Bellbrook Health And Rehab
1957 North Lakeman Drive, Bellbrook, OH 45305 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 65 certified beds · (937) 848-7800 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — 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 (F0568, F0569)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (37) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $75,323 in federal fines (most recent 2023-12-19)
- 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 (1/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (62%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- about 24% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
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) | 1 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 |
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 fell from 4 to 2 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 | 5.6% | 5.3% | 15.4% | typical for the state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 9.7% | 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 | 0.8% | 0.4% | 2.0% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 25.0% | 30.1% | 6.5% | better than 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 | 0.8% | 3.2% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 39.5% | 25.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 73.7% | 94.5% | 95.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 7.9% | 3.4% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 19.2% | 21.4% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 7.5% | 8.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.4% | 1.2% | 1.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 26.1% | 75.6% | 79.4% | 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.
38.1% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 30 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.38 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 66% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 14% 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 | 38.1%CMS range 18.1–65.4 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 | not reported — Newly certified nursing home with less than 12-15 months of data available or the nursing home opened less than 6 months ago, and there were no data to submit or claims for this measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.07 | 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 65 beds and averages 38.4 residents a day — about 59% occupied, or roughly 27 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 3.92 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.65 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.98 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 3.75 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.99 on weekdays — 6% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.79 to 0.32 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 62% 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.
37 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 27 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-29 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, resident representative interview, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to notify the physician of a resident's pressure ulcer upon admission and failed to obtain treatment orders to treat it. This affected one (#40) of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility census was 36.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #40 revealed an admission date of 04/17/26. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes mellitus, and atrial fibrillation. Resident #40 discharged to another skilled nursing facility on 04/20/26. Review of an admission Data Collection evaluation, dated 04/17/26, revealed Resident #40 was cognitively intact and required staff assistance with bed mobility, transfers, toilet hygiene, and bathing. The evaluation revealed Resident #40 admitted with pressure ulcer to coccyx which measured five centimeters (cm) in length by 1.0 cm in width with less than 0.1 cm depth. Review of the physician order 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 · D2026-04-29 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, resident representative interview, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) was administered according to physician orders. This affected one (#40) of three residents reviewed for respiratory cares and services. The facility census was 36.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #40 revealed an admission date of 04/17/26. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma, and atrial fibrillation. Resident #40 discharged to another skilled nursing facility on 04/20/26. Review of an admission Data Collection evaluation, dated 04/17/26, revealed Resident #40 was cognitively intact. Resident #40 had oxygen at six liters per nasal canula and bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP) at home settings.Review of Resident #40's hospital discharge orders dated 04/17/26 revealed an order to continue CPAP as directed. The orders indicated Resident #40 discharged from the hospital…
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 · D2026-03-12 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
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, review of the Self-Reported Incidents (SRI), staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to timely report an allegation of verbal abuse. This affected one (#23) out of three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 41.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #23 revealed an admission date of 02/02/26. Diagnoses included bipolar disorder current episode manic without psychotic features moderate, anxiety disorder, hypothyroidism, mixed hyperlipidemia, major depressive disorder single episode severe without psychotic features, and hypertension.Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #23 was cognitively intact. Resident #23 was assessed to require supervision for toileting, bathing, dressing, and transfer, set up assistance for oral and personal hygiene, and was independent for eating and bed mobility.Review of the provider visit note dated 02/16/26 revealed Resident #23 reported an incident…
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 · D2026-03-12 · 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 medical record review, staff interview, review of the hospital record, review of the incident report, review of the incident/accident log, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free of significant medication errors. This affected two (Resident #15 and #36) out of six (#15, #36, #01, #39, #23, and #45) residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 41.Findings include:1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #15 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included cerebral infarction, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, hypertensive urgency, adult failure to thrive, and essential hypertension. Further review of Resident #15's medical record revealed the resident was assessed as having moderately impaired cognition according to the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE].Review of a progress and Situation, Background, Assessment, and Recommendation (SBAR) note dated 02/17/26 contained in Resident #15's medical record…
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 before2026-03-12 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, review of the Ohio Administrative Code (OAC), and policy review, the facility failed to ensure controlled substances were disposed of properly. This affected one (Resident #15) out of 33 residents with controlled substance medication orders. There were eight (#01, #02, #08, #10, #30, #31, #35, and #41) residents who were identified by the facility with no orders for controlled substances. The facility census was 41.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #15 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included cerebral infarction, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, hypertensive urgency, adult failure to thrive, and essential hypertension. Further review of Resident #15's medical record revealed the resident was assessed as having moderately impaired cognition as of their most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE].Observation on 03/12/26 at approximately 9:55 A.M. revealed Licensed Practical…
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 before2026-03-12 · 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, review of an incident report, review of the hospital records, and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain an accurate and adequately comprehensive medical record. This affected one (Resident #15) out of six (#15, #36, #39, #01, #23, and #45) residents reviewed for accurate and complete medical records. The facility census was 41.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #15 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included cerebral infarction, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, hypertensive urgency, adult failure to thrive, and essential hypertension. Further review of Resident #15's medical record revealed the resident was assessed as having moderately impaired cognition as of their most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE].Review of a facility incident report dated 02/17/26, an outside hospital history and physical note dated 02/17/26, and a Situation, Background, Assessment and Recommendation (SBAR) nursing…
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 · Fcited before2026-01-15 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — widespreadMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure areas of the facility were in good repair. This had the potential to affect all 34 residents residing in the facility. Findings include:Observation of the facility's outdoor courtyard on 01/13/26 at 11:59 A.M. revealed a square raised planter box that was filled with soil had a corner that was broken and coming apart. The broken corner had exposed rusty nails. A small inoperable portable heater was on the concrete next to the planter box. A wooden fence enclosing the courtyard was loose and was falling toward the courtyard. A bag of sand was holding a section of the fence up. A wooden picnic table was covered in peeling paint, and the wood appeared to be deteriorating.Interview and observation with the Administrator on 01/14/26 at 9:03 A.M. confirmed the courtyard had a planter box that was broken, coming apart and had exposed rusty nails, there was portable heater sitting in the courtyard, and the wooden fence was loose and falling toward the courtyard. The Administrator confirmed…
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 before2026-01-15 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, record review, and policy review. the facility failed to secure and store medications appropriately. This affected one of two medication carts observed and the facility identified there were four medication carts. This affected Resident #11 and had the potential to affect 13 residents whose medications were stored in the 300-hall medication cart. The facility census was 34.Findings include: 1. Observation on 01/12/26 from 10:39 A.M. to 10:45 A.M. revealed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #141 walked away from medication cart for the 300-hall and rounded the 200-hall corner, and the medication cart was unlocked. The medication cart was not in sight of LPN #141. Interview on 01/12/26 at 10:45 A.M. with LPN #141 confirmed the medication cart was unlocked when he walked away and out of sight. Observation and interview on 01/13/26 at 10:49 A.M. of the medication cart for the 300-hall with LPN #152 revealed the following findings: There were five white pills out of packing 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 · E2026-01-15 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure 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 observations, staff interviews and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure frozen foods were stored at appropriate temperatures. This has the ability to affect all residents except 11 residents (#1, #2, #3, #4, #6, #7, #19, #21, #23, #27, and #43) who did not receive food from the kitchen. The facility census was 34.Finding include:Interview and observations on 01/12/26 from 8:50 A.M. to 8:52 A.M. with Dietary Manager (DM) #127 revealed the kitchen's freezer had quit working the previous afternoon. He shared a repair company was called and the part which went out was under warranty and a new one was ordered. He acknowledged the food remained in the freezer and he stated the plan was to keep the food in the freezer with the door closed to help maintain temperature. The walk-in freezer's temperature was 28 degrees Fahrenheit and there was food stored in boxes on the shelves which included hamburger patties, bulk, french fries and vegetables which were in various states of thawing. DM #127 verified the food in the freezer was no longer frozen.The facility…
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 · D2026-01-15 · tag F0576 — isolatedEnsure residents have reasonable access to and privacy in their use of communication methods.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, resident and staff interviews, record review and policy review, the facility failed to provide residents privacy for telephone calls. This affected one (Resident #50) of 17 residents reviewed for telephone calls. The facility census was 34.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #50 revealed an admission date of 01/08/26. Diagnoses included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting right dominant side, anxiety disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, and depression.The admission Data Collection form dated 01/09/26 revealed Resident #50 was alert and oriented times four.Observation and interview on 01/12/26 at 10:57 A.M. revealed Resident #50 was at the 300-Hall nursing station. Resident #50 was utilizing a walker, using the desk telephone for personal call with multiple residents in the hallway. Business Office Manager (BOM) #102 stated the residents were usually given the cordless telephone from the front desk but Resident #50 was using the regular desk telephone at this time.Observation and interview on 01/13/26 at…
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 27 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-15 · 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 staff interview, policy review and record review, the facility failed to notify the provider and resident representative of a resident's change in condition. This affected one (Resident #9) of one resident reviewed for notification of change. The facility census was 34.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #9 revealed an admission date of 10/19/22. Diagnoses included epilepsy. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #9 had moderately impaired cognition.The care plan, last revised on 10/17/25, revealed Resident #9 had impaired neurological status related to seizure disorder. Interventions included to monitor and report any seizure activity, monitor environment if involuntary muscle movements place the resident at risk for injury, monitor for need of padding to side rails or wheelchairs, monitor vital signs as needed, and report abnormal to physician.Review of Resident #9's progress notes dated 01/07/25 to 01/14/25 revealed no documentation of 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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-15 · 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 record review, resident and staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure resident care conferences occurred quarterly with the Interdisciplinary Team and the resident and/or resident representative. This affected three (#8, #9, and #34) of three residents reviewed for care conferences. The facility census was 34. Findings include:1. Review of the medical record for Resident #34 revealed an admission date of 04/01/14. Diagnoses included diffuse traumatic brain injury, disease of digestive system, diabetes mellitus, dysphagia, and major depressive disorder. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #34 had severe cognitive impairment. The care plan revealed Resident #24 was a long term resident with no plans to discharge at this time. Interventions included to review with resident at least quarterly for any changes in discharge planning needs. Review of Resident #34's medical record revealed Resident #34 had one care conference held in the year of 2025,…
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 · D2026-01-15 · 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 record review, observations, policy review, and staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was dependent on staff for personal hygiene and bathing received adequate assistance with nail care. This affected one (#11) of 12 residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL). The facility census was 34.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #11 revealed admission date of 08/23/22. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including stroke, dementia without behaviors, type two diabetes mellitus, depression, anxiety and polyneuropathy. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #11 was cognitively impaired. Resident #11 was dependent upon staff for personal hygiene and toileting.Review of the care plan revealed Resident #11 had a physical functioning deficit with interventions which included nail care as needed.Observation and interview on 01/12/26 at 11:01 A.M. revealed Resident #11's fingernails had extended…
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 before2026-01-15 · 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 staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident received adequate care and treatment for intravenous line placements, skin assessments, and a wound vac. This affected one (Resident #46) of five residents reviewed for hospitalization. The facility census was 34.Findings include:Review of Resident #46's medical record revealed an admission date of 08/05/25 with diagnoses including acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, anxiety disorder, tracheostomy status, and depression. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #46 had moderately impaired cognition, and dependent on staff with toileting and bathing. Resident #46 discharged from the facility on 08/12/25.Review of Resident #46's assessments from 08/05/25 to 08/12/25 revealed there were no wound or skin assessments completed upon admission or after. Review of Resident #46's physician orders dated 08/05/25 revealed wound vac to abdomen at 100 millimeters of mercury (mmHg) suction to be changed…
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 · D2026-01-15 · 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 observations, resident and staff interviews, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure fall interventions were in place for a resident who had a history of falling. This affected one (Resident #9) of two residents reviewed for accidents. The facility census was 34. Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #9 revealed an admission date of 10/19/22. Diagnoses included epilepsy, cerebral infarction, and hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting left non-dominant side. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #9 had moderately impaired cognition and was dependent on staff for toileting, bathing, and personal hygiene.The care plan dated 11/07/23 revealed Resident #9 was at risk for falls related to impaired mobility. Interventions included bilateral fall mats to floor on each side of bed, call light in reach at all times when in bed, educate/remind to use call light prior to transfer, encourage resident to use…
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 before2026-01-15 · 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
Based on record review, staff interviews, and observations, the facility failed to maintain an accurate medical record. This affected one resident (Resident #12) of 13 residents reviewed for accuracy of medical records. The facility census was 34.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #12 revealed an admission date of 05/09/25.Review of a progress note dated 12/08/25 revealed the interdisciplinary team (IDT) met on that date to discuss an incident that occurred involved Resident #12 on 11/10/25. The team determined the resident had poor safety awareness and he was unaware of his transfer limitations. There were no progress notes in the chart on or around 11/10/25 describing the incident. Review of the active physician orders for 01/12/26 revealed a physician order dated 11/12/25 for a fall mat was to be placed to the left side of the Resident #12's bed when he is in bed, and its placement should be verified every day on each shift.Review of the treatment administration record (TAR) for November 2025, December 2025, and January 2026 revealed nursing staff…
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 · D2025-11-17 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
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, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were provided with a proper discharge. This affected one (#100) of the three residents reviewed for discharges. The facility also failed to ensure the discharges were reported to the local ombudsman office. This affected one (#100) of the three residents reviewed. The facility census was 33.Findings include: 1) Review of the medial record or Resident #100 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged to his home on [DATE]. Diagnoses included orthostatic hypotension, diabetes mellitus (DM), dehydration, dysphagia, and anxiety disorder.Review of the Care Plans dated 04/18/25 for Resident #100, revealed no care plan developed for discharge planning.Review of the April and May 2025 physician orders for Resident #100, revealed no orders for the resident to be discharge from the facility.Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #100 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 · Dcited before2024-08-29 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, facility staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to timely repositioning and turn one resident (#36) of three reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility census was 42. Findings Included: Review of medical record for Resident #36 revealed a re-admission date of 08/11/24, and an initial admission date of 06/17/24. Diagnoses included anoxic brain damage, stage four pressure ulcer of left elbow and sacrum which were documeted to be present on admission to the facility. Review of plan of care dated 06/18/24 revealed that Resident #36 had actual stage four pressure ulcer to the left elbow. Interventions included turning and repositioning schedule per assessment, turn side to side in bed every one to two hours, and treatments as ordered. Resident #36 also had a stage four pressure ulcer to right sacrum plan of care that included interventions of pillows for positioning, low air loss mattress, turning and repositioning and weekly wound assessment. Resident #36 was at risk for pressure ulcers due to impaired mobility. Interventions included…
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 before2024-08-29 · 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
Based on observations, interview, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure enhanced barrier precautions were followed for one resident (#36) and failed to ensure soiled gloves were removed prior to touching clean items for one (#36) of three residents reviewed. The facility census was 42. Findings Included: Review of medical record for Resident #36 revealed a re-admission date of 08/11/24, and an initial admission date of 06/17/24. Diagnoses included anoxic brain damage, stage four pressure ulcer of left elbow and sacrum which were documeted to be present on admission to the facility. Observation on 08/14/24 at 11:42 A.M. Registered Nurse (RN) #329 and State Tested Nurse Aide (STNA) #405 enter Resident #36 room to perform incontinence care, repositioning, wound care, and to check urinary catheter for position. The staff were observed to bring the wound treatment cart into Resident #36's room and the staff were observed to put on gloves to provide care to the resident. No other personal protective equipment (PPE) was used by the staff during the observation. STNA #405…
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 before2024-04-26 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — patternMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, resident interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure exterior windows in resident rooms were maintained. This affected seven (Residents #03, #09, #11, #25, #26, #30, and #31) of 37 residents residing at the facility. Findings include: Observation of the facility on 04/26/24 at 11:21 A.M. revealed there was plastic covering Resident #09 and Resident #11's windows and blinds, and the blinds could not be opened without poking a hole in the plastic. Further observation of the facility revealed there were no screens in the exterior windows in Resident #03, #25, #26, #30, and #31's rooms. Interview with Maintenance Director #80 on 04/26/24 at 11:21 A.M. verified there was plastic covering Resident #09 and Resident #11's windows and blinds, and the blinds could not be opened without poking a hole in the plastic. Maintenance Director #80 stated Resident #09 and Resident #11 had plastic over their exterior windows and blinds because the windows were old and allowed cold air in Resident #09 and Resident #11's rooms. Maintenance Director #80 stated 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 before2023-12-19 · 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 record review, interview and policy review, the facility failed to notify a resident's representative of a change in condition and failed to notify the resident's representative and physician of test results timely. This affected one (Resident #45) of three residents reviewed for a change in condition. The facility census was 42. Findings include: Review of the closed medical record for Resident #45 revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE], transferred to the hospital on [DATE], and discharged on 11/17/23. Diagnoses included cerebral infarction due to embolism of unspecified cerebral artery, cerebral edema, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting left non-dominant side, occlusion and stenosis of unspecified carotid artery, acute embolism and thrombosis of left femoral vein, chronic atrial fibrillation, other low back pain, atherosclerosis of coronary artery bypass graft (s) without angina pectoris, congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease,…
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 before2023-12-19 · 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 of open and closed medical record review, staff interviews, resident representative interview, review of hospital records, review of the death certificate, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to appropriately assess and provide timely intervention for Resident #45 following a change in condition. This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy and placed Resident #45 at risk for serious life-threatening harm, negative health outcomes, and/or death when on [DATE] at approximately 3:06 P.M., Resident #45 complained of lower abdominal pain to Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #02 and was unable to tolerate palpation to his abdomen. After Resident #45 complained of abdominal pain, his bowel sounds were not assessed and the physician ordered imaging results, which indicated a possible bowel obstruction, and the results were not relayed to the physician timely. Consequently, Resident #45 was transferred to the hospital on [DATE] at 11:47 A.M. at the request of Resident #45 and his representative 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 · Dcited before2023-12-19 · 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 record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure resident medical records were complete. This affected one (Resident #45) out of three residents reviewed for documentation. The facility census was 42. Findings include: Review of the closed medical record for Resident #45 revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE], transferred to the hospital on [DATE], and discharged on 11/17/23. Diagnoses included cerebral infarction due to embolism of unspecified cerebral artery, cerebral edema, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting left non-dominant side, occlusion and stenosis of unspecified carotid artery, acute embolism and thrombosis of left femoral vein, chronic atrial fibrillation, other low back pain, atherosclerosis of coronary artery bypass graft (s) without angina pectoris, congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, rheumatoid arthritis, other intervertebral disc degeneration lumbar region, old myocardial infarction, hyperlipidemia,…
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 · D2022-09-26 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview , facility personal funds account review, and policy review, the facility failed to close the resident's account after the resident expired. This affected one resident (#137) of three residents who have expired with money in the facility's personal funds account. The facility failed to provide a notice of spend down for a resident whose balance exceeded the maximum asset permitted. This affected one resident (#30) of three resident records reviewed for personal funds accounts. The facility census was 33. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #137's medical record revealed an admission dated of [DATE]. admission diagnoses included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction. Review of Resident #137's progress note dated [DATE] revealed the hospital called to inform the facility the resident had passed away. Review of the facility's current personal funds account balances for all residents revealed Resident #137 had a balance of $983.35. Interview on [DATE] at 9:22 A.M. with…
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 · D2022-09-26 · 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
Based on medical record review and interviews the facility failed to issue a bed hold notification letter to residents who went to the hospital. This affected Resident #13 and #34 who were reviewed for hospitalizations. The facility census was 33. Findings include: 1. Review of medical record for Resident #13 revealed admission date of 10/14/21 with server cognitive deficits. Resident #13 diagnoses included atrial fibrillation , type two diabetic , and encephalopathy. On 06/19/22, he was transferred to the hospital due to problems with his Foley catheter. On 06/24/22, Resident #13 was readmitted to the facility. Review of Resident #13 nurses progress notes from 06/01/22 to 07/01/22 revealed the facility did not send the representative a bed hold notification letter. On 09/20/21 at 5:15 P.M. interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed a bed hold letter was not issued to Resident #34 or his representative. 2. Review of medical record for Resident #34 revealed admission date of 7/21/22. The resident was admitted with diagnoses chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia,…
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 · D2022-09-26 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview and record review, the facility failed to provide services to prevent further decrease in range of motion and mobility. This affected one resident (Resident #33) out of two resident reviewed with splints. The facility census was 33. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #33 revealed an admission date of 08/29/13 with medical diagnoses of unspecified intracranial injury with loss of consciousness, obstructive hydrocephalus, quadriplegia, and immobility syndrome, aphasia, contracture to joints, unspecified, and traumatic brain injury. Review of the medical record revealed the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] which stated Resident #33 was sometime able to understand information and rarely/never able to make self-understood. The MDS revealed Resident #33 had moderate impaired cognition. Further review of MDS revealed resident required extensive staff assistance of two staff members for bed mobility and toileting and was dependent upon staff for transfers…
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 before2022-09-26 · 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, and policy review, the facility failed to follow infection control procedures when distributing medications and completing wound care. This affected two residents (Resident #10 and Resident #11) out of five residents reviewed. The facility census was 33. Findings include: 1. Review of medical record for Resident #10 revealed an admission date of 02/05/22 with medical diagnoses of acute osteomyelitis, Diabetes Mellitus (DM), chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage 2, neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder, congestive heart failure (CHF), morbid obesity, major Depressive disorder, and status post partial traumatic amputation of right foot. Review of the medical record for Resident #10's revealed a Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] which stated the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) was 15 indicating the resident had no cognitive impairment. Further review of the MDS revealed Resident #10 required extensive staff assistance of two staff members for bed mobility, transfers,…
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 · D2022-09-26 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, resident record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were offered their pneumococcal vaccine. This affected two residents (Resident #9 and #21) of five residents reviewed for immunizations. The facility census was 33. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #9 revealed an admission dated of 07/30/18. admission diagnoses included acute and chronic respiratory failure, anoxic brain damage, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure, and dependence on respiratory ventilator. Review of Resident #9's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) unable to be completed. The MDS revealed the resident required total two-person dependence for bed mobility, dressing, toileting and personal hygiene. The MDS revealed transfers and eating had not occurred during the evaluation period. Review of Resident #9's plan of care dated 08/05/22 revealed the resident had an alteration in respiratory status due to chronic…
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 · F2019-11-26 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespreadHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on review of the facility time punches and schedules and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a Registered Nurse (RN) was working at least eight hours a day. This had the potential to affect 31 of 31 residents at the facility. The facility census was 31. Findings included: Review of the weekend staffing schedules and payroll punches from 10/19/19 through 11/24/19, revealed the facility did not have a RN working for at least eight hours a day on 10/19/19, 10/20/19, 11/02/19, 11/03/19, 11/16/19 and 11/17/19. Interview on 11/26/19 at 2:11 P.M., with Human Resources Director (HR) #101 confirmed there was no RN staffed on 10/19/19, 10/20/19, 11/02/19, 11/03/19, 11/16/19 and 11/17/19. Interview on 11/26/19 at 2:30 P.M., with the Administrator confirmed there was no RN staffed on 10/19/19, 10/20/19, 11/02/19, 11/03/19, 11/16/19 and 11/17/19.
- Potential for harm · F2019-11-26 · tag F0730 — widespreadObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on review of personnel files and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure State Tested Nursing Assistants (STNA) received 12 hours of training annually. This affected one (#109) of one STNA reviewed who worked at the facility greater than one year. This had the potential to affect 31 of 31 residents at the facility. The facility census was 31. Findings include: Review of the personnel file for STNA #109 revealed a hire date of 10/15/13. Further review of STNA #109's file revealed no evidence of 12 hours of annual in-services. Interview on 11/26/19 at 11:03 A.M., with Human Resource Director (HR) #101 confirmed the facility was not able to provide a record of on-going training or in-services for STNA #109. HR #101 confirmed there were no other STNAs who had been at the facility greater than one year. Interview on 11/26/19 at 3:54 P.M., with the Director of Nursing (DON) verified the facility had no documentation to support STNA #109 received 12 hours of on-going in-services.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2019-11-26 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide 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, medical and personnel record reviews, facility Tuberculosis Risk Assessment review, policy reviews and staff interviews, the facility failed to maintain infection control measures while providing wound care. This affected one (#30) of two residents reviewed for infection control with wounds. The facility identified six residents with pressures wounds at the facility. The facility also failed to provide initial two-step Mantoux testing to three new hired employees. This affected two State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) (#115 and #120) and Social Services (SS) #127 of seven personnel files reviewed. This had the potential to affect 31 of 31 residents at the facility. The facility census was 31. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #30's medical record revealed an admission date of 08/08/19, with diagnoses including a Stage IV pressure ulcer of the sacral region at admission, neuropathic bladder and dependence on respirator (ventilator) status. Review of Resident #30's minimum data set…
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 · E2019-11-26 · tag F0568 — patternProperly hold, secure, and manage each resident's personal money which is deposited with the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of the fund account authorization agreements and staff interview, the facility failed to provide authorizations with complete information. This affected five (#2, #3, #13, #17 and #24) of five reviewed for resident fund accounts. The facility identified 11 residents with fund accounts. The census was 31. Findings include: Review of the authorization agreements for five Residents (#2, #3, #13, #17 and #24) identified as having fund accounts revealed there was no evidence of the date the fund accounts were authorized. In addition, the authorization for Resident #2 revealed he marked his name with an X and had only one witness signature. The authorization agreement form indicated two witness signatures were required if a resident marked a name with an X. Interview on 11/25/19 at 8:47 A.M. with Business Office Manager (BOM) #100 verified none of the five authorization agreements were dated for Residents #2, #3, #13, #17 and #24. BOM #100 verified Resident #2 signed with an X and there was only one witness signature. The authorization form stated there should be two…
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 before2019-11-26 · 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, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to consistently provide physician ordered compression leg cuffs. This affected one (#18) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The census was 31. Finding include: Review of Resident #18's medical record revealed an admission date of 02/20/19, with diagnoses including deep vein thrombosis. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident's cognition was intact. Review of physician's order initiated 03/28/19 revealed to apply compression cuffs bilaterally to the resident's lower extremities 45 minutes twice per day. Review of the recent Treatment Administration Records (TAR) for the resident revealed no evidence the compression cuffs were applied on day shift on 10/01/19, 10/04/19, 10/12/19, 10/20/19, 10/22/19, 10/23/19, 10/24/19, 10/25/19, 10/30/19, 11/04/19, 11/06/19, 11/10/19, 11/19/19 and 11/24/19. There was no information on the TAR that the resident refused the compression…
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 · D2019-11-26 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff and resident interview, the facility failed to ensure catheter care was provided to residents utilizing an urinary catheter. This affected two (#20 and #30) of two residents reviewed for catheter care. The facility identified seven residents with urinary catheters. The facility census was 31. Findings included: 1. Review of Resident #20's medical record revealed an admission date of 07/31/19. Medical diagnosis included neurogenic bladder. Review of admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #20 was cognitively intact. Review of physician orders dated 07/31/19 for Resident #20 revealed to provide catheter care every day and night shift. Review of care plan dated 08/01/19 for Resident #20 revealed she had an alteration in bladder related to urinary catheter for a diagnosis of neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder. Review of the Treatment Administration Record (TAR) from 10/01/19 through 10/31/19 revealed there was no documented evidence 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 · D2019-11-26 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure tube feeding was administered at the correct infusion rate. This affected two (#9, #131) of two residents reviewed for tube feed administration. The facility identified 15 residents who received tube feeding. The census was 31. Findings included: 1. Medical record review for Resident #9 revealed an admission date of 06/15/19. Medical diagnosis included heart failure and diabetes. Review of significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #9 was fed by a feeding tube. Review of the monthly weight records revealed no significant weight loss for the resident. Review of physician order dated 10/15/19 for Resident #9 revealed an Enteral feeding every day and night shift for Glucerna 1.5 at 55 milliliters per hour (ml/hr). Observation of the tube feeding pump on 11/24/19 at 11:52 A.M., for Resident #9 revealed the infusion was at 45 ml/hr. Interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #104…
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 · D2019-11-26 · tag F0800 — isolatedProvide each resident with a nourishing, palatable, well-balanced diet that meets his or her daily nutritional and special dietary needs.
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, observations, review of the menu and recipe, and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide dessert as specified on the approved menu for two (#21 and #5) of five diabetic residents observed with physician's orders for controlled carbohydrate diet. The census was 31. Findings include: 1. Medical record review for Resident #21 revealed she was admitted on [DATE], with diagnosis including insulin dependent diabetes. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had intact cognition. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for the past month revealed the resident's accuchecks ranged from 93 to 209 milligrams/deciliter which indicated her blood sugars were elevated at times. The resident's current diet order was for a controlled carbohydrate diet. Observations on 11/24/19 at 12:29 P.M., revealed chocolate cake was served to Resident #21 at lunch topped with chocolate syrup/chocolate chips. 2. Medical record review for Resident #5…
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 · C2019-11-26 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespreadDispose of garbage and refuse properly.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview, the facility staff failed to contain trash in a sanitary manner. The potentially could affect 31 of 31 residents in the facility. The facility census was 31. Findings include: Observations on 11/24/19 at 8:50 A.M., with [NAME] #121 revealed the outside trash dumpster was almost full of trash with the door to the dumpster open. The trash inside the dumpster was visible from the kitchen. At that time [NAME] #121 verified the open door to the dumpster almost full of trash. Observation on 11/25/19 at 7:43 A.M., of the outdoor trash area revealed an overflow of trash over the top of the dumpster with the lid open. Interview with Dietary Manager #139, at that time, verified the lid to the dumpster was open with trash overflowing over the top of the dumpster. Interview on 11/25/19 at 11:20 A.M., with the Administrator revealed there was no policy for containing the dumpster trash.
“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
$75,323 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $75,323 — penalty dated 2023-12-19
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to SIMCHA HYMAN & NAFTALI ZANZIPER — 79 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 2.6 | -0.6 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.7 | -0.7 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 2.2 | -1.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 3.4 | +1.6 vs chain |
The other 78 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.6★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 78; lowest-rated first.
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
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FLYER 2 OPERATIONS HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 09/29/2022 |
| ACM ASHEM HOLDINGS, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 09/29/2022 |
| FLYER 2 HOLDINGS, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 09/29/2022 |
| FTK FLYER OH, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 09/29/2022 |
| ZANZIPER FAMILY TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 09/29/2022 |
| CLINGER, STEAVEY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/08/2025 |
| KRIESER, AKIVA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| MOERMAN, RAFAEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| CITRIN COOPERMAN ADVISORS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| FASTEN HALBERSTAM LLP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| GALE HEALTHCARE SOLUTIONS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| MED-NET COMPLIANCE LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/01/2018 |
| NPNH1 LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| OVATION REHABILITATION SERVICES LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| SHS KEREN LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| THE PAVILION MANAGMENT COMPANY LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| VERACITY RESOURCING AND SERVICES LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| WISE MEDICAL STAFFING, INC. | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| BIRNBAUM, EZRA | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| DIXON, KOBY | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/02/2025 |
| HIRSCH, SHAYE | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| SINGER, SIMON | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| ZANZIPER, NAFTALI | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| ZANZIPER, NATALIE | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/29/2022 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 30 rows in the source record cover these 24 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
15 organizational owners 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 $1.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 24% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in 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 365626. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-15, 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.