Greenbriar Center
8064 South Avenue, Boardman, OH 44512 · For profit - Corporation · 120 certified beds · (330) 726-3700 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (28% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0602), cited Jul 2025
- 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 2 actual-harm citations
- inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (42) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $14,380 in federal fines (most recent 2026-02-25)
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
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) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 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, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 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 1 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 5.9% | 5.3% | 15.4% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.5% | 6.2% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.3% | 0.2% | 0.9% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.3% | 0.4% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 48.3% | 30.1% | 6.5% | worse 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 | 3.1% | 3.2% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 7.8% | 6.1% | 16.1% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 15.1% | 25.5% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.9% | 94.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.3% | 3.4% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 35.2% | 21.4% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 3.4% | 8.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 92.1% | 75.6% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 30.8% | 24.9% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 17.7% | 12.9% | 12.0% | 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.
44.1% 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 97 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 76.0% 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 25 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 0.26 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 38% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 8% 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 | 44.1%CMS range 33.6–54.3 | 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 | 11.0%CMS range 7.6–15.2 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 76.0% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 68.0% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 64.0% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 8.1%CMS range 4.9–13.0 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.00 | 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 120 beds and averages 96.2 residents a day — about 80% occupied, or roughly 24 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.36 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.79 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.87 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.91 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.54 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.86 to 0.62 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 28% 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
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.
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.
42 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 29 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2026-02-25 · 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 THE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCY REPRESENTS AN INCIDENCE OF PAST NON-COMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY. Based on observation, interviews, record review, review of the facility incident investigation, and policy review, the facility failed to maintain a hazard free environment free from unsecured smoking materials and smoking inside the facility in undesignated smoking areas. Actual harm occurred on 02/12/26 when Resident #4, who was cognitively intact, wheelchair dependent, and dependent on staff assistance for transfers due to impairment to his lower extremities, lit a cigarette while in his bed and the cigarette fell to contact a flammable agent (cologne) on his bed and on his body. Resident #4 was sent to the hospital on [DATE] for evaluation where he was diagnosed with second degree burns (partial thickness burn that damages the outer layer and underlying layer of skin characterized by severe pain, intense redness, blistering and swelling) to his right thigh. This affected one (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.
- Actual harm · G2024-11-19 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, medical record review, and interview, the facility failed to develop and implement comprehensive, effective and individualized pain management programs for all residents. The facility failed to ensure Resident #104 received pain medication as ordered and the facility failed to ensure Resident #60 was re-assessed timely following complaints of severe pain to determine if changes were needed to his medication regimen. This affected two residents (#60 and #104) of six residents reviewed for pain. Actual harm occurred on 11/14/24 when Resident #104, who had a diagnosis of metastatic (cancer cells have spread to areas other than the original tumor) lung cancer did not receive routine/scheduled pain medication as ordered to achieve effective pain relief/pain management and prevent shortness of breath resulting in complaints of increased pain which included facial grimacing and shortness of breath with pursed lip breathing. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #104's medical record revealed the resident had diagnoses including malignant neoplasm of the lungs and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · G2022-02-10 · 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, record review and interview the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive and individualized restorative range of motion plan for Resident #94 to prevent a decline in range of motion and to prevent the development of hand contractures. Actual Harm occurred on 10/12/21 when Resident #94, who was admitted with no impairment in functional range of motion to his bilateral upper extremities developed contractures to both hands, increased pain with hand movement and the loss of function. Prior to the development of the contractures, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive and individualized plan of care for restorative nursing services, failed to consistently implement therapy recommended range of motion (ROM) services and failed to timely identify, report and implement new interventions for the resident to prevent the contractures and then adequately treat limitations in range of motion. This affected one resident (#94) of two residents reviewed for range of motion.…
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 · F2025-07-02 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — widespreadProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on resident interviews, staff interviews, observation and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure sufficient staff to meet the needs of the residents. This affected four (Residents #83, #49, #42, and #95) interviewed regarding staffing concerns and had the potential to affect all 102 residents residing in the facility. Findings include:Interview on 06/23/25 at 9:33 A.M. with Resident #83 revealed there was only one nurse, and one aide scheduled daily.Interview on 06/23/25 at 9:56 A.M. with Resident #49 revealed the unit was understaffed, and the call light response was poor. Interview on 06/23/25 at 10:28 A.M. with Resident #42 revealed the Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) were lazy and would stand in the hallway talking while call lights were sounding which resulted in lengthy call light responses. Interview on 06/23/25 at 10:45 A.M. with Resident #90 revealed there was never enough staff and usually only one nurse and one aide working.Interview on 06/24/25 at 2:25 P.M. with Resident #95…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-07-02 · 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 record review, observation, interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to store insulin (a medication used to stabilize blood sugars) in a proper manner to ensure efficacy. This affected six (Residents #27, #61, #76, #90, #99, and #109) of 23 (Residents #3, #12, #27, #30, #31, #35, #40, #41, #49, #50, #52, #55, #61, #73, #75, #76, #78, #87, #90, #94, #95, #99, and #109) who were identified as utilizing insulin. The facility census was 102.Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #27 revealed an admission date of 02/10/23 with diagnosis including type two diabetes mellitus with diabetic chronic kidney disease, and long-term use of insulin. Significant orders included Fiasp FlexTouch (a fast-acting insulin)100 units per milliliter solution pen-injector: Inject five units subcutaneously before meals for diabetes mellitus. hold for blood sugar less than 130, dated 3/5/25. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief…
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 · D2025-07-02 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolatedProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
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, facility self-reported incident (SRI) review, interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure Resident #61 was free from misappropriation. This affected one (Resident #61) of one resident reviewed for abuse, neglect and misappropriation and had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 102.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #61 revealed an admission date of 02/13/25 with diagnoses including type two diabetes mellitus with hyperglycemia, acquired absence of right leg below the knee, encounter for orthopedic aftercare following surgical amputation, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), need for assistance with personal care, and anxiety. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 of 15. Indicating Resident #61 was cognitively intact. Review of the facility SRI tracking number 261140 dated 06/02/25…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-02 · tag F0627 — isolatedEnsure the transfer/discharge meets the resident's needs/preferences and that the resident is prepared for a safe transfer/discharge.
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 facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure Resident #106 was safely discharged to another skilled nursing facility. This affected one (Resident #106) of the five residents reviewed for discharge. The facility census was 102. Findings include:Review of the closed medical record revealed Resident #106 was admitted to the facility 05/03/24 with diagnoses of sequelae of cerebral infarction, epilepsy, systemic lupus erythema and autoimmune hepatitis. Resident #106 was cognitively intact and required maximal assistance with toileting hygiene, showers, and dressing along with moderate assistance with personal hygiene and transfers. Review of the progress note dated 03/20/25 at 2:34 P.M. revealed Resident #106 requested to have a referral sent to facilities closer to Akron, Ohio. [NAME] Care in [NAME], Ohio reached out and accepted the referral. All pertinent information requested was sent over for review and the facility accepted. All resident items were packed up by…
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 · D2025-07-02 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interview and contract review, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered as ordered in a timely fashion after admission for Resident #111. This affected one (Resident #111) of eight residents who were reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 102. Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #111 revealed an admission date of 06/29/25 at 6:50 P.M. with diagnoses including vesicointestinal fistula, peritoneal abscess, encounter for surgical aftercare following surgery on the digestive system, acute diastolic heart failure, hypothyroidism, arteriosclerotic heart disease, hypertension, and gastroesophageal reflux. Review of the admission assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #11 was alert and oriented.Review of the care plan dated 06/29/25 revealed Resident #111 had an infection. Interventions included administering antibiotics per medical providers orders. The care plan also revealed Resident #111 utilizes antidepressant 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-17 · tag F0551 — isolatedGive the resident's representative the ability to exercise the resident's rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #101's Power of Attorney (POA) signed Resident #101's admission paperwork as the resident's representative. This affected one resident (Resident #101) out of three residents reviewed for admissions. The facility census was 95. Findings include: Review of Resident #101's closed medical record revealed an admission date of 02/04/25 with diagnoses including aphasia, following cerebral infarction, Parkinson's disease, type two diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease, muscle wasting and atrophy. Review of POA documents dated 05/29/25 revealed Resident #101's wife was designated POA. Review of Resident #101's admission paperwork revealed all admission paperwork was signed by Resident #101's son-in-law on 02/07/25 who was not an authorized representative of Resident #101 or his POA. Review of Resident #101's discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had severely impaired cognition. required supervision…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-17 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a call light was within reach for Resident #52. The facility also failed to ensure Resident #3 and #28 were reasonably accommodated by staff in response to call light activation for care needs. This affected three residents (Resident #3, #28 and #52) of 31 residents reviewed for call lights. The facility census was 95. Findings include: 1. A review of medical records for Resident #52 revealed a date of admission [DATE]. Significant diagnoses included unspecified head injury, unspecified dementia and cognitive communication deficit. Significant orders included up ad lib with wheeled walker, scheduled toileting to promote continence, and hospice care. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #52 had moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS also revealed Resident #52 had hearing aids, had clear speech and could make self understood. Resident #52 was occasionally…
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 · D2025-03-17 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure a bed hold letter was mailed to Resident #101's Power of Attorney (POA). This affected one resident (Resident #101) of three residents reviewed for notification of bed hold. The facility census was 95. Findings include: Review of Resident #101's closed medical record revealed an admission date of 02/04/25 and a discharge date of 02/16/25. Resident #101's diagnoses included aphasia, following cerebral infarction, Parkinson's disease, type two diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease, muscle wasting and atrophy. Review of Resident #101's POA documents, dated 05/29/2013, revealed Resident #101's wife was designated as POA. Review of Resident #101's discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had severely impaired cognition, required supervision or touching assistance for eating, substantial to maximal assistance with dressing and bed mobility. Resident #101 was dependent on staff for oral hygiene, toileting…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-17 · 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 and interview, the facility failed to ensure Residents #9, #13, and #56 received the necessary services for showers to maintain personal hygiene. This affected three Residents (#9, #13, and #56) out of seven residents reviewed for showers. The facility census was 95. Findings include: 1. Review of the Grievance/Concern log minutes dated 12/03/24, 01/10/25, 01/22/25, 02/27/25, revealed multiple residents voiced concerns about not receiving showers as scheduled. Review of Resident Council meetings dated 01/29/25 and 02/26/25 revealed residents requested shower aides on shifts to help with showers. Medical record review for Resident #56 revealed an admission date of 01/05/23. Diagnoses included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following a cerebral infarction affecting the right dominant side, dysphagia, anxiety, difficulty in walking, cognitive communication deficit. Review of Resident #56's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had severely impaired…
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 · D2025-03-17 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interview and policy review the facility failed to complete pre and post dialysis assessments for Resident #94 on each dialysis treatment day. This affected one resident (Resident #94) of one resident reviewed for dialysis. The facility identified four residents (#9, #76, #86 and #94) as being on dialysis. The facility census was 95. Findings include: A review of medical records for Resident #94 revealed a recent admission date of 01/28/25. Significant diagnoses included end stage renal disease and dependence on renal dialysis. Significant orders included assess dialysis shunt for thrill (a palpable vibration felt over the dialysis access shunt) or bruit (a sound of blood flowing through the access shunt) every shift, assess dialysis resident upon return from dialysis, no blood pressures/blood draws or intravenous access in left arm due to dialysis shunt, dialysis days Monday, Wednesday and Friday. Review of the five-day Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed 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.
Show the remaining 29 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-17 · 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 record review, interview and observation the facility failed to ensure medications were administered as ordered by the physician. This affected two residents (Resident #70 and #357) of eight residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 95. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #357's medical record revealed an admission date of 03/07/2025 with diagnoses that included, acute and subacute infective endocarditis, septic arterial embolism, chronic kidney disease, stage two, ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), other psychoactive substance abuse, uncomplicated intravenous drug use with Suboxone, bacteremia, methicillin resistant staphylococcus aureus infection, nicotine dependence. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #357 had intact cognition. Review of Resident #357 care plan dated 03/08/25 revealed a focus of substance use disorder with interventions to administer medications per medical provider's orders and evaluate 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 · D2025-03-17 · tag F0926 — failed to keep the home smoke-free / fire-safe — isolatedHave policies on smoking.
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, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure Residents #53, #55, and #89 were smoking in a safe smoking area and not an area designated as non-smoking. This affected all three Residents #53, #59, and #89 who were reviewed for smoking. The facility census was 95. Findings include: 1.Review of the medical record for Resident #53 revealed an admission date of 10/28/24. Diagnoses included chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, hemiparesis following cerebral infarction, and atrial fibrillation. Review of the entry Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #53 had severe cognitive impairment with a memory problem. Resident #53 required extensive assistance for all activities of daily living. Review of the smoking assessments completed 10/28/24, 01/28/25, and 02/22/25 revealed Resident #53 was an independent smoker. Review of the care plan dated 01/06/25 revealed Resident #53 utilizes nicotine products. Interventions included she will use 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 · D2024-12-03 · 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 facility's self-reported incident (SRI), interviews and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure timely and appropriate reporting of suspected verbal abuse and rough handling of Resident #75 by staff. This affected one resident (#75) of 33 residents residing on the Regency unit of the facility. The facility census was 100. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #75 revealed an admission date of 09/24/19 with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease, dementia, mild intellectual disabilities, asthma, atherosclerotic heart disease of the native coronary artery, essential hypertension, iron deficiency anemia, obstructive reflux uropathy, bipolar disorder, muscle weakness, glaucoma, and unspecified chronic kidney disease. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment completed 11/04/24 revealed Resident #75 had severe cognitive impairment and was dependent for toileting hygiene, dressing lower body, application…
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 before2024-11-19 · 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
Based on medical record review, review of controlled drug administration records and interview, the facility failed to ensure accuracy of records regarding medication administration. This affected one (Resident #60) of six residents reviewed for pain. Findings include: Review of Resident #60's medical record revealed diagnoses including osteoarthritis of the hips and osteonecrosis of the left femur. On 11/01/24, an order was written for ultram (pain medication) 50 milligrams (mg) to be administered every eight hours as necessary for pain. Comparison of the November Medication Administration Record (MAR) and the controlled drug administration record revealed discrepancies described below. The MAR indicated ultram was administered on 11/05/24 at 9:34 A.M. There was no documentation of the withdraw of the ultram for that date and time. The MAR indicated ultram was administered on 11/06/24 at 8:37 P.M. The controlled drug administration record indicated ultram was removed at 10:00 (what appeared to be 10 A.M.). The MAR indicated Resident #60 received ultram on 11/07/24 twice (at 10:51…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-01 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
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 the facility policy the facility failed to ensure Resident #48, who had an order to self-medicate, kept his medications stored appropriately. This affected one resident (#48) who the facility identified as the only resident in the facility that self-medicated. The facility census was 92. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #48 revealed an admission date of 06/12/24. Diagnoses included type two diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and schizophrenia. Review of the physician's order dated 06/12/24 revealed that Resident #48 may keep his medications at his bedside and administer his medications to himself. Review of the self-administration of medication assessment dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #48 demonstrated secure storage for medication in his room. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #38 had intact cognition. Resident #48 required minimal assistance with all activities…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-01 · 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 observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review the facility failed to administer medications to Resident #31 in accordance with professional standards of practice. This affected one resident (#31) of two residents observed for medication administration. The facility census was 92. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #31 revealed an admission date of 08/08/23. Diagnoses included chronic kidney disease, type two diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and peripheral vascular disease. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #31 had intact cognition. Resident #31 required extensive assistance for all activities of daily living and had an indwelling urinary catheter and was always incontinent of bowel. Review of the care plan dated 08/14/24 revealed Resident #31 required assistance with all activities of daily living. Interventions included to provide set up and clean up assistance for eating and to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-05 · 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
Based on interview, medical record review, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure bathing was completed for Resident #55 and Resident #87 as scheduled. This affected two residents (Residents #55 and #87) of three residents reviewed for bathing. The facility census was 114. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #55 revealed an admission date of 02/24/24 with diagnoses including primary hypertension, atrial fibrillation, type two diabetes mellitus, dysphagia, osteoarthritis, cerebral infarction affecting the left non-dominant side, and hemiplegia. Review of the care plan dated 02/25/24 revealed Resident #55 required assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs) related to pain, impaired mobility, weakness, and hemiplegia. Interventions included two staff for all shower transfers and one, sometimes two, staff to complete all the effort for bathing. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment completed on 06/07/24 revealed Resident #55 had intact cognition and impaired range of motion of the upper and lower extremities…
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 before2024-02-15 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure 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 record review, observation, interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure resident smoking materials were maintained by the facility staff. This affected four (Residents #15, #64, #77 and #346) of four residents reviewed for smoking. The facility census was 94. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #15 revealed an admission date of 03/09/20 with diagnoses including spinal cord disease, paraplegia (paralysis to his legs), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and nicotine dependence. Review of the Smoking Acknowledgement form revised on 03/30/16, revealed smoking materials could present a safety hazard and the facility had adopted a safety policy and procedure to provide a safe smoking area. Resident #15 signed this form on 06/13/23. Review of the quarterly smoking assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #15 was an independent smoker. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #15 had impaired cognition.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-02-15 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, menu spreadsheet review and policy review the facility failed to serve palatable meals at appetizing temperatures. This affected 91 residents receiving meals from the kitchen as three residents (Residents #23, #86 and #296) were ordered nothing-by-mouth (NPO). The facility census was 94. Findings include: Review of a menu for Day 17 Week Three Tuesday corresponding to 02/13/24 revealed the following for the dinner meal: Rancher's Chicken Thigh, country style tomatoes, oven browned potatoes, cornbread and peanut butter cookie. Interview on 02/12/24 at 7:56 P.M. with Resident #56 revealed food was really cold. Interview on 02/12/24 at 8:01 P.M. with Resident #54 revealed the food was cold more often that not and you would not want to eat it. Interview on 02/12/24 at 8:12 P.M. with Resident #25 revealed the food was sometimes cold. Interview on 02/12/24 at 8:22 P.M. with Resident #31 revealed the food was cold because his room was at the very end of the facility. Interview on 02/13/24 at 8:58 A.M. with Resident #32 revealed the food at dinner was cold.…
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 before2024-02-15 · 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 observation, interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure foods were labeled, dated and not retained when expired. This had the potential to affect 91 residents receiving food from the facility's kitchen as three residents (Residents #23, #86 and #296) were ordered nothing-by-mouth (NPO). The facility census was 94. Findings include: Observation of the facility's nourishment refrigerators on 02/12/24 starting at 7:24 P.M. with Culinary Supervisor (CS) #274 revealed the following areas of concern: • On the Providence unit, there was a food container with Resident #347's room number and no date. • On the Lifestyles unit, in the freezer there was a freezerburnt container of ground beef dated 10/13/23. In the refrigerator, there was a container of ice cream with Resident #61's name on it dated 06/14, a peanut butter and jelly sandwich dated 02/03/23, two peanut butter and jelly sandwiches without dates, an additional half of a peanut butter and jelly sandwich that was hard to touch and lacked a date, a clear container with a staff member's name on it with half 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 · Dcited before2024-02-15 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the resident's call light was within reach. This affected one (Resident #8) of five residents reviewed for call lights. The facility census was 94. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #8 revealed an admission date of 10/25/22 with diagnoses including hemiplegia (paralysis) to the left side and dementia. Review of Resident #8's care plan dated 10/26/22 stated she required assistance with activities of daily living related to balance problems, impaired cognition, safety awareness and weakness. The staff were to place her call light within reach so she could call for assistance. Review of Resident #8's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed she had impaired cognition and was dependent on staff for activities of daily living. Observation on 02/13/24 at 8:44 A.M. of Resident #8 revealed her call light cord to be wrapped around the side rail but the call button dangling on the floor.…
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 before2024-02-15 · 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 and interview, the facility failed to ensure showers were completed as scheduled. This finding affected two residents (Residents #54 and #350) of five residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs). The facility census was 94. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #350's medical record revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including difficulty in walking, radiculopathy and pain in the right hip. Review of Resident #350's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident exhibited intact cognition and required substantial/maximal assistance with shower/bathing. Review of Resident #350's shower documentation revealed the resident was scheduled for showers on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday on nightshift and he had received a bed bath on 02/06/24, refused on 02/09/24 and received a bed bath on 02/10/24. Interview on 02/12/24 at 7:33 P.M. with Resident #350 confirmed he was admitted for approximately two weeks and staff had not…
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 before2024-02-15 · 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 observation, record review and interview, the facility failed failed to ensure Resident #347's intravenous (IV) fluids were discontinued after use and Resident #26's right foot dressing was completed as ordered. This finding affected one (Resident #347) of one resident reviewed for IV therapy and one (Resident #26) of three residents reviewed for general skin conditions. The facility census was 94. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #347's medical record revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including encounter for surgical aftercare following surgery on the genitourinary system, unspecified intestinal obstruction and essential hypertension. Review of Resident #347's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident exhibited moderate cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #347's physician orders revealed an order dated 02/09/24 for dextrose-sodium chloride intravenous solution 5-0.45% (percent), use 75 ml (milliliters) per hour intravenously…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-15 · tag F0694 — isolatedProvide for the safe, appropriate administration of IV fluids 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 observation, record review and interview, the facility failed failed to ensure Resident #347's intravenous (IV) fluids were discontinued after use. This finding affected one (Resident #347) of one resident reviewed for IV therapy. Findings include: Review of Resident #347's medical record revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including encounter for surgical aftercare following surgery on the genitourinary system, unspecified intestinal obstruction and essential hypertension. Review of Resident #347's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident exhibited moderate cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #347's physician orders revealed an order dated 02/09/24 for dextrose-sodium chloride intravenous solution 5-0.45% (percent), use 75 ml (milliliters) per hour intravenously every shift for an ileus for two days. Review of Resident #347's IV team form dated 02/10/24 at 12:45 P.M. revealed a new peripheral IV line was started in the resident's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-15 · 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 and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure complete and accurate documentation for Residents #15 and #62. This affected one of three residents reviewed for restorative care (#62) and one of one record reviewed for transmission-based precautions (#15). The facility census was 94. Findings Include: 1. Review of medical records for Resident #15 revealed an admission date of 10/07/20. Resident #15 was diagnosed with MRSA (Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus) in the urine on 06/13/23 and was subsequently placed on transmission-based precautions (contact precautions). Contact Precautions were not discontinued after completion of the appropriate antibiotic therapy. Review of Resident #15's medical records revealed the order for contact precautions was discontinued on 02/14/24. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) indicated Resident #15 remained on contact precautions from 06/13/23 through 02/13/24. Nursing staff was documenting on the MAR daily the resident was currently on contact precautions. Observation on 02/14/24 at 12:13 PM…
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 before2023-12-07 · 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 observations, review of the medical record and interview with the staff, the facility failed to ensure blood sugar tests and insulin was administered as ordered for Resident #78, failed to ensure the call light was answered timely for Resident #15 and failed to ensure an intravenous antibiotic was initiated timely after admission for Resident #99. This affected two residents (Resident #78 and #99) of three reviewed for medication administration and one resident (Resident #15) of three reviewed for staffing. The facility census was 97. Findings included: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident # 78 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included cerebral infarction, anemia, acute cystitis, severe protein calorie malnutrition, encephalopathy, diabetes, diabetic neuropathy, cognitive communication, hemiplegia, gastrostomy, and weakness. Review of the Five-Day Medicare Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #78 had moderately impaired cognition, he had a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-12-07 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
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, review of the medical record and interview with the staff the facility failed to maintain a medication error rate of less than five percent. The medication error rate was calculated to be 13.3 percent and included four medication errors of 30 opportunities for error. This affected one resident ( Resident #55) out of four residents observed during medication administration. The facility census was 97. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #55 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included respiratory failure, COVID-19, hypoxemia, polyneuropathy, chronic kidney disease, benign prostatic hyperplasia, Alzheimer's disease, glaucoma, abdominal aortic aneurysm, atrial fibrillation, adult failure to thrive, weakness, cognitive communitive deficit, and major depressive disorder. Review of the Significant Change Minimum Data Set 3.0 assessment dated 11/2023 revealed Resident #55 had intact cognition. Review of the December 2023 physician's orders revealed…
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 before2023-12-07 · 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, review of the medical record and interviews with staff the facility failed to ensure a clean sanitary environment while providing resident care to Resident #55 and during a dressing change for resident #78. This affected two residents ( Resident #55 and #78) of three residents reviewed for infection control. The facility census was 97. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident # 78 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included cerebral infarction, anemia, acute cystitis, severe protein calorie malnutrition, encephalopathy, diabetes, diabetic neuropathy, cognitive communication, hemiplegia, gastrostomy, and weakness. Review of the Five-Day Medicare Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] Resident #78 had moderately impaired cognition, he had a tube feed for nutrition and received insulin. Review of the December 2023 physician's orders revealed Resident #78 had an order to cleanse his sacral wound with normal saline, apply hydrogel and silver…
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 before2023-09-06 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review the facility failed to provide a clean and sanitary environment where food was being prepared. This had the potential to affect all 92 residents (#1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #11, #12, #13, #14, #15, #16, #17, #18, #19, #20, #21, #22, #23, #24, #25, #26, #27, #28, #29, #30, #31, #32, #33, #34, #35, #36, #37, #38, #39 #40, #41, #42, #43, #44, #45, #46, #47, #48, #49, #50, #52, #53, #54, #55, #56, #57, #58, #59, #60, #61, #62, #63, #64, #65, #66, #67, #68, #69, #70, #71, #72, #73, #74, #75, #76, #77, #79, #80, #81, #82, #83, #84, #85, #86, #87, #88, #89, #90, #91, #92, #93, #94, and #95) who receive their meals from the kitchen. The facility census was 96. Findings include: Observation on 09/06/23 at 8:15 A.M. revealed [NAME] #500 in the kitchen with no hair net covering his beard and mustache. [NAME] #500 was preparing lunch and cleaning up breakfast food service. Interview on 09/06/23 at 8:25 A.M. with [NAME] #500 confirmed he had not and was not wearing his beard and mustache hair net and it 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 · Fcited before2022-02-10 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure food was served in a sanitary manner. This affected one resident (Resident #77) and had the potential to affect all 107 residents residing in the facility. Findings Include: Review of the medical record for Resident #77 revealed an admission date of 05/05/20 with diagnoses including type 2 diabetes, dysphagia, pleurisy, chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage 3 and peripheral vascular disease. Review of the care plan, dated 01/10/22 revealed Resident #77 had a nutritional deficit related to dysphagia and feeding difficulties. Interventions included adaptive equipment such as a two-handle sipper cup, weighted utensils and a scoop plate with all meals. Food intake was to be monitored and recorded at every meal and staff was to provide feeding assistance as necessary. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident required the extensive assistance of one staff member for eating. On 02/08/22…
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 before2022-02-10 · 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
Based on observation, interview, facility policy and procedure review and review of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) guidance the facility failed to maintain adequate infection control practices after providing incontinence care to Resident #45 and related to screening procedures for COVID-19 to prevent the spread of infection including COVID-19. This affected one resident (#45) and had the potential to affect all 107 residents. Findings Include: 1. On 02/08/22 at 1:30 P.M. State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #820 was observed providing incontinence care to Resident #45. After the care was completed, STNA #820 was observed touching the resident's over bed table to move it, assisting Resident #45 to move up in bed using linen and handled the bed remote to raise the head of the bed with the same gloved hands as were used during incontinence care. On 02/08/22 at 1:45 P.M. interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #235, who was present during the provision of incontinence care verified the above observations. LPN #235 revealed the STNA should have removed the gloves and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2022-02-10 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — widespreadImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, review of infection surveillance logs, facility policy review and interview the facility failed to ensure an effective antibiotic stewardship program was maintained. This affected one resident (#34) and had the potential to affect all 107 residents residing in the facility. Findings Include: 1. Review of Resident #34's medical record revealed diagnoses including dementia, congestive heart failure, and cerebral infarction. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 12/07/21 revealed Resident #34 required extensive assistance from staff for toilet use and was always incontinent of bowel and bladder. A nursing note, dated 02/06/22 at 7:43 P.M. indicated the nurse attempted to straight cath Resident #34 per the resident's son's request because he (the son) believed the resident had a urinary tract infection. Another nurse had attempted to catheterize Resident #34 three times unsuccessfully on 02/01/22. Resident #34's son reported the resident was experiencing itching in her perineal area and had a urine smell. The nursing note indicated the son 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 · D2022-02-10 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #5's wishes regarding advance directives/code status was clear and consistently noted in both the resident's electronic health record (EHR) and medical chart record (binder). This affected one resident (#5) of 32 residents reviewed for advance directives. Findings Include: Review of Resident #5's medical record revealed diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), epilepsy, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hyperlipidemia and peripheral vascular disease (PVD). An annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated [DATE] revealed Resident #5 was able to make himself understood and was able to understand others. Resident #5 was assessed as cognitively intact. A signed Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) form (not dated) was in the resident's medical chart record (binder) on the unit at the nursing station. The EHR indicated Resident #5 wished to have cardiopulmonary resuscitation (full code status). On [DATE] at 11:47 A.M.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-02-10 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview the facility failed to provide required transfer/discharge notifications. This affected three residents (#4, #68, and #87) of 32 residents reviewed for hospitalizations. Findings Include: 1. Review of Resident #68's medical record revealed diagnoses including type 2 diabetes mellitus, heart failure, borderline personality disorder, and mild intellectual disabilities. A nursing note, dated 02/04/22 at 4:49 P.M. indicated Resident #68 was vomiting, had garbled speech and weak hand grasps. The note indicated Resident #68 was only alert to person but was usually alert and oriented to person, place and time. Resident #68 was transported to the hospital. There was no evidence of a transfer/discharge notice being provided to Resident #68 or her representative. On 02/09/22 at 4:40 P.M. interview with Regional Director of Clinical Services #1190 revealed the facility did not provide a transfer notice to Resident #68. The Ombudsman was given a list of residents' with discharge date s…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-02-10 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessments were accurate for all residents. This affected three residents (#3, #44 and #95) of 29 resident records reviewed for comprehensive assessments. Findings Include: 1. Review of Resident #44's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including hemiplegia, major depressive disorder and weakness. Review of Resident #44's comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 12/21/21 revealed the resident received seven doses of a hypnotic medication and zero doses of an anticoagulant medication. Review of Resident #44's medication administration records from 12/15/21 to 12/21/21 revealed the resident did not receive any hypnotic medications and received seven doses of an anticoagulant medication. Interview on 02/09/22 at 9:05 A.M. with Minimum Data Set (MDS) Registered Nurse (RN) #1150 revealed she marked the doses of the anticoagulant medication on the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-02-10 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as 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 record review and staff interview the facility failed to refer Resident #57 for Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) Level Two after a new mental health diagnoses was identified. This affected one resident (#57) of three residents reviewed for PASARR. Findings Include: Record review revealed Resident #57 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including diabetes insipidus, lymphedema, schizoaffective disorder (added 05/09/19), primary osteoarthritis, left knee, hypothyroidism, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and history of coronavirus disease (Covid-19). Review of Resident #57's PASARR application/form, completed on 05/17/16 revealed Section D, titled indications of serious mental illness was marked no. No other PASARR application/form was completed after 05/17/16. Review of Resident #57's medical records revealed a PASARR application/Level 2 was not completed after the resident was diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder on 05/09/19. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0…
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 before2022-02-10 · 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 observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure fall interventions were in place for Resident #7 as ordered by the physician and care plan to prevent falls. The facility also failed to implement safe smoking practices to prevent accidents/injuries associated with resident smoking. This affected three residents (#7, #44 and #49) of four residents reviewed for accidents. The facility identified 12 residents (#4, #7, #20, #44, #49, #56, #67, #70, #82, #87, #96 and #98) who smoked in the facility. Findings Include: 1. Review of Resident #7's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including unspecified dementia without behavioral disturbance, major depressive disorder and difficulty in walking. Review of Resident #7's fall care plan interventions revealed an intervention updated 11/02/20 to encourage the resident to wear socks with shoes daily, encourage the resident to sit back in her wheelchair, assure no items were placed between…
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 before2022-02-10 · 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 observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure medications were stored properly. This affected two residents (#100 and #154) of six residents reviewed for medication storage. Findings Include: 1. Review of Resident #100's medical record revealed the resident was readmitted to the facility with diagnoses including diabetes, morbid obesity and weakness. Review of Resident #100's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 01/19/22 revealed the resident exhibited intact cognition On 02/09/22 at 7:38 A.M. interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed Resident #100's bedside table had six medication bottles including Fish oil, Vitamin D3, Heal-n-soothe (supplement for relieving joint and back pain), Testosterone support (supplement), Exipure supplement (nutritional supplement that aids in weight loss by improving brown adipose tissue) and Coenzyme Q (COQ10 which improves heart health and blood sugar regulation). Interview on 02/09/22 at 7:40 A.M. with the DON 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 · D2022-02-10 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolatedProvide or obtain dental services for each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview the facility failed to provide timely dental services for Resident #19 with identified decaying teeth. This affected one resident (#19) of 32 residents reviewed for dental condition. Findings Include: Review of Resident #19's medical record revealed diagnoses including dementia with behavioral disturbance, legal blindness, and anxiety disorder. Record review revealed the most recent dental consult was dated 02/19/21. An annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 11/17/21 indicated Resident #19 was sometimes able to make herself understood and was sometimes able to understand others. The assessment revealed Resident #19 required extensive assistance from staff for personal hygiene. The MDS indicated Resident #19 did not have obvious or likely cavities. Nurse practitioner notes, dated 11/23/21 at 4:37 P.M., 12/10/21 at 2:57 P.M., 12/21/21 at 2:57 P.M., 01/28/22 at 1:56 P.M., 01/31/22 at 10:40 A.M. and 02/04/22 at 6:39 P.M. indicated Resident #19 had decayed teeth. On 02/09/22 at 10:44 A.M., Social Service Assistant #525 revealed 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.
“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
$14,380 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $14,380 — penalty dated 2026-02-25
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 COMMUNICARE HEALTH — 110 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 | 3 of 5 | 3.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.7 | -0.7 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 2.6 | +1.4 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.5 | +0.5 vs chain |
The other 109 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.2★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 109; 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CONSOLIDATED OP CO., LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 05/01/2020 |
| CONSOLIDATED HEALTH HOLDINGS, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/01/2020 |
| CONSOLIDATED HEALTH LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 04/19/2008 |
| NE BAKER HOLDINGS, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 04/19/2008 |
| STOLTZ, CHARLES | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 04/19/2008 |
| WILHEIM, RONALD | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 04/19/2008 |
| SOUTH I MGMT CO., LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/19/2008 |
| BERRESFORD, SAMUEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/15/2024 |
| GROVES, DONNA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| RICCIARDI, SANTUCCIO | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/14/2025 |
| ROMEO, DOMINIC | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 04/01/2023 |
| C.R. STOLTZ IRREVOCABLE TRUST | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/19/2008 |
| I. ROSEDALE IRREVOCABLE TRUST | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/19/2008 |
| R.S. WILHEIM IRREVOCABLE TRUST | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/19/2008 |
| RONALD S WILHEIM 2012 SPOUSAL TRUST | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/19/2008 |
| ROSEDALE FAMILY INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/19/2008 |
| RRW, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/19/2008 |
| S.L. ROSEDALE IRREVOCABLE TRUST | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/19/2008 |
| WILHEIM FAMILY INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC. | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/19/2008 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 25 rows in the source record cover these 19 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
13 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.
About 72% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $1.5M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 16% 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 2024. 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, FY2024). 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 365853. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-03-17, 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.