Centerville Post Acute

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

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.

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.

46.9% 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 131 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 40.6% 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 32 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 0.31 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 50% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 27% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 129 beds and averages 100.5 residents a day — about 78% occupied, or roughly 28 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 3.01 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.41 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.61 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 2.75 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.12 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.44 to 0.33 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 59% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

Inspection trend

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

21 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 11 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · D2026-05-21 · tag F0627 — isolated
  Ensure 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, staff interview, and transportation interview, the facility failed to properly discharge a resident. This affected one (Resident #117) out of three reviewed for discharge. The facility census was 111.Findings include:Review of Resident #117's medical record revealed an admission date of 11/18/25 and a discharge date of 04/25/26 with diagnoses of paraplegia, complete, other acute osteomyelitis, right ankle and foot, neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder, and chronic pulmonary embolism. Further review revealed Resident #117's wounds to the bilateral heels were healed. Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed resident had moderate cognitive impairment with no behaviors documented. Resident required assistance with eating, required partial assistance with oral hygiene, required substantial assistance with bathing, personal hygiene, and was dependent on staff assistance with toileting hygiene, dressing, bed mobility, transfers, and wheelchair mobility.Review of the…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-03-27 · tag F0644 — pattern
  Coordinate 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 medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to assess residents with new diagnoses and medications to treat serious mental illness for eligibility for Level II pre-admission screening and resident review (PASARR) services. The affected four (#19, #34, #55, And #63) of five residents sampled for PASARR. The facility census was 96. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #34 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, type II diabetes, stage II chronic kidney failure, unspecified bipolar disorder, and paranoid schizophrenia. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident # 34 had moderately impaired cognition, had no behaviors, did not wander , and did not reject care. Review of care plan dated 12/10/2023 revealed Resident # 34 had an Activity of Daily Living (ADL) Self-care/mobility/ functional ability/performance deficit. Interventions included…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-03-27 · 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, staff interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident was being transported in a wheelchair in a dignified manner. This affected one (#34) of four residents sampled for dignity. The facility census was 96. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #34 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, type II diabetes, stage II chronic kidney failure, unspecified bipolar disorder, and paranoid schizophrenia. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #34 had moderately impaired cognition, had no behaviors, did not wander , and did not reject care. Review of care plan dated 12/10/23 revealed Resident #34 had an Activities of Daily Living (ADL) Self-care/mobility/functional ability/performance deficit. Interventions included limited to extensive assistance with bathing, and additional staff assistance with ADL's as needed to ensure needs…

  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 · D2025-03-27 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
  Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interviews; resident interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure quarterly care conferences were conducted with residents and resident representatives. This affected three (#16, #41, and #73) of three residents sampled for care planning. The facility census was 96. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident # 41 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting left non-dominant side, major depressive disorder, morbid obesity, unspecified gout, and chronic pain syndrome. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #41 was cognitively intact, had no behaviors, did not wander, and did not reject care. Review of care conference note dated 03/07/23 revealed Resident #41 and his father (via telephone) had a care conference with the social worker, dietary, and activity staff in attendance. Interview on 03/24/25 at 2:02 P.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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-27 · 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 medical record review, observation, staff interview, and family interview, the facility failed to ensure gastrostomy tube dressings were changed as ordered. This affected one (#301) residents of four residents reviewed for wound care. The facility census was 96. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #301 revealed an admission date of 03/11/25, with medical diagnoses of aftercare following surgery for neoplasm, squamous cell cancer of skin on face, encounter for attention to gastrostomy, malignant neoplasm of mouth, dysphagia, and anemia. Review of the medical record for Resident #301 revealed an admission evaluation, dated 03/11/25, which indicated Resident #301 was cognitively intact and admitted with cancer biopsy site to right jaw, and a gastrostomy tube (g-tube). Review a physician order dated 03/12/25 revealed to cleanse g-tube site with normal saline and cover with a t-drain dressing daily. Review of the March 2025 Treatment Administration Record (TAR) which had documentation to support Resident #301's g-tube care was completed 03/12/25 to…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-03-27 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, resident interview, and review of policies, the facility failed to accurately assess a wound and timely initiate a treatment for new skin area. This affected one (#41) residents of four residents reviewed for wound care. The facility census was 96. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident # 41 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting left non-dominant side, major depressive disorder, morbid obesity, unspecified gout, and chronic pain syndrome. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident # 41 was cognitively intact, had no behaviors, did not wander, and did not reject care. Review of care plan dated 06/17/24 revealed Resident # 41 had potential for alteration in skin integrity related to incontinence. Interventions included diet as ordered, lotion for dry skin, Braden scale quarterly and as needed,…

  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 before2025-03-27 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure 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 medical record review, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to investigate a resident elopement. This affected one (#22) of one resident reviewed for elopement. The facility census was 96. Findings included: Review of the medical record for Resident #22 revealed an admission date of 10/27/25 with medical diagnoses of major Depression, diabetes mellitus, congestive heart failure, history of suicidal ideations, and hypertension. Review of the medical record for Resident #22 revealed a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 01/27/25, which indicated Resident #22 had severely impaired cognition and required set-up assistance with eating, toileting, bathing, bed mobility and transfers. The MDS did not indicate Resident #22 had behaviors. Review of the medical record for Resident #22 revealed a physician order dated 02/18/25 for wanderguard to check placement to left ankle and function every shift. Review of the medical record for Resident #22 revealed an elopement care plan dated…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-03-27 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, staff and resident interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to provide mechanically alter diet as ordered. This affected one (23) of the two residents reviewed for food texture. The facility identified seven residents on a pureed diet. The facility census was 96. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #23 revealed an admission date of 04/23/23 with medical diagnoses of hypertensive heart disease with heart failure, chronic kidney disease, congestive heart failure, diabetes mellitus, and dysphagia. Review of the medical record for Resident #23 revealed a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 02/07/25, which indicated Resident #23 was cognitively intact and was independent with transfers, toileting, and set-up assist with eating. The MDS indicated Resident #23 received a mechanically altered diet. Review of the medical record for Resident #23 revealed a physician order dated 03/24/25 for carbohydrate control, no added salt, pureed texture diet with thin liquids. Observation and interview with Resident #23 on 03/24/25 at…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-10-10 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  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 NON-COMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY. Based on medical record reviews, review of Self-Reported Incident (SRI), staff and guardian interviews and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure resident was free from abuse. This affected one (#102) out of the three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 110. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #102 revealed an admission date of 08/10/24 with medical diagnoses of chronic respiratory failure, [NAME]-[NAME] Syndrome (multisystem disorder characterized by developmental delay and impaired cognition), hypothyroidism, obesity, and mild intellectual disabilities. Review of the medical record for Resident #102 revealed an admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 08/14/24, which indicated Resident #102 had severe cognitive impairment and was dependent upon staff for toileting, bathing, bed mobility, and transfers. The MDS…

  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 · D2023-12-13 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to provide assistance with activities of daily living by not offering a resident showers. This affected one (#10) of three residents reviewed for personal hygiene. The facility census was 96. Findings include: Review of medical record for Resident #10 revealed admission date of 05/25/23. Diagnoses included heart attack, stage four kidney disease, congestive heart failure, peptic ulcer and anxiety. The resident remains at the facility. Review of Resident #10's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed he required extensive two person assistance for bed mobility, transfers, toileting and supervision for eating. Resident #10's Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) was not assessed. Review of Resident #10's care plan for Activities of Daily Living Deficit initiated 05/25/23 documented intervention to provide extensive assistance with bathing. Further review of Resident #10's electronic medical records revealed no documentation…

  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.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to PACS GROUP — 274 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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 22 rows in the source record cover these 18 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

This home reported $380K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

Cost & finances

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

What families pay in OH