No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Briarfield Place

8400 Market Street, Boardman, OH 44512 · For profit - Corporation · 58 certified beds · (330) 758-8855 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (330) 758-8855 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 10 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (35% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement

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.

5/5
CMS overall
5 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 5 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★ 2/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Pharmacy
Grocery
1135 W Western Reserve Rd · (330) 965-9490 · Call to confirm hours
Park
126 Washington Blvd · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 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 improved from 4 to 5 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.

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased6.5%5.3%15.4%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight0.0%6.2%5.4%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder1.8%0.2%0.9%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.9%0.4%2.0%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.9%30.1%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury7.8%3.2%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened7.1%6.1%16.1%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication18.4%25.5%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%94.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers7.5%3.4%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control19.4%21.4%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table11.1%8.8%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.3%1.2%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%75.6%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission21.2%24.9%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit4.7%12.9%12.0%better

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

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.

66.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 308 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

66.4%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
7.5%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
50.3%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.75U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.40hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.28hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.06hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 50.3% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 149 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.75 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 93% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 18% 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF66.4%CMS range 62.0–72.351.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF7.5%CMS range 5.4–10.210.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge50.3%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge50.3%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge58.4%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay1.7%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.2%CMS range 3.5–9.07.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.901.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

0.44
RN hours/ resident / day
1.60
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.47
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.50
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.35
RN hoursweekends
35.2%
Total nursing turnover
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 58 beds and averages 52.0 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 6 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.50 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.44 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.47 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 4.10 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.67 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.47 to 0.35 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 35% is below the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

1
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-02-26)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2024-05-02)

Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. 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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

10 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · D2026-02-26 · tag F0552 — isolated
    Ensure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to inform residents of the risks, benefits, and alternative treatment options prior to initiating new psychotropic medications. This affected one resident (#7) out of five reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 47. Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #7 revealed an admission date of 05/25/25 with diagnoses including cerebral infarction, depression, and anxiety. Review of the care plan dated 06/09/25 revealed Resident #7 used psychoactive medications. Interventions included provide medications as ordered by the physician, monitor mental status, monitor mood and behavior changes, observe resident's interactions with others, and pharmacy to review medication regimen per facility policy. Review of the Nurse Practitioner (NP) progress note dated 06/13/25 revealed Resident #7 had poor oral intake at meals with minimal improvement after diet texture upgrade. New orders were added for Remeron/Mirtazapine (an antidepressant) 7.5 milligrams (mg) once daily at bedtime for seven days and then…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-05-02 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure food was served in a sanitary manner. This had the potential to affect all 52 residents in the facility, as the facility identified all 52 residents received meals from the kitchen. The facility census was 52. Findings include: 1. Observation of the kitchen on 04/30/24 from 11:12 A.M. to 11:26 A.M. revealed Food Service Director (FSD) #406 had a noticeable growth of facial hair and wasn't wearing a beard guard in the kitchen as he ran the bowl and lid to the commercial blender and a spatula through the dish machine. Interview on 04/30/24 at 11:26 A.M. with FSD #406 confirmed he wasn't wearing a beard guard and had never worn a beard guard in the kitchen. Interview on 04/30/24 at 11:26 A.M. with Dietitian #331 stated staff with beards in the kitchen should be wearing beard guards and confirmed FSD #406 had not been wearing a beard guard and should have been. Review of the facility's undated policy Proper…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-02 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, medical record review, staff interview and policy review the facility failed to ensure peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) were flushed appropriately and as ordered by the physician. This affected one (Resident #113) of five residents reviewed for medications. The facility identified three residents (102, 103 and 113) with current PICC line or intravenous (IV) lines for medication administration. The facility census was 52. Findings include: Observation on 04/30/24 at 12:05 P.M. revealed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #372 administering ceftriaxone (antibiotic) 2000 milligram (mg) through a PICC line for Resident #113. LPN #372 had the medication solution, two 10 milliliter (ml) syringes of 0.9% normal saline (NS) and one 5 ml syringe of heparin (blood thinner) 100 units (u) per ml. LPN prepared the PICC line tubing by cleaning the caps with alcohol and then flushed with 10 ml of NS, then flushed with 3 ml of the heparin and then another flush with 10 ml of NS. At this time LPN #372 connected the ceftriaxone to the PICC line and began the medication…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-02 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, resident interview, medical record review, review of manufacturer's instructions and staff interview the facility failed to ensure respiratory equipment including continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) equipment were properly cleaned per manufacturer's instructions. This affected one resident (Resident #9) of three residents reviewed for respiratory equipment use. The facility census was 52. Findings include: Observation of Resident #9 on 04/29/24 at 2:05 P.M. revealed a CPAP machine on the bedside stand. Interview with Resident #9 on 04/29/24 at 2:05 P.M. revealed staff do not clean her CPAP mask, tubing or machine on a routine basis. Review of Resident #9's medical record revealed an admission date of 06/09/22 with diagnoses including obstructive sleep apnea, congestive heart failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Further review of the medical record revealed on 12/29/23 the resident was ordered the use of a CPAP machine. No evidence of any cleaning of the machine, tubing or mask was found within the medical record. Review of the care plan for…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-06-26 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy the facility failed to ensure all food was labeled, dated, and discarded properly. The facility identified all residents received food from the kitchen, which had the potential to affect all 49 residents. Findings include: During the initial kitchen tour conducted on 06/20/23 between 8:22 A.M. and 8:35 A.M. the following was observed and verified with Food Service Director (FSD) #612. Observation of the walk-in freezer revealed: • One gallon storage bag of chicken breasts was not dated. • One gallon storage of sliced unknown meat, according to the FSD #612, was not labeled or dated. • One opened and resealed half full bag of tator tots was not dated when opened. • One gallon storage bag of breaded chicken thighs was not dated. Observation of the walk-in cooler revealed: • One opened and resealed half full bag of shredded mozzarella cheese was not dated when opened. • One opened and resealed bag of cheddar cheese chunks was not dated when opened. • One opened and resealed bag of four croissants was not dated…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-06-26 · tag F0655 — pattern
    Create and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of Baseline Care Plan facility policy revealed the facility did not ensure baseline care plans were implemented and/ or that the resident and/ or resident representative received a copy of the baseline care plan within 48 hours of admission that included goals, objectives, and interventions of the residents' current needs. This affected four residents (#56, #161, #165, and #170) out of 26 residents reviewed for care plans. The facility census was 49. 1. Review of medical record for Resident #165 revealed an admission date of [DATE] and she was discharged on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included moderate protein-calorie malnutrition, abnormal involuntary movements, restlessness, agitation, and difficulty walking. No baseline care plan was noted in her medical record that included goals, objectives, and interventions of her current needs. Review of Fall Risk Assessment dated [DATE] and completed by Registered Nurse (RN) #639 revealed Resident #165 was at moderate…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-06-26 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on medical record review, interview, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure a resident's wish regarding end-of-life measures was clearly identified in the medical record. This affected one (Resident #39) of 24 residents screened for Advanced Directives. Findings include: Review of Resident #39's medical record revealed diagnoses including fracture of the left pubis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, Parkinson's disease, generalized anxiety disorder, psychosis, chronic ischemic heart disease, severe protein-calorie malnutrition, dementia, adult failure to thrive and cerebrovascular disease. Review of a DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) form dated 10/25/22 revealed a Do Not Resuscitate Comfort Care (DNRCC) order. Review of physician orders revealed an order dated 11/15/22 for a Do Not Resuscitate Comfort Care Arrest (DNRCC-A). Information along the top of the record located near the allergy list and the care plan (initiated 11/29/22) also indicated a DNRCC-A status. On 06/21/23 at 11:59 A.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) stated there was a separate book with code…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-06-26 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, interview, and facility policy review the facility failed to revise care plans for two residents (#15 and #16) of 27 residents whose care plans were reviewed. The facility census was 49. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #15's medical record revealed diagnoses including major depressive disorder and generalized anxiety disorder. A care plan initiated 07/08/22 indicated Resident #15 used psychoactive medication and had a history of anxiety, depression, and PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder). Interventions included monitoring mood and behavior changes, providing medication as ordered, and monitoring mental status. A psychiatrist note dated 03/01/22 indicated Resident #15 had a lot of anxiety and worry. Staff reported increased depression/anxiety especially once the Russian/Ukraine conflicts started. The note indicated Resident #15 had some PTSD issues. Medication changes were made, including discontinuation of trazodone (antidepressant), starting Cymbalta (antidepressant)…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-06-26 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
    Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, record review, and review of weight policy revealed the facility did not ensure weights were obtained as ordered by the physician and/ or per facility policy. This affected two residents (#161 and #164) out of four residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility census was 49. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #161 revealed an admission date of 06/13/23 with diagnoses including hypertension, retention of urine, and chronic ischemic heart disease. Review of the June 2023 Medication Administration Record (MAR) and June 2023 Treatment Administration Record (TAR) revealed no weights were documented. Review of the BCP (Baseline Care Plan)/Admit/ Readmit Screener dated 06/13/23 revealed per the assessment Resident #161 was on a regular diet with thin liquids. There was nothing else added including he was on daily weights as ordered per the physician as an intervention. Review of the Weight Summary for Resident #161 dated from 06/13/23 to 06/20/23 revealed Resident #161…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-06-26 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview, observation, record review, and facility policy review the facility did not ensure Resident #167 had an order for oxygen and had appropriate signage indicating oxygen was in use on her door. This affected one resident (#167) out of two residents reviewed for respiratory therapy. This had the potential to affect eight residents (#13, #15, #21, #164, #167, #171, #173, and #258) receiving oxygen. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #167 revealed an admission date of 06/01/23 with diagnoses including acute cystitis with hematuria, plural effusion, hypertension, and chronic ischemic heart disease. Review of the Physician Orders for June 2023 revealed Resident #167 had no current oxygen order as well as no previous oxygen orders in her medical record from 06/01/23 to 06/20/23. Review of the comprehensive care plan dated 06/01/23 revealed Resident #167 did not have a care plan regarding her respiratory issues and need for oxygen. Review of the Oxygen Saturation Summary dated from 06/02/23 to 06/20/23 revealed there was at least one entry per day…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
REESE, DIANEIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF; ADP OF THE SNF50%since 02/03/2021
REESE, EDWARDIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF; ADP OF THE SNF50%since 02/03/2021
DIANE J. REESE FAMILY TRUST IOrganizationDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2022
EDWARD J. REESE FAMILY TRUST IOrganizationDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2022
WESBANCO INC.Organization5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/21/2020
RUPEKA, ROBERTIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/18/2019
EDM MANAGEMENT, INCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/15/2021
OVATION REHABILITATION SERVICES LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2025
CANUP, SUNNIEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 11/04/2024
COX, JENNIFERIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/18/2019
GROVE, BETTYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2021
JABLONSKI, NICOLEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2021
JONES, ASHLEYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/26/2021
LANDERS, SUSANIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/28/2024
MACLARREN, MILDREDIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/17/2021
MAGNOLIA, CHRISTINEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 12/16/2021
PASTOR, TIMOTHYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/22/2022
REID, GREGIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/29/2025
RIVERA, AMANDAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 12/16/2020
SCHNEIDER, STACYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/01/2022
TORRES, MELONIEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/17/2021
HILL, BARTH & KING LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 08/21/2020
MCCLURG ROAD FACILITY REALTY LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 08/25/2020
WEM & ASSOCIATES, INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2024
NALLAPANENI, SUDHIRIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 11/01/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 51 rows in the source record cover these 25 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

8 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.

$7.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-0.1%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$944K
Related-party expense13% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 5%Medicare 31%Other / private 64%

This home reported $944K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 13% 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

$398per resident / day
operating cost
$12,107per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$398per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in Ohio
$9,186/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$10,389/mo
Nursing home (private)
$6,103/mo
Assisted living

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 366485. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-26, 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.

What to do next