Advanced Health Care Of Cincinnati

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.

60.2% 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 70 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 61.3% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 106 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 1.15 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 98% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 22% 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 46 beds and averages 40.7 residents a day — about 88% 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 4.47 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.00 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.40 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 4.00 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.67 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.20 to 0.49 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 64% 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 fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

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

• Potential for harm · E2025-11-05 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — pattern
  Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, manufacturer directions and policy review, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered as ordered. There were four medication errors out of 26 opportunities for error which resulted in a 15.38 percent medication error rate. This affected four (#17, #18, #19, #20) of five residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 34.Findings Include:1.Review of the medical record for Resident #19 revealed an admission date of 10/29/25. Diagnoses included metabolic encephalopathy and rhabdomyolysis.Review of the physician orders for Resident #19 revealed an order for a chewable 81milligram (mg) Aspirin tablet with a start date of 10/30/25.Observation on 11/05/25 at 7:39 A.M. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #111 prepared and administered Resident #19 two Fluconazole (antifungal) 200 mg tablets, Gabapentin (nerve pain) 600 mg tablet and an 81 mg Enteric Coated (EC) Aspirin.Interview on 11/05/25 at 7:51 A.M. LPN #111 verified she had administered an EC aspirin and acknowledged the order was for 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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-06-23 · 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 policy review, observation, and staff interview, the facility failed to store and prepare food in a manner that kept food safe. This had the potential to affect all 29 residents residing in the facility who received food from the kitchen. The facility census was 29. Findings include: Observation of dry storage area on 06/16/25 at 8:53 A.M. with Nutritional Services Director (NSD) #45 revealed nine bags of hamburger buns that were undated as well as three loaves of bread, all undated. During the tour, a box of cornstarch was discovered to be open and undated. NSD #45 confirmed the bags of buns, loaves of bread and cornstarch should all have been dated as it was received/opened. Observation of walk-in freezer on 06/16/25 at 9:14 A.M. with NSD #45 revealed bag of sweet potato fries were open and undated; a package of frozen saran wrapped homemade dough was undated; a bag of hash brown potatoes, open to air and undated; a bag of frozen pretzel dough open to air and undated; a bag of frozen garlic bread loaves open to air and undated; a box of frozen pre-baked French bread…

  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 · F2025-06-23 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to implement their water management plan to reduce the risk of Legionella (bacteria that causes a severe form of pneumonia with exposure generally from droplets of water). This had the potential to affect all 29 residents residing in the facility. Findings include: Review of the facility's undated Water Management Plan/Legionella Prevention revealed the monitors would be implemented and maintained in logs, which included monthly visual checks of temperatures and settings of hot water heaters, annual cleaning and disinfection of shower heads, weekly flushing of infrequently used outlets, and visual checks of identified high risk areas. Interview on 06/23/25 at 11:52 A.M. with the Administrator and Maintenance Director (MD) #23 verified the facility had no documentation for the visual checks of temperatures and settings of the hot water heaters, cleaning and disinfection of shower heads, flushing of infrequently used outlets, and visual checks of identified high risk areas. Review of the undated facility…

  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 · D2025-06-23 · 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, review of the self-reported incident (SRI), review of time punch card, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to follow their abuse policy following a staff-to-resident abuse allegation. This affected one (#87) of four residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 29. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #87 revealed an admission date of 11/07/24 with a discharge date of 01/03/25. Diagnoses included congestive heart failure (CHF), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #87 had intact cognition. Review of the SRI dated 11/11/25 at 12:24 P.M. revealed Resident #87 reported Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #9 hit her while passing medications. When interviewed by the Administrator, Resident #87 wanted to retract her claim, but she was told it had to be reported. LPN #9 entered Resident #87's room to provide medications. Resident #87 was eating and asked…

  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 · D2025-06-23 · tag F0847 — isolated
  Inform resident or representatives choice to enter into binding arbitration agreement and right to refuse.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to explain the arbitration agreement in a manner that residents could understand. This affected two (#9 and #14) of four residents reviewed for arbitration agreements. The facility identified there were four residents who recently signed arbitration agreements. The facility census was 29. Findings included: 1. Medical record review for Resident #9 revealed the resident was admitted to facility on 05/15/25. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment revealed Resident #9 was cognitively intact. Review of the facility's arbitration agreement dated 05/15/25 revealed Resident #9 signed the arbitration agreement to have any dispute between the facility and herself decided by neutral arbitration and gave up the right to a jury or court trial. Interview with Resident #9 on 06/16/25 at 4:03 P.M., during resident council meeting, revealed Resident #9 did not understand what an arbitration agreement was. Resident #9 stated if someone had explained what an arbitration agreement was, she would not sign one.…

  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.

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-05-08 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
  Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to provide timely and complete access to resident medical records. This affected one resident (#17) of three residents reviewed. The facility census was 13. Findings include: Review of the closed medical record for Resident #17 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged to an unknown location on 02/09/23. His diagnoses included cerebral infarction, anxiety disorder, dysphagia, diabetes mellitus (DM), kidney failure, and essential primary hypertension. The limited medical record provided no additional information pertaining to nurse's progress notes, care plan and Minimum Data Set (MDS) information. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) and Rehabilitation (Rehab) Service Manager (#80) on 05/07/24 at 2:35 P.M. revealed the facility only utilized electronic medical records (EMR) for the resident's medical information. The DON stated the facility did not have access to Resident #17'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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2022-05-23 · tag F0712 — pattern
  Ensure that the resident and his/her doctor meet face-to-face at all required visits.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were visited by a physician every 60 days. This affected four (Residents #05, #06, #10, and #31) of four residents reviewed for physician visits. The facility census was 39. Findings include. 1. Record review revealed Resident #06 was admitted on [DATE]. Progress notes revealed the resident was seen by the Nurse Practitioner (NP) on 11/04/19. There was no further documentation in the medical record Resident #06 was seen by a physician every 60 days. 2. Record review revealed Resident #10 was admitted on [DATE]. Progress notes revealed Resident #10 was seen by the physician on 11/21/19 and 03/24/22. There was no documentation in the medical record Resident #10 had been seen by a physician every 60 days., 3. Record review revealed Resident #31 was admitted on [DATE]. Progress notes revealed Resident #31 was seen by the NP on 04/20/22. There was no further documentation in the medical record the resident had been seen by a physician since…

  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 · E2022-05-23 · tag F0868 — pattern
  Have the Quality Assessment and Assurance group have the required members and meet at least quarterly
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on record review, interview and policy review, the facility failed to hold Quality Assessment and Assurance meetings at least quarterly. This had the potential to affect all 39 residents in the facility. The facility census was 39. Findings include: Review of the Quality Assurance (QA) records revealed the last meeting was held on 12/27/21. There were no other QA meetings held in 2021 or 2022. During interview on 05/17/22 at 2:30 P.M. the Regional Administrator verified there was only one QA meeting held from January 2021 through May 2022. Review of the facility policy titled, QAPI Policy/Procedure, revealed the QA committee shall meet at least quarterly and as needed.

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2022-05-23 · 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 a resident's advanced directives were ordered and placed on the resident chart accurately. This affected one Resident (#45) out of three residents reviewed for advanced directives. The facility census was 39. Findings include: Resident #45 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included, malignant neoplasm of prostate, acute kidney failure, atrial septal defect, osteoarthritis, malignant neoplasm of colon, secondary malignant neoplasm of bone, anemia, type two diabetes mellitus, essential hypertension, and cerebral infarction. Review of the progress notes dated [DATE] at 6:49 A.M. documented Resident #45 was found unresponsive in his bed with no blood pressure and no pulse. Review of the physician order dated [DATE] revealed Resident #45's code status was full code, give cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). There was another order dated [DATE] that stated Resident #45's code status was do not resuscitate (DNR). During interview 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 · D2022-05-23 · 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, interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was completed accurately to reflect a resident's current health care status. This affected one (Resident #5) of three residents reviewed for accurate MDS assessments. The facility census was 39. Findings include: Record review revealed Resident #5 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including end stage renal failure and dependence on renal dialysis. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments,dated 11/04/22 and 02/09/22, did not have dialysis coded on the assessment. Review of the plan of care for Resident #5, dated 10/27/21 revealed the resident was at risk for complications related to dialysis due to end stage renal disease. Interventions include administer medication as ordered, dialysis Monday, Wednesday and Friday, diet as ordered, and dialysis will communicate results and complications to facility as needed. During interview on 05/10/22 at 11:10 A.M., Resident #5 stated he goes 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning 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 ADVANCED HEALTH CARE — 26 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 11 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

6 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 $979K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 22% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

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

Cost & finances

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