Mapleview Country Villa

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.

56.2% 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 160 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 67.2% 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 64 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 0.34 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 57% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 19% 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 100 beds and averages 84.4 residents a day — about 84% occupied, or roughly 16 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 3.61 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.99 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.27 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 3.11 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.82 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.10 to 0.71 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 54% 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

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 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 10 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2025-06-16 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolated
  Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on medical record review, review of the incident log, review of Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) data, review of hospital records, review of facility policy, and interviews with staff, the facility failed to prevent a significant medication error for Resident #51 when the resident's insulin medication with insulin hold parameters, was not administered with meals as ordered beginning on 02/02/25 and then on 05/08/25 was administered outside of the set parameters. Actual Harm occurred on 05/08/25 when Resident #51, who had severe cognitive impairment and required diabetes management with insulin, was admitted to the hospital with hypoglycemia (when blood glucose dropped below the normal range of relatively 80 to 130 milligrams per deciliter [mg/dL]). The facility found Resident #51 unresponsive, flushed, drooling, sweating and moaning with a blood glucose (BG) level of 37 mg/dL approximately two hours after being administered ten units of a short acting insulin (Novolog), despite the resident having a BG level of 97 mg/dL at the time, and the physician's…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-06-04 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
  Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review, interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure medications were obtained timely from the pharmacy and were administered according to physician orders. This affected one (Resident #81) of three residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 90. Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #81 revealed an admission date of 01/30/24 with diagnoses including prostate cancer, chronic pain syndrome, Parkinson's Disease, osteoarthritis and neuropathy. Review of the care plan dated 01/31/24 for Resident #81 revealed he had the risk for pain and discomfort related to prostate cancer, Parkinson's Disease, osteoarthritis, chronic pain and neuropathy. Interventions included to administer pain medication per the physician's order. Review of the physician's orders for Resident #81 revealed he had an order for Pregabalin 100 milligrams (mg) (medication for neuropathic pain) three times a day dated 02/01/25. Resident #81 also received topical pain treatments including Lidocaine Patch four percent to his left…

  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 · E2026-02-26 · tag F0800 — pattern
  Provide each resident with a nourishing, palatable, well-balanced diet that meets his or her daily nutritional and special dietary needs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, staff interview, review of facility menu, and review of diet spreadsheets, the facility failed to ensure residents who were ordered a puree diet received all food items on the menu. This affected five residents (#2, #24, #50, #68 and #70) who were identified as ordered a pureed diet. The facility census was 85.Findings include:Observation on 02/24/26 from 11:45 A.M to 12:50 P.M. of the lunch meal service revealed pureed bread was not available on the steam table or served to residents ordered a pureed diet.Interview on 02/24/26 at 12:53 P.M. with Dietary Manager (DM) #515 confirmed pureed bread was not served to Residents #2, #24, #50, #68 and #70.Interview on 02/24/26 at 12:55 P.M. with [NAME] #513 confirmed she had not prepared pureed bread for the lunch meal.Review of the facility menu titled Week at a Glance Fall/Winter 25-26 for cycle week one revealed the lunch meal included chicken teriyaki, fried rice, steamed broccoli, dinner roll with margarine, black forest cake, and a beverage.Review of the diet spreadsheet for lunch meal on 02/24/26 revealed pureed…

  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 · Dcited before2026-02-26 · 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

  Based on observation, staff interview, medical record review, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to maintain the call light in reach of Resident #7. This affected one resident (#7) and had the potential to affect all 85 residents residing in the facility. Findings include:Observation on 02/24/26 at 12:20 P.M. revealed Resident #7 was lying down in his bed. The pressure sensitive call light was observed placed in the middle of the floor mat to the left side of the bed. The floor mat was lower than the bed height. Interview at the time of the observation with Resident #7 revealed that if he needed help he would press his call light, but didn't know where the light was. Resident # 7 was unable to see or reach the call light on the floor mat. Additional interview at the time of the above observation with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #632 verified the call light was placed on the floor mat next to the resident's bed. CNA #632 stated she was instructed by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #553 to place the call light on the floor mat so if the resident fell out 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 · D2026-02-26 · tag F0644 — isolated
  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 record review and staff interview the facility failed to notify the appropriate state agency (The Ohio Department of Mental Health) of a significant change in a resident's mental health condition as required. This affected one resident (Resident #1) of one resident reviewed for preadmission screening and resident review (PASRR). The facility census was 85.Findings include:Medical record review revealed Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses including bipolar disorder, acute kidney failure, diabetes, Parkinsonism, post-traumatic stress disorder, mild cognitive impairment of uncertain or unknown etiology, chronic kidney disease, neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder, sleep apnea, osteoarthritis, insomnia, low back pain, and a personal history of suicidal behavior.Further review of Resident #1's medical record revealed an in-patient psychiatric hospitalization from 04/08/25 to 04/23/25 due to suicidal ideations with a plan. Resident #1 returned to the facility on [DATE]…

  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 before2026-02-26 · 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 observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received adequate nail care. This affected one resident (#8) of three residents investigated for activities of daily living (ADL) care. The facility census was 85.Findings include:Review of Resident #8's medical record revealed an admission date of 01/09/26 and pertinent diagnoses including severe protein-calorie malnutrition, basal cell carcinoma of the skin of scalp and neck, secondary malignant neoplasm of the bone, convulsions, type two diabetes mellitus without complications, anxiety disorder, and acquired absence of the right eye. Review of Resident #8's Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 dated 01/16/26 revealed a Basic Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, which indicated intact cognition. Further review of the MDS also revealed Resident #8 required maximum assistance with upper body dressing, was dependent on staff for lower body dressing, toileting, showering and personal hygiene and was dependent on staff for mobility. Review of Resident #8's Care Plan dated 01/09/26 revealed the…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-06-16 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, record review, review of the PBJ (Payroll-Based Journal) Staffing Data Report, and review of facility assessment, schedules, incidents logs, resident care lists, policies and the staffing tool, the facility failed to provide adequate staffing to meet resident needs in the Rosewood residential area which contained three units, 200-hall front (a secured memory care unit), 200-hall middle, and 200-hall back. This affected 47 residents (#2, #3, #4, #5, #7, #8, #9, #10, #12, #14, #19, #20, #22, #24, #25, #27, #28, #30, #35, #36, #38, #40, #42, #45, #47, #49, #50, #51, #52, #55, #57, #58, #59, #60, #61, #62, #67, #68, #70, #71, #72, #75, #76, #79, #83, #84 and #85) who resided in the Rosewood residential area. The facility census was 88. Findings include: Review of the facility census effective 06/08/25 revealed the Rosewood residential area, 200-hall front unit had 17 residents residing there, 200-hall middle unit had 16 residents, and 200-hall back unit had 14 residents. Observation…

  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 · D2025-06-16 · 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

  Based on observation, interview, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to treat Resident #51 with dignity and respect. This affected one (Resident #51) of three residents reviewed for resident rights and had the potential to affect all 88 residents who resided in the facility. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #51 revealed an admission date of 09/12/22. Diagnoses included diabetes mellitus type two, congestive heart failure, dementia and peripheral vascular disease. Observation on 06/09/25 at 6:54 A.M. of 200-hall back unit revealed Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #631 entered the unit and stood in the center of the hallway in front of Resident #51's room. Interview with CNA #631 reported arriving for day shift and was training and looking for the right area to be in. During the interview, Resident #51 was heard yelling out repeatedly from the room Help. Please come help me. CNA #631 then left the unit and did not make any attempt to inquire with Resident #51 to see what was needed. Observation on 06/09/25 at 6:56 A.M. on 200-hall…

  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 · Dcited before2025-06-16 · 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

  Based on record review, observation, interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to maintain call lights within reach of Residents #24 and #50. This affected two (Residents #24 and #50) of 88 residents reviewed for call light accessibility. The facility census was 88. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #24 revealed an admission date of 04/29/25. Diagnoses included Parkinson's disease, diabetes mellitus type two, dementia and overactive bladder. Observation on 06/09/25 at 5:06 A.M. of 200-hall middle unit revealed Resident #24 was hollering out for help. Upon room entrance, the resident was lying diagonally in bed with no sheet or blanket. A sheet appeared to be bunched up underneath both legs. There was no call light within reach as it was seen on the floor behind Resident #24's headboard of the bed. Interview with Resident #24 complained of needing changed because of feeling wet but could not find the call light. The resident accused staff of hiding the call light away because of using it too much and complained the staff made him get out…

  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 · Dcited before2025-06-16 · 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 observation, interview, record review and review of the facility policy, the facility did not ensure Resident #52 was assisted with eating and drinking. This affected one (Resident #52) out of two residents reviewed that required feeding assistance. This had the potential to affect four (Residents #4, #36, #52, and #67) identified by the facility requiring assistance with feeding on the secured unit. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #52 revealed an admission date of 03/26/24 with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease, diabetes, hypertension, right hip fracture, and anxiety disorder. Review of the weight record revealed Resident #52's weight recorded on 08/08/24 was 99.8 pounds and on 06/10/25 her weight was 89.6 pounds. Review of the significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #52 had impaired cognition as she was rarely or never understood. She required partial to moderate assistance with eating and substantial to maximum assistance…

  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 · D2025-06-16 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, record review and review of facility policy, the facility did not ensure residents had proper signage upon entry to their room indicating oxygen was in use and/or there was a physician order for the use of oxygen. This affected two (Residents #24 and #33) out of three residents reviewed for oxygen use. This had the potential to affect 14 (Residents #3, #7, #14, #24, #27, #28, #33, #35, #41, #44, #49, #51, #65, and #71) identified by the facility on oxygen. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #33 revealed an admission date of 06/06/25 with diagnoses including emphysema, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with acute exacerbation, and acute and chronic respiratory failure. Review of the undated care plan revealed Resident #33 had ineffective breathing patterns as evidenced by shortness of breath, labored respirations due to COPD, emphysema and respiratory failure. Interventions included adjusting the head of bed and body positioning to assist with the ease of respirations, administering oxygen as ordered,…

  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 LEGACY HEALTH SERVICES — 10 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 13 rows in the source record cover these 12 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

10 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 $2.5M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 23% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. 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