on [DATE]. Diagnoses included acute pyelonephritis, type II diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease, end-stage renal disease, and heart failure Review of Resident #281's five-day Medicare Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 04/27/23, revealed the resident was cognitively intact and required extensive assistance of one staff for a majority of the activities of daily living. The resident received oxygen, dialysis, and intravenous medications. Review of Resident #281's respiratory progress notes dated 04/27/23 and timed…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-18 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide 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 medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents and resident resident representatives received notice of transfer as soon as practicable upon discharge to the hospital. This affected one (#281) of five residents reviewed for hospitalization. The facility census was 79. Findings include: Review of Resident #281's medical record revealed an admission date of 04/20/23. The resident was discharged from the facility while in the hospital on [DATE]. Diagnoses included acute pyelonephritis, type II diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease, end-stage renal disease, and heart failure Review of the census records for Resident #281 revealed the resident was transferred to a local hospital on [DATE] and then discharged . Review of both the electronic and paper charts revealed no evidence Resident #281 or the resident representative was provided with a notice of transfer or discharge. A discharge notice was issued when lack of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-18 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify 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 medical record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide a resident with the option to hold a bed at the facility following a transfer and failed to ensure an accurate amount of bed hold days were conveyed to a resident. This affected two (#10 and #281) of five residents reviewed for hospitalization. The facility census was 79. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #281's medical record revealed an admission date of 04/20/23. The resident was discharged from the facility while in the hospital on [DATE]. Diagnoses included acute pyelonephritis, type II diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease, end-stage renal disease, and heart failure Review of the census records for Resident #281 revealed the resident was transferred to a local hospital on [DATE] and then discharged . Review of both the electronic and hard charts revealed no evidence Resident #281 or their representative was given a bed hold notice for their discharge…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-18 · tag F0626 — isolatedPermit a resident to return to the nursing home after hospitalization or therapeutic leave that exceeds bed-hold policy.
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, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to allow a resident to return to the facility following hospitalization. This affected one (#281) of five residents reviewed for hospitalization. The facility census was 79. Findings include: Review of Resident #281's medical record revealed an admission date of 04/20/23. The resident was discharged from the facility while in the hospital on [DATE]. Diagnoses included acute pyelonephritis, type II diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease, end-stage renal disease, and heart failure Review of Resident #281's five-day Medicare Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 04/27/23, revealed the resident was cognitively intact and required extensive assistance of one staff for a majority of the activities of daily living. The resident received oxygen, dialysis, and intravenous medications. Review of Resident #281's respiratory progress notes dated 04/27/23 and timed 8:25 A.M.…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2020-02-27 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — patternReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each 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 medical record review, observation, staff and resident interview and policy review, the facility failed to accommodate resident's need by ensuring resident call lights were within reach. This affected four (#68, #40, #55, #67) of 24 sampled residents. The facility census was 99. Findings include: 1. Medical record review revealed Resident #68 had an admission date of 08/28/15. Diagnoses included multiple sclerosis, dementia, anxiety, depressive disorder and Alzheimer's disease. Review of the significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had impaired cognition. The resident was dependent on two staff for transfers and dependent on one staff for locomotion. Observation on 02/24/20 at 3:08 P.M. revealed Resident #68 was in her bed calling out for help. The resident's call light was on a chair in her room not within the resident's reach. Interview on 02/24/20 at 3:08 P.M., State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #140 verified the resident's call light was not within…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2020-02-27 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor 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 medical record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to clarify and accurately reflect a resident's advanced directive choices throughout the medical record. This affected one (#38) of one resident reviewed for advanced directives. The facility census was 99. Findings include: Medical record review revealed Resident #38 had an admission date of 09/12/19. Diagnoses included interstitial pulmonary disease, atrioventricular block, dysphagia and anxiety. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had mild cognitive impairment. Review of a physician order dated 09/13/19 revealed a Do Not Resuscitate Comfort Care-Arrest (DNRCC-Arrest)- indicating comfort care protocol would be implemented in the event of a cardiac arrest or a respiratory arrest status. Review of a DNR identification form, signed by the resident's representative and nurse practitioner on 09/16/19, revealed the resident had elected a DNR Comfort Care (DNRCC) Protocol.…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2020-02-27 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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, observation, staff interview and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a wound treatment was dated, timed and initialed in accordance with the facility policy. This affected for one (#26) reviewed for skin conditions. The facility census was 99. Findings include: Medical record review for Resident #26 revealed admission date 04/05/19. Diagnoses included end stage renal disease, depended on renal dialysis, hypothyroidism, and type II diabetes mellitus with hyperglycemia. Review of the comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] limited assist of one person for bed mobility, transfers, and set up only for locomotion. Review of the physician orders dated 02/22/20 revealed cleanse wound to right lower anterior leg with normal saline, pat dry, apply silver alginate and cover with Allevyn at bed time. Observation on 02/24/20 at 3:50 P.M., of Resident #26 sitting at bed side in wheelchair has a right lower anterior bandage to leg. The bandage is not dated,…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2020-02-27 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to follow a physician order for placement/function of a wanderguard. This affected one (#55) of one reviewed for wanderguard placement and function. The facility census was 99. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #55 revealed an admission date of 05/21/19. Diagnoses included traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage with loss of consciousness and hypertension. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 01/24/20, revealed the resident had impaired cognition. The resident required extensive assist of one for bed mobility, transfer, ambulation and identifies motion sensor alarm used daily. Review of the physician orders dated 07/22/19 revealed wanderguard on left ankle-check placement and function every shift. Further review of the medication administration and treatment administration record (MAR/TAR) revealed an order for Resident #55 to wear a wanderguard on the left ankle-check placement and function every shift. Review of 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.
- Potential for harm · D2020-02-27 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
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, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to attempt a gradual dose reduction (GDR) for a resident on an antipsychotic medication. This affected one (#29) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility identified 14 residents receiving antipsychotic medications. The facility census was 99. Findings include: Medical record review revealed Resident #29 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, anxiety, hallucinations, and delusional disorders. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had severe cognitive impairment. Review of a physician order dated 11/15/18 revealed Resident #29 was ordered Olanzapine 2.5 milligrams (mg) by mouth in the morning for dementia with behaviors including delusions. Review of a psychiatric progress note dated 05/14/19 revealed a trail discontinuation of the Olanzapine would be considered on the next visit. Further review of 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2020-02-27 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide 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 medical record review, observation, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a urinary catheter drainage bag was properly maintained in a sanitary manner. This affected one (#68) of two residents reviewed for urinary catheters. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure staff wore personal protective equipment while caring for a resident on reverse isolation. This affected one (#67) of one resident reviewed for transmission-based precautions. The facility census was 99. Findings include: 1. Medical record review revealed Resident #68 had an admission date of 08/28/15. Diagnoses included multiple sclerosis, neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder, dementia and Alzheimer's disease. Review of the significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had impaired cognition. Further review of the assessment revealed the resident had an indwelling catheter. Observation on 02/24/20 at 2:19 P.M. revealed the resident's urinary drainage bag was lying…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2018-12-13 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, policy review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure all drugs were maintained in locked compartments to ensure unauthorized access. The facility identified seven Residents (#8, #18, #55, #66, #83, #151 and #156), whom resided in close proximity to the unsecured medication and that could potentially be affected. Facility census was 98. Findings include: Observation of the 200/500 medication cart on 12/10/18 started at 11:56 A.M., located outside of the nursing station. The medication cart was noted with a bottle of Dakin's solution; (dilute solution of sodium hydrochloride (corrosive properties/poisonous), used to clean wounds. The medication cart and bottle of medication was noted to be unattended. Continued observation identified Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #700 returned to the medication cart on 12/10/18 at 12:06 P.M., obtained medications from the cart and again left the bottle of Dakin's on the top of the cart unsecured. LPN #700 returned to the cart at 12:10 P.M. and removed medications, left the cart and the bottle of Dakin's solution,…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2018-12-13 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide 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 medical record review, observation, staff interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure bed pans, and bath basins were properly stored in resident rooms. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure proper placement of a urinary catheter collection bag. This affected nine (#3, #16, #45, #80, #82, #95, #248, #348 and #349) of 32 sampled resident rooms. The facility census was 98. Findings include 1. Observation on 12/12/18 at 1:24 P.M. revealed an uncovered urinal and graduate on the back of the toilet in the room of Resident #45. Interview on 12/12/18 at 1:24 P.M. with State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #102 revealed the urinal and graduate were left uncovered on the back of the toilet. Observation on 12/12/18 at 1:30 P.M. revealed an uncovered bedpan on the back of the toilet in the room of Resident #82. Interview on 12/12/18 at 1:30 P.M. with STNA #102 revealed the bedpan should be stored in a bag. Observation on 12/12/18 at 1:32 P.M. revealed an uncovered bath basin on 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2018-12-13 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor 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 medical record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to clarify and accurately reflect a resident's advanced directives choices throughout the medical record. This affected one (#82) of 32 residents reviewed for advanced directives. The facility census was 98. Findings include Medical record review revealed Resident #82 had an admission date of [DATE]. Diagnoses included a displaced fracture of the left femur, cardiac arrhythmia, hypertension, and type two diabetes mellitus. Review of Resident #82's medical chart revealed a signed do not resuscitate (DNR) identification form had been signed by the resident and a nurse practitioner on [DATE]. Review of a physician order dated [DATE] revealed Resident #82's advance directives included full code status indicating cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) would be performed when required. Review of electronic and paper monthly physician orders dated 12/2018 revealed Resident #82's advance directives included full code status indicating…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2018-12-13 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolatedEnsure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, medical record review, review of a seat belt manufactures instructions and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure an alarming seat belt was correctly applied to one (#83) out of 32 sampled residents. The facility identified no residents who use restraints. Facility census was 98. Findings include: Review of Resident #83's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on 0 2/06/18 with medical diagnosis including dementia. The record identified Resident #83 was high risk for falling and the facility implemented a alarming seatbelt for Resident #83, to alert staff in the event of an unassisted attempt to rise from the chair. The record identified the alarming belt was implemented on 02/22/18 and was to be evaluated monthly by staff to ensure Resident #83 was able to release the belt. The record identified on 11/10/18 Resident #83 had a fall in which the wheelchair was tipped over sideways. The record identified Occupational Therapist (OT) #1, implemented a lowered seat at the time to attempt to prevent further issues. Observation of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2018-12-13 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to update a resident's advanced directives choices in the plan of care. This affected one (#82) out of 32 residents reviewed for care plans. The facility census was 98. Findings include Medical record review revealed Resident #82 had an admission date of [DATE]. Diagnoses included a displaced fracture of the left femur, cardiac arrhythmia, hypertension, and type two diabetes mellitus. Review of Resident #82's medical chart revealed a signed do not resuscitate (DNR) identification form had been signed by the resident and a nurse practitioner on [DATE]. Review of plan of care initiated on [DATE] and last revised on [DATE] revealed Resident #82's advance directives included full code status indicating CPR would be performed when required. Interview on [DATE] at 8:49 A.M. with the Director of Nursing (DON) verified Resident #82's full code status had not been updated to a DNR code status in the electronic health record or in 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.
- Potential for harm · D2018-12-13 · tag F0773 — isolatedProvide or obtain laboratory tests/services when ordered and promptly tell the ordering practitioner of the results.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, policy review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a physician was immediately notified of a critical laboratory result. This affected one (#32) out of five residents reviewed for medications. Facility census was 98. Findings include: Review of Resident #32's medical record identified admission to the facility occurred on 1/11/17 with medical diagnosis including Congestive heart failure (CHF), Alzheimer's disease, atrial fibrillation and long term use of anticoagulants. The medical record identified Resident #32 was receiving anticoagulant Eliquis until 11/05/18, when Resident #32's family elected hospice services, for end of life care. The medication administration record (MAR) dated 10/05/18 confirmed Resident #32 started receiving Coumadin (anticoagulant) medication with Eliquis being discontinued. The MAR further identified Resident #32 was additionally ordered an antibiotic medication starting 10/05/18. These medications when given concurrently can cause significant increase in toxicity. Review of hospice physician notes dated…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2018-12-13 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of the pneumococcal immunizations tracking records, review of medical/vaccine records, policy review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure policies and procedures were developed and residents were able to chose the newest form of pneumonia vaccine available. This affected two (#20 and #151) out of five residents reviewed for vaccines. The facility identified 50 residents who received the pneumococcal vaccine. Facility census was 98. Findings include: Review of the facilities tracking of all residents vaccines (influenza and pneumococcal vaccines) was conducted with infection control coordinator Registered Nurse (RN) #500,on 12/12/18 at 1:25 P.M. The review/interview confirmed the facility had not administered or offered the new pneumonia vaccine (PPSV-23), which protects against 23 strands of pneumonia to any residents. The interview confirmed at this time the facility only offers and administers PCV-13. Review of Resident #20's medical/vaccine records identified admission to the facility occurred on 08/25/16 with evidence of pneumococcal vaccine being…
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.
- No harm found · C2018-12-13 · tag F0732 — widespreadPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observations and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure staffing was accurately posted in a prominent location for residents/visitors to review. This had the potentially to affect all 98 residents residing in the facility at the time of the annual survey. Facility census was 98. Findings include: Observations of the front lobby of the facility, near the therapy entrance was conducted on 12/11/18 at 9:35 A.M. The staffing posted was dated 12/10/18 and included the hours worked by the staff for that day. Interview with State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #20 on 12/11/18 at 6:12 P.M. confirmed the posted staffing was for the day prior (12/10/18) and was not posted for the day. STNA #20 identified she fills out the staffing forms and places them in a wall mounted display case.
“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.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership Data Not Available |
The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — 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.
This home reported $660K 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 OH
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Ohio Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 365646. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2023-05-18, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.