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

Chapel Hill Community

12200 Strausser St NW, Canal Fulton, OH 44614 · Non profit - Corporation · 80 certified beds · (330) 854-4177 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (330) 854-4177 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0602) — cited May 2024Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0758)
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0602), cited May 2024
  • it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (30) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags

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.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
945 W Nimisila Rd · (330) 529-5283 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
977 Cherry St E · (330) 854-4949 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
2275 Locust St S · (330) 854-2239 · Call to confirm hours
Park
853 Locust St S · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
8101 Manchester Ave NW · (330) 854-2650

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 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 1 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased8.5%5.3%15.4%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight5.8%6.2%5.4%typical
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.2%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.4%0.4%2.0%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms9.7%30.1%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury2.2%3.2%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened13.9%6.1%16.1%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication26.1%25.5%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine97.3%94.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.4%3.4%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control31.7%21.4%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table9.2%8.8%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication3.7%1.2%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine83.3%75.6%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission19.8%24.9%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit22.0%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.

44.8% 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 33 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

44.8%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.4%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
40.0%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.39U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.15hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.19hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 40.0% 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 20 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 0.39 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 68% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 26% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF44.8%CMS range 29.1–62.251.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.4%CMS range 7.3–19.810.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge40.0%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge25.0%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge15.0%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified96.3%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot 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 stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened3.7%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.2%CMS range 4.0–11.97.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.891.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.44
RN hours/ resident / day
1.22
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.23
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.89
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.31
RN hoursweekends
44.4%
Total nursing turnover
33.3%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 80 beds and averages 75.1 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 5 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.89 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.44 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.23 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.40 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.08 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.49 to 0.31 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 44% is about the same as 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

4
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-04-24)
13
at the previous standard inspection (2022-11-07)

Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

30 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 20 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-24 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident #9 was assessed following a reported incident in which the resident acquired bruising on her forehead. This finding affected one (Resident #9) of three residents reviewed for quality of care. Findings include: Review of Resident #9's progress note dated 04/10/25 at 3:00 P.M. revealed the resident stated yesterday morning while she was sitting on the commode, she leaned forward and bumped her forehead on the handrail which caused a small faint bruise. She stated she did not tell staff this occurred yesterday. Resident #9 denied complaints of pain/dizziness/or blurred vision. The daughter was present at the time of the conversation and the physician was notified. Review of Resident #9's progress note dated 04/11/25 at 9:23 A.M. revealed the interdisciplinary team (IDT) reviewed the incident of 04/10/25. The resident stated that yesterday morning while sitting on the commode, she leaned forward and bumped her forehead on the hand rail which caused a small faint bruise to the middle of the forehead. She denied…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-04-24 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolated
    Provide 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

    Based on record review, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure there was consistent communication between the facility and the dialysis center regarding Resident #48's health information and hemodialysis treatments. This affected one resident (Resident #48) out of one resident reviewed for dialysis. The facility census was 75. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #48 revealed an admission date of 07/14/23 with diagnosis including but not limited to paraplegia, end stage renal disease, acute kidney failure, and type 1 diabetes mellitus with hypoglycemia. Review of the physician's orders for April 2025 revealed orders for hemodialysis two times a week on Monday and Friday at the outside dialysis facility, send dialysis book with resident, obtain vital signs/assessment and post dialysis vital signs/assessment upon return, check vital sign pre and post dialysis (also check dialysis site) two times a day every Monday and Friday. Review of the dialysis communication binder for Resident #48 revealed only five (5) hemodialysis communication forms…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-24 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure non-pharmacological interventions were attempted prior to administering Resident #13's as needed anti-anxiety medication. This finding affected one (Resident #13) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Findings include: Review of Resident #13's medical record revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including vascular dementia, cognitive communication deficit and anxiety disorder. Review of Resident #13's Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident exhibited severe cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #13's care plans did not reveal interventions including attempting non-pharmacological interventions prior to administering the resident's anti-anxiety medication. Review of Resident #13's physician orders revealed an order dated 03/07/25 to document nonpharmaceutical and pharmaceutical interventions in the nurses notes along with the effectiveness every shift for behavior…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-04-24 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation, staff interview and facility policy review the facility failed to implement enhanced barrier precautions during Resident #38's wound care. This deficient practice affected one resident (Resident #38) out of three residents reviewed for transmission based precautions. The facility census was 75. Findings Include: Review of Resident #38's medical record revealed admission date 03/11/25 with diagnoses including but not limited to fracture of right shoulder, dislocation of right shoulder, dementia, and depression. Review of Resident #38's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #38 required assistance from staff to complete activities of daily living (ADL) tasks and required a sling to be worn on the right arm/shoulder related to a fractured right shoulder. Resident #38 had impaired cognition with a Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score of five out of a possible 15. Review of Resident #38's physician orders dated 04/01/25 to 04/23/25 revealed an order…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-21 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolated
    Protect 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 THE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCY REPRESENTS AN INCIDENT OF PAST NONCOMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY. Based on a facility self-reported incident (SRI) review, medical record review, policy review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure resident narcotic medication was not misappropriated by a staff member. This affected two (Resident #23 and #73) of two residents reviewed for misappropriation of resident property. The facility census was 72. Findings include: Review of Resident #73's closed medical record revealed an admission date of 09/26/23 with diagnoses that included spinal stenosis, dorsalgia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and congestive heart failure. The resident was prescribed the use of oxycodone 5 mg every eight hours as needed for pain relief. Review of Resident #23's medical record revealed an admission date of 09/11/20 with diagnoses that included end stage renal disease with hemodialysis and congestive heart failure. The resident was prescribed the use 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · F2022-11-07 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure staff washed their hands during the passing of the meal trays, failed to ensure the cleanliness of kitchen areas and timely and proper disposal of outdated/expired foods and failed to ensure dish machine temperatures were monitored to prevent contamination and/or food borne illness. This had the potential to affect 71 of 71 residents who received meal trays from the kitchen. The facility census was 72. Findings include: 1. On 10/31/22 at 8:32 A.M. observation during the initial kitchen tour revealed the following: a. The walk-in refrigerator had an unidentified spill which was white in color was noted under the right-side shelving unit that extended half of the length of the refrigerator and had also leaked into the refrigerator walkway. A saturated white towel was on the floor of the walkway. Observation while inside the walk-in freezer revealed two packages of undated frozen cinnamon rolls noted by themselves on the shelf. Observation of the reach in refrigerator revealed 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2022-11-07 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — pattern
    Provide activities to meet all resident's needs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive and individualized activity program to meet the total care needs of all residents. This affected five residents (#28, #51, #56, #57 and #171) of nine residents reviewed for activities. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #28 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease, dementia, atherosclerotic heart disease, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, hypertension, need for assistance with personal care, psychosis, chronic kidney disease, diverticulosis, major depressive disorder, and anxiety disorder. Review of the activity assessment, dated 05/09/22 revealed Resident #28 enjoyed exercise, music, talking, and social gatherings. The resident had been admitted to the facility for long-term care placement. The assessment noted the resident enjoyed conversations with others and her sister-in-law often took her…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2022-11-07 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — pattern
    Provide 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

    Based on observation and staff interview the facility failed to maintain sufficient levels of staffing to ensure adequate supervision was provided to residents during meal service on the memory care unit. This affected nine residents (#1, #2, #6, #28, #33, #56, #64, #171 and #172) of 16 residents on the Memory Care Unit (Willow). Findings include: On 11/02/22 at 8:40 A.M. observation of the breakfast meal revealed there was one nurse, two State Tested Nursing Assistants and one Hospice aide in the Lakeside dining room assisting residents to eat On 11/01/22 from 8:50 to 9:05 A.M. there were no staff observed on the [NAME] (secured memory care) unit to provide supervision for Resident #1, #2, #6, #28, #33, #56, #64, #171 and #172 who were observed with their breakfast trays in front of them. On 11/01/22 at 9:10 A.M. interview with State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #9 verified there were no staff on the [NAME] unit while the residents had their food. She indicated the staff had been pulled to help assist with feeding residents in the Lakeside dining room. On 11/07/22 at 10:45 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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2022-11-07 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — pattern
    Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, review of the facility menu, review of the facility spreadsheet, review of facility policy and procedure and staff interview the facility failed to ensure all residents on the Lakeside unit and [NAME] unit were served the correct/proper serving size of meat during the lunch meal on 10/31/22. This affected 11 residents (#1, #6, #25, #32, #33, #42, #45, #49, #57, #61 and #171) of the 28 residents on the Lakeside and [NAME] units. The facility census was 72. Findings include: Review of the menu for 10/31/22 revealed residents were to receive herb pork loin, red skinned mashed potatoes, corn and apple dump cake. Review of the facility spreadsheet for 10/31/22 revealed the serving size for the pork loin was three ounces. On 10/31/22 at 11:45 A.M. observation in the Lakeside dining room revealed Dietary Aide #37 was serving pork loin to the residents which did not appear to be an appropriate portion size. On 10/31/22 at 11:58 A.M. interview with Dietary Aide #37 revealed she did not know what the appropriate serving size for the meat was supposed to be. Two meal…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-11-07 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her 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 observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #171's urinary catheter drainage bag was properly covered to promote the dignity of the resident. This affected one resident (#171) of three residents reviewed for dignity. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #171 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including trigeminal neuralgia, COVID-19, Alzheimer's disease, benign prostatic hyperplasia, cognitive communication deficit, need for assistance with personal care, sepsis, urinary tract infection, delusional, major depressive disorder, dementia, hypertension, bladder neck obstruction, acute kidney failure and adult failure to thrive. Review of the October 2022 physician's orders revealed Resident #171 had an order for a urinary (Foley) catheter size 16 French with a 10 milliliter balloon. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 10/16/22 revealed Resident #171 had severely impaired cognition. 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
Show the remaining 20 citations
  • Potential for harm · D2022-11-07 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolated
    Reasonably 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, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #24 was positioned properly in bed and had her meal tray placed within reach to allow the resident to eat in a timely manner following meal tray delivery. This affected one resident (#24) of seven residents reviewed for nutrition. Findings include: Review of medical record revealed Resident #24 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including pneumonia, dyspnea, dysphagia, emphysema and severe protein-calorie malnutrition. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 08/17/22 revealed Resident #24 required limited assistance fro two staff for bed mobility, limited assistance from one for transfers, and (staff) supervision for eating. The assessment revealed Resident #24 had moderately impaired cognition. On 11/02/22 at 11:56 A.M. observation revealed Resident #24 was lying in bed with the head of the bed up. The resident's lunch tray was observed sitting on the over bed table. The over bed table was on…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-11-07 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolated
    Keep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
    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, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #171 was provided privacy during personal (catheter) care. This affected one resident (#171) of one resident reviewed for privacy. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #171 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including trigeminal neuralgia, COVID-19, Alzheimer's disease, benign prostatic hyperplasia, cognitive communication deficit, need for assistance with personal care, sepsis, urinary tract infection, delusional, major depressive disorder, dementia, hypertension, bladder neck obstruction, acute kidney failure and adult failure to thrive. Review of the October 2022 physician's orders revealed Resident #171 had an order for a urinary (Foley) catheter. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 10/16/22 revealed Resident #171 had severely impaired cognition. The assessment revealed the resident required extensive…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-11-07 · tag F0645 — isolated
    PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 2. Review of Resident #10's medical record revealed an admission date of 03/05/19 with diagnoses including Parkinson's disease, progressive supranuclear ophthalmoplegia, palliative care, dementia in other diseases pseudobulbar affect, anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, psychotic disorder with hallucination due to known physiological condition (dated 08/13/20), dysarthria and anarthria, cognitive communication deficit, and chronic pain syndrome. Review of the medical record for Resident #10 revealed no evidence a Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) was completed following the addition of the 08/13/20 diagnosis of psychotic disorder with hallucination due to a known physiological condition. Review of the 08/06/22 quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 revealed the resident was noted to be moderately cognitively impaired. The assessment revealed the resident required extensive assistance from two staff for bed mobility, extensive assist from one staff for transfers, dressing, 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-11-07 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #10, who required staff assistance for activities of daily living, received adequate and proper assistance with meals. This affected one resident (#10) of 22 sampled residents. Findings include: Review of Resident #10's medical record revealed an admission date of 03/05/19 with diagnoses including Parkinson's disease, progressive supranuclear ophthalmoplegia, palliative care, dementia in other diseases, pseudobulbar affect, anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, psychotic disorder with hallucination due to known physiological condition, dysarthria and anarthria, cognitive communication deficit, and chronic pain syndrome. Review of the 08/06/22 quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment revealed Resident #10 was moderately cognitively impaired. The assessment revealed the resident required extensive assistance from two staff for bed mobility and extensive assistance from one staff for transfers, dressing, eating, toileting, personal hygiene, and bathing. Review of the 09/06/22 speech…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-11-07 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #19, who required staff assistance for activities of daily living (ADL) care received adequate urinary/urostomy catheter care to prevent urine odors and to promptly identify symptoms of a urinary tract infection. This affected one resident (#19) of three residents reviewed for dignity. Findings include: Review of Resident #19's medical record revealed an admission date of 08/24/21 with diagnoses including atherosclerotic heart disease of native coronary artery without angina pectoris, acute kidney failure, dysphagia, oropharyngeal phase, dementia, and a history of urinary tract infections and bladder cancer. Review of the 08/15/22 annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment for Resident #19 revealed a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10 (out of 15) which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. The assessment revealed the resident required extensive assistance from one staff for dressing and personal hygiene, extensive assistance from two staff for transfers and toileting 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-11-07 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
    Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #57 was provided a physician ordered weight loss supplement, failed to ensure the resident was provided the appropriate serving size of meat during the lunch meal on 10/31/22 and failed to ensure the resident was provided adequate and timely assistance with eating. This affected one resident (#57) of eight residents reviewed for food and nutrition. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #57 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including dementia, anxiety, muscle weakness, need for personal assistance, cognitive communication deficit, COVID-19, psychotic disorder, hypertension, insomnia, and depression. Review of the weight record for Resident #57 revealed an admission weight of 175 pounds on 06/10/11 and then a weight of 186 pounds on 06/11/22 and 06/12/22 and a current weight (10/27/22 note) of 160.4 for a 13.98 percent decrease. Review of the plan of care, dated 06/13/22 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-11-07 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolated
    Provide or obtain dental services for 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, record review and interview the facility failed to provide emergency dental services when Resident #51 had a broken tooth. This affected one resident (#51) of one reviewed for dental services. Findings include: Review of medical record revealed Resident #51 was admitted on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including respiratory failure, syncope and collapse, retinal detachment, major depressive disorder, and anxiety disorder. Review of dental care services provided revealed Resident #51 had radiographic images on 12/09/21. An appointment note, dated 06/16/22 at 11:05 A.M. revealed Resident #51 had an appointment with an oral surgeon on 06/28/22. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 06/06/22 revealed Resident #51 had no chipped or cracked teeth. The quarterly MDS 3.0 assessment, dated 10/04/22 revealed Resident #51 was cognitively intact. Review of a nursing progress note, dated 10/16/22 at 5:00 P.M. revealed Resident #51 requested soft foods. The…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-11-07 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
    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, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #56 received food items in bite sized pieces as ordered and beverages/drinks per his preference. This affected one resident (#54) of six residents reviewed for nutrition. Finding include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #56 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including dementia, suicidal ideations, major depressive disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, hemiplegia, psychosis, need for assistance with personal care, cognitive communication deficit, dysphagia, adjustment disorder, repeated falls, prostate cancer and heart failure. Review of the modification to the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 08/22/22 revealed Resident #56 had severely impaired cognition. The assessment revealed the resident required (staff) supervision for eating and received a mechanically altered diet. Review of the October 2022 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2019-12-12 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — widespread
    Ensure 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 staff interview the facility failed to properly store medication in the [NAME] unit medication cart, [NAME] unit medication cart, and [NAME] unit medication cart. This affected nine residents (#26, #35,#43, #46, #56 #61 #62, #74, #83) and had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 87. Findings Include: 1. Observation on 12/12/19 at 10:50 A.M. of the [NAME] unit medication cart with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #544 revealed a bottle of artificial tears eye drops not dated when opened for Resident #26, a bottle of artificial tears eye drops not dated when opened for Resident #74, a vial of Humalog insulin not dated when opened for Resident #62, and a vial of Lantus insulin not dated when opened for Resident #35. Interview on 12/12/19 at 10:55 A.M. LPN #544 verified a bottle artificial tears eye drops not dated when opened for Resident #26, a bottle of artificial tears eye drops not dated when opened for Resident #74, a vial…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-12-12 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
    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 #55 received his preferred number of showers per week. This affected one resident (#55) of one resident reviewed for choices. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #55 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of fracture of the right tibial, obesity, muscle weakness, pulmonary embolism, ileus, megacolon, anxiety, insomnia, depression, and psychosis. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 11/05/19 revealed Resident #55 had intact cognition and bathing had not occurred. An interview on 12/09/19 at 10:29 A.M. with Resident #55 indicated he was not given a choice on when or how many times a week to receive a shower. The resident indicated he was only receiving one shower a week and he would like more. Interview on 12/12/19 at 9:42 A.M. with State Tested Nursing Assistant #542 revealed Resident #55 was scheduled to have a shower on Tuesday and Friday…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-12-12 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure advanced directives were in place for Resident #62, Resident #64 and Resident #233. This affected three residents (#622, #64 and #233) of three residents reviewed for advanced directives. Findings include: 1. Resident #233 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including osteoarthritis, muscle weakness, and hypertension. Review of Resident #233's electronic medical record and paper medical record did not reveal any advance directives. On 12/10/19 at 5:00 P.M., Registered Nurse (RN) #547 verified Resident #233 did not have any advanced directives in place. Interview with RN #547 on 12/10/19 at 2:35 P.M. revealed advance directive/code status should be obtained upon admission and entered in the physician's orders and placed in the front of the paper medical record. RN #547 also revealed until a resident's code status was determined, the code status defaults to a full code. Review of the facility policy titled, Advance Care Planning…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-12-12 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
    Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #22's responsible party was contacted timely to discuss dental options and services available for the resident. This affected one resident (#22) of 24 residents reviewed for notification. Findings include: Record review revealed Resident #22 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease, type two diabetes mellitus and major depression. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #22 had severely impaired cognition scoring a three on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) The MDS assessment also revealed Resident #22 had no broken or loose fitting teeth. Resident #22's medical record revealed an initial dental visit on 10/08/19 which Resident #22 refused to attend and a second dental visit on 11/12/19 which revealed a dental treatment plan to fill tooth #3 and a clasp was removed from tooth #15 with possible further extraction of tooth #15. However, review of…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-12-12 · tag F0582 — isolated
    Give residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interview the facility failed to issue a Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice form (SNFABN) to Resident #44 as required. This affected one resident (#44) of three residents reviewed for beneficiary notices. Findings include: Resident #44 was admitted to the facility for skilled nursing services under Medicare part A on 10/12/19. Secondary to Resident #44's medical decline and the decision to be placed onto Hospice services, the facility issued a Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) with a date of 12/02/19, which was signed by Resident #44's authorized representative on 11/29/19. Review of the facility completed SNF Beneficiary Protection Notification Review form for Resident #44 revealed the facility did not provide a SNFABN for because Resident #44 transitioned onto Hospice services. Staff interview on 12/12/19 at 9:52 A.M. with Registered Nurse (RN) #557 revealed the SNFABN form was not given because the facility did not believe the form had to be given since the family had chosen Hospice services. Review of the facility provided forms…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-12-12 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolated
    Develop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
    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 effectively implement their abuse policy and procedure to ensure injuries of unknown origin involving Resident #19 were thoroughly investigated and reported to the State agency. This affected one resident (#19) of one resident reviewed for accidents and injuries of unknown origin. Findings include: Review of Resident #19's medical record revealed an admission date of 09/19/19 with diagnoses that included falls with pelvic fracture, dementia and osteoporosis. Further review of the progress notes revealed on 11/12/19 Resident #19 was attending a scheduled appointment with an orthopedic surgeon for follow up care related to multiple pelvic fractures that occurred prior to admission to the facility. At this appointment, the resident indicated she had pain to her left hip. An x-ray was completed at this time and found evidence of a left femoral neck fracture. Resident #19 was admitted to the hospital and received surgical repair. Review of the medical record…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-12-12 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely 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 record review and interview the facility failed to ensure injuries of unknown origin involving Resident #19 were reported to the State agency as required. This affected one resident (#19) of one resident reviewed for accidents and injuries of unknown origin. Findings include: Review of Resident #19's medical record revealed an admission date of 09/19/19 with diagnoses that included falls with pelvic fracture, dementia and osteoporosis. Further review of the progress notes revealed on 11/12/19 Resident #19 was attending a scheduled appointment with an orthopedic surgeon for follow up care related to multiple pelvic fractures that occurred prior to admission to the facility. At this appointment, the resident indicated she had pain to her left hip. An x-ray was completed at this time and found evidence of a left femoral neck fracture. Resident #19 was admitted to the hospital and received surgical repair. Review of the medical record prior to 11/12/19 revealed falls in the facility on 9/27/19, 10/13/19,…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-12-12 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure 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 staff interview the facility failed to accurately code the comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment related to antibiotic use for Resident #1 and pressure ulcers for Resident #32. This affected two residents (#1 and #32) of 22 residents whose MDS 3.0 assessments were reviewed. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses of acute osteomyelitis, pneumonitis due to the inhalation of food and vomit, diabetes, diabetic neuropathy, acute respiratory failure, epilepsy, sepsis, cerebral infarction, mild cognitive impairment, malignant neoplasm of thyroid gland, delirium, apnea, and convulsions. Review of the five day Minimum Data (MDS) Set 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #1 had intact cognition and had not received an antibiotic medication. Review of the physician's orders for December 2019 revealed Resident #1 had an order dated 11/27/19 for intravenous 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-12-12 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure weights were obtained and as needed diuretic medications were administered as ordered by the physician to ensure the appropriate treatment for Resident #36 who had a diagnosis of congestive heart failure. This affected one resident (#36) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medication use. Findings include: Review of Resident #36's medical record revealed an admission date of 02/02/16 with a diagnosis that included congestive heart failure. Review of the current physician's orders revealed daily weights were to be obtained and Zaroxolyn (diuretic medication) 2.5 milligrams (mg) was to be administered once every day as needed (PRN) for a three pound weight gain. Review of the daily weight records revealed no daily weights obtained on 12/08/19, 12/07/19, 11/29/19, 11/24/19, 10/18/19, 10/12/19, 10/05/19, 09/30/19, 09/25/19, 09/20/19 or 09/12/19. Further review of the daily weights found a three pound weight gain on 12/5/19 (3.1 pounds), 11/27/19 (3.4 pounds), 11/20/19 (4.3 pounds), 11/14/19 (6.0 pounds),…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-12-12 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
    Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #1 received thickened liquids as ordered and Resident #6, #20, #42 and #46 received nutritional supplements as ordered to promote optimal nutrition. This affected five residents (#1, #6, #20, #42 and #46) of seven residents reviewed for nutrition and hydration. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses of acute osteomyelitis, pneumonitis due to the inhalation of food and vomit, diabetes, diabetic neuropathy, acute respiratory failure, epilepsy, sepsis, cerebral infarction, mild cognitive impairment, malignant neoplasm of thyroid gland, delirium, apnea, and convulsions. Review of the five day Minimum Data (MDS) Set 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #1 had intact cognition, required supervision with eating, was on a therapeutic diet and held food and liquids in his mouth and cheeked after meals. Review of the physician's order…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-12-12 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #36, who received as needed anxiolytic medications had proper physician documentation for an indication for use. This affected one resident (#36) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medication use. Findings include: Review of Resident #36's medical record revealed an admission date of 02/02/16 with diagnoses that included anxiety, schizoaffective disorder and borderline personality. Further review of the physician's orders revealed long term use of Ativan (anxiolytic medication) one milligram (mg) every eight hours as needed (PRN) for 120 days. The PRN Ativan was reordered on 08/06/19 and 12/10/19. Further review of the medical record found no evidence of any progress notes from Resident #36's physician, nurse practitioner or psychiatrist documenting the rationale for using the PRN Ativan longer than a 14 day period. Interview with the Director of Nursing and Registered Nurse (RN) #567 on 12/11/19 at 2:20 P.M. verified there was no documentation for rationale or indication of extended PRN Ativan…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-12-12 · tag F0825 — isolated
    Provide or get specialized rehabilitative services as required for a 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 and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #54 received therapy services as ordered after a hospitalization. This affected one resident (#54) of 18 residents reviewed for orders during the annual survey. Findings include: Resident #54 was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including cerebral infarction, hemiplegia and hemiparesis affecting right dominant side, and dysphagia. Resident #54's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #54 had moderately impaired cognition scoring a 12 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) and required total dependence from two people for transfers. Resident #54's medical record revealed a hospital admission on [DATE] with a readmission to the facility on [DATE]. Further review of Resident #54's hospital transfer orders dated 11/19/19 revealed orders for Physical Therapy, Occupational Therapy, and Speech Therapy. Review of Resident #54's medical record revealed no documentation or…

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

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

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to UNITED CHURCH HOMES — 9 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 4 of 53.9+0.1 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 53.3+0.7 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 53.3-0.3 vs chain
Quality measures 3 of 54.4-1.4 vs chain
The other 8 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.9★, per CMS)

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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
UNITED CHURCH HOMES, INC.Organization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF100%since 04/01/2000
BAILEY, PETERIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/01/2024
BATES, TREVORIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 02/01/2017
BENJAMIN, PAMELAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/01/2021
BLACK, GEOFFREYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/01/2016
D'AGOSTINO, JOANNAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/01/2024
GRAHAM, GEORGEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/01/2025
HAWES-SAUNDERS, RO NITAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 02/01/2024
HENRY, JAMESIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 12/31/2014
JAMES, JILLIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/01/2025
LONG-HIGGINS, DAVIDIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 11/01/2018
SANDMAN, ROBERTIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/01/2025
ULRICH, KARLIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/01/2024
WILLIAMS, STEPHANIEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/01/2024
WINFREY, LAPEARLIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/01/2020
NADERHOFF, JUDITHIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/01/2026
YOUNG, KENNETHIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 02/07/2025
BAUGHMAN, CHERYLIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 09/26/1990
BILLS, ASHLEYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 08/26/2022
BOLLINGER, NATHANIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/31/2023
BRUBAKER, TAMRAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 08/19/2022
CANNONE, DANIELIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 12/06/2012
COVALESKY, JENNAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 09/22/2017
CUENOT, JORDANIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/02/2024
DURBIN, DEBRAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 08/08/2022
DYE, MARCIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/26/2014
EUSANIO, VINCENTIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/31/2025
FARRELL, LAURAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/26/1996
HORNING, BRIANNAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 10/28/2020
HURWITZ, GLORIAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 10/07/2013
JUERSIVICH, HOLLYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 06/18/2020
KELLEY, MEGANIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 08/01/2023
KERR, JOSHUAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/02/2026
KLENZMAN, WILLIAMIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/15/2022
LONG-HIGGINS, ELIZABETHIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 04/02/2022
MAGHES, MICHELLEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/24/2025
MILLER, DANIELIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/04/2017
SIATTA, ELIZABETHIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/13/2025
SLUTZ, SCOTTIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 02/01/2016
SPITZNAGEL, TERESAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/15/2022
THOMPSON, TRACYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/24/2014
TILLMAN, MICHELLEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 08/21/2020

CMS files one row per role, so the 48 rows in the source record cover these 42 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$7.7M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-16.3%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$505K
Related-party expense6% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 10%Medicare 2%Other / private 88%

This home reported $505K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$345per resident / day
operating cost
$10,490per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$297per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in OH

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Ohio Medicaid page.

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

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 365494. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-04-24, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next