Aventura At West Park
2950 West Park Drive, Cincinnati, OH 45238 · For profit - Corporation · 125 certified beds · (513) 451-8900 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0602) — most recent Nov 2024
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0608, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- inspectors recorded 2 serious findings as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (42) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $16,801 in federal fines (most recent 2024-04-17)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (69%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- about 23% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
- its last standard health inspection was over 2 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 8.6% | 5.3% | 15.4% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 9.0% | 6.2% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.0% | 0.2% | 0.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.3% | 0.4% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 2.7% | 30.1% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.3% | 0.1% | 0.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 3.1% | 3.2% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 9.7% | 6.1% | 16.1% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 16.0% | 25.5% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 88.5% | 94.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.6% | 3.4% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 26.6% | 21.4% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 19.6% | 8.8% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.2% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 62.8% | 75.6% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 20.9% | 24.9% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 30.3% | 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.
58.2% 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 48 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 47.6% 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 21 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 0.33 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 56% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 11% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 58.2%CMS range 45.7–70.7 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.6%CMS range 6.1–13.5 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 47.6% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 38.1% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 38.1% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 91.7% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not 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 discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 2.8% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.90 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 125 beds and averages 82.1 residents a day — about 66% occupied, or roughly 43 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 3.69 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 1.91 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 3.34 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.83 on weekdays — 13% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.53 to 0.22 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 69% 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.
This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
42 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 30 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2026-06-17 · tag F0700 — isolatedTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY THE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCY REPRESENTS AN INCIDENCE OF PAST NON-COMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY Based on record review, Self-Reported Incident (SRIs) review, hospital record review, review of emergency medical services (EMS) run sheet review, observation, staff interview, review of the facility investigation, review of the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Guide to Bed Safety: Bed Rails in Hospitals, Nursing Homes and Home Healthcare, review of the Direct Supply Multi-Bed Pivoting Assist Device Owner's Manual, and policy review, the facility failed to thoroughly assess residents for the risk of entrapment and appropriateness for the use of bed rails. This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy and serious life-threatening harm/death when Resident #11's head and neck became wedged between the mattress and the bed rail. Resident #11 asphyxiated and died. This had the potential to affect 40 residents (Residents #4, #5, #12, #16, #20, #21, #22, #26, #30, #33, #35, #36, #37, #39,…
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.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2024-04-17 · tag F0678 — failed to provide CPR when needed — isolatedProvide basic life support, including CPR, prior to the arrival of emergency medical personnel , subject to physician orders and the resident’s advance directives.
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 review, staff interview, Physician Assistant (PA) interview, review of facility witness statements, review of facility policy and review of the American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines, the facility failed to ensure cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) was provided to a resident who was a full code. This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy and the potential for serious life-threatening harm and/or death when Resident #76, who was a full code, was found unresponsive and without vital signs on [DATE] at 7:20 A.M. and staff failed to immediately perform CPR and the resident was subsequently pronounced dead. This affected one (Resident #76) of three residents reviewed for death over the last three months. The facility census was 78. On [DATE] at 1:25 P.M., the Administrator, Regional Director of Clinical Operations (RDCO) #508, the Director of Nursing (DON), and Director of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2026-05-18 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to store food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This had the potential to affect all of the residents residing in the facility with the exception of three facility-identified residents who did not receive food from the kitchen. The facility census was 88 residents. Findings include: Observations during initial kitchen tour on 05/07/26 at 8:48 A.M. revealed a rack containing bread products including 4 full bags of hamburger buns, not dated, 2 partial bags of hamburger buns, not dated, one half loaf of bread, not dated. Inside the refrigerator there was a half full bag of Asian stir-fry, not dated, and two bags of tater tots not dated. Interview on 05/07/26 at 8:48 A.M. with Corporate Support Manager (CSM) #600) confirmed the undated foods in the kitchen. Review of the facility policy titled Food Storage (Dry, Refrigerated and Frozen) dated 08/12/23 revealed foods should be dated upon opening. This deficiency represents noncompliance investigated under Complaint Number.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2026-05-18 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, employee file review, staff interview, review of online resources from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive water management plan was implemented to minimize the risk of waterborne pathogens including Legionella. The facility also failed ensure new employees were screened for tuberculosis (TB) and/or were screened annually for TB. This had the potential to affect all residents living in the facility. The facility census was 88 residents.Findings include: 1. Review of the facility's infection control documents revealed they did not include water management plan to prevent the growth of Legionella. Interview on 05/13/26 at 11:47 A.M. with Maintenance Director (MD) #311 verified the facility did not have a water management plan in place to prevent the growth of Legionella. Interview on 05/13/26 at 12:15 P.M. with the Administrator verified the facility did not have a water management plan in place to prevent the growth of Legionella. Review of facility policy titled…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-05-18 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure appropriate water temperatures in the north hallway shower room and in individual resident rooms and failed to maintain bathrooms and shower rooms in a clean and sanitary manner. This affected five facility-identified (Residents #12, #42, #55, #82, #90) who use the north hallway shower room and three (Residents #7, #12, #78) and had the potential to affect all of the residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 88 residents. Findings include: 1.Observation on 05/11/26 at 4:27 P.M. with Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #413 revealed she allowed Resident #7's bathroom sink water to run for several minutes and obtained a water temperature of 83 degrees Fahrenheit (F).Interview on 05/11/26 at 4:27 P.M. with CAN #413 confirmed the water temperature in Resident #7's bathroom sink was 83 degrees F. 2.Observation on 05/11/2026 at 4:31 P.M. with CNA #413 revealed she allowed Resident #12's bathroom sink run for several minutes and obtained a temperature reading of 83…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-04 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure accurate documentation in the medical record. This affected one (Resident #101) of three residents reviewed for documentation. The facility census was 83 residents. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #101 revealed an admission date of 11/19/25 with diagnoses including metabolic encephalopathy, calculus of kidney, severe protein-calorie malnutrition, bipolar disorder, oropharyngeal dysphasia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Review of the care plan for Resident #101 dated 11/22/25 revealed the resident was at risk for an alteration in nutrition/hydration related to a history of severe malnutrition, altered mental status, dysphagia, a low body mass index, and recent significant weight loss. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #101 dated 11/25/25 revealed the resident was cognitively intact. Review of the nutritional assessment for Resident #101 dated 11/28/25 per Registered Dietician (RD) #261 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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-03-27 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to secure all medications in a locked storage area and to limit access to authorized personnel. This had the potential to affect 12 residents (#3, #7, #11, #13, #24, #25, #26, #28, #34, #41, #66 and #74) that are independently mobile on the 400 floor. The facility census was 90. Findings include: Observation of medication administration on 03/27/25 at 8:29 A.M. revealed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #315 to retrieve a medication that needed to be re-stocked on the cart. LPN #315 went to the medication storage room on level 4 of the facility. The door was observed to be unlocked. Interview with LPN #315 on 03/27/25 at 8:29 A.M. revealed that the medication storage room was never locked and had not been since the electronic key pad lock was taken off the door. On 03/27/25 at 8:41 A.M. this surveyor went back to the medication storage room and was able to gain access due to the door not being locked. Observation on 03/27/25 at 8:47 A.M. revealed that the door to the medication storage room was ajar. Interview on 03/27/25 at 8:48…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-27 · tag F0711 — isolatedEnsure the resident's doctor reviews the resident's care, writes, signs and dates progress notes and orders, at each required visit.
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, physician interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure physician notes were signed at the time service was rendered. This affected three (#51, #52, and #60) of three residents reviewed for physician visits. The facility census was 90. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record of Resident #51 revealed an admission date of 07/19/18. Diagnoses included emphysema, dementia, Alzheimers, anxiety, depression, hypertension, gastro-esophageal reflux disease, chronic pain syndrome, and atrial fibrillation. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had moderately impaired cognition. The resident was independent with eating, supervision with toileting, and partial/moderate assistance with bathing, dressing, bed mobility, and transfers. Review of a physician visit dated 01/27/25 revealed the physician did not sign the progress note until 02/09/25. Interview on 03/27/25 at 1:43 P.M. Physician #340 stated he signs his…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-20 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect 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 review, review of facility Self-Reported Incidents (SRI), staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from verbal abuse. This affected one (#64) of three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 89. Findings include: Review of the medical record of Resident #64 revealed an admission date of 01/15/20. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, anxiety disorder, dementia with behavioral disturbance, rheumatoid arthritis, delusional disorders, essential hypertension, heart failure, benign prostatic hyperplasia, unsteadiness on feet, and major depressive disorder. Review of the comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had severely impaired cognition. The resident exhibited fluctuating inattention and continuous disorganized thinking during the assessment period. The resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-03 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolatedProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY THE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCY REPRESENTS AN INCIDENT OF PAST NON-COMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY. Based on record review, staff interview, review of witness statements, review of a facility Self-Reported Incident (SRI) and policy review, the facility failed to ensure misappropriation of resident funds. This affected three (#21, #22, and #23) residents of the six Residents (#11, #14, #15, #21, #22, and #23) reviewed for resident funds. The facility census was 57. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #21, revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE]. Diagnoses included, but not limited to, acute respiratory failure, paranoid schizophrenia, anxiety, cerebrovascular disease, and acute kidney failure. Resident #21 expired in the facility on [DATE]. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #21 was cognitively intact. Review of the medical record for Resident #22, revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE]. Diagnoses…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-07-18 · tag F0620 — patternNot require residents to give up Medicare or Medicaid benefits, or pay privately as a condition of admission; and must tell residents what care they do not provide.
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 and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure new residents were provided written admission Agreements at the time of admission. This affected four (#8610, #8611, #8613 and #8618) of five residents reviewed for admission procedures. The facility census was 66. Findings Include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #8610 revealed an admission date of 05/27/24. Diagnoses included diabetes mellitus type II, lumbar disc degeneration, congestive heart failure and acute myocardial infarction. Resident #8610 was discharged home on [DATE]. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Discharge-Return Not Anticipated assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #8610 had intact cognition, was occasionally incontinent of bowel and bladder, was independent with eating, oral hygiene and bed mobility, and required set up assistance with toileting, bathing, dressing, personal hygiene and transfers. 2. Review of the medical record for Resident #8611 revealed an admission date of 05/29/24.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-07-18 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — patternMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure carpets were maintained in a clean and sanitary manner. This affected all 10 residents (#6, #7, #17, #30, #33, #41, #43, #54, #62 and #63) residing on the third floor. The facility census was 66. Findings include: Observations on 07/17/24 of the third floor revealed carpeting with multiple stains throughout the main corridors and sitting area. Interview on 07/17/24 at 10:35 A.M. with Maintenance Aid (MA) #201 confirmed the stained carpeting throughout the third floor. Interview on 07/17/24 at 2:00 P.M. with the Administrator verified the condition of the third floor carpeting. The Administrator indicated steps were being taken to replace the flooring but was unable to provide any specific information on when this was to be completed. This deficiency represents non-compliance investigated under Master Complaint Number OH00155422 and Complaint Number OH00154443.
Show the remaining 30 citations
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-29 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure medications were available to administer as ordered. This affected one (Resident #80) of five patients reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 65. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #80 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and expired at the facility on [DATE]. Resident #80 had diagnoses including unspecified neoplasm of digestive organ, essential hypertension, gastroesophageal reflux disease, absence epileptic syndrome, oropharyngeal phase dysphagia, chronic ulcerative pancreatitis, unspecified lymphedema, sciatica, and unspecified anxiety disorder. Review of the most recent quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was cognitively intact, had no behaviors, did not reject care, and did not wander. Review of the care plan dated [DATE] revealed Resident #80 received Hospice services related to a diagnosis of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-29 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from significant medication errors when they gave double the dose of Morphine to a resident. This affected one (Resident #80) of five residents sampled for medication administration. The facility census was 65. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #80 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and expired at the facility on [DATE]. Resident #80 had diagnoses including unspecified neoplasm of digestive organ, essential hypertension, gastroesophageal reflux disease, absence epileptic syndrome, oropharyngeal phase dysphagia, chronic ulcerative pancreatitis, unspecified lymphedema, sciatica, and unspecified anxiety disorder. Review of the most recent quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was cognitively intact, had no behaviors, did not reject care, and did not wander. Review of care plan dated [DATE] revealed Resident #80…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-04-17 · tag F0800 — widespreadProvide 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 staff interview, observation, record review, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure all food temperatures were checked prior to the start of meal service. This had the potential to affect all 78 residents in the facility. Findings include: Interview on 04/03/24 at 4:00 P.M. with Dietary [NAME] (DC) #430 confirmed he only gets the temperature of one food on the steam table at the beginning of each meal because if one was hot, the rest will be hot. DC #430 further confirmed he would be testing the temperature of the chicken for the meal because it was the only food on the steam table which did not have foil over it in addition to the metal lid. DC #430 then tested the temperature of the chicken and the thermometer read 140 degrees Fahrenheit (F). DC #430 confirmed the chicken needed to be at least 165 degrees F and then placed the chicken back in the steamer. Observation on 04/03/24 at 4:10 P.M. revealed DC #430 retrieved the pan of chicken from the steamer and placed it in the steam table. DC #430 obtained the temperature of the chicken at 179…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-04-17 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure kitchen equipment was maintained in a sanitary manner. The facility also failed to ensure staff wore hair restraints which fully contained the hair while preparing food. This had the potential to affect all 78 residents in the facility. Findings include: 1. Observation on 04/01/24 at 8:37 A.M. revealed the hood in the kitchen, which covered the fryer, stove, grill, and steamers, was covered with a black and grey fuzzy substance. Further observation revealed a sticker on the hood, which indicated the last cleaning was completed on June 2023. Interview on 04/01/24 at 8:37 A.M. with Food Service Manager (FSM) #503 confirmed the slats of the hood in the kitchen were in need of cleaning. FSM #503 confirmed the cleaning was past due, and the hood should be cleaned every three months. Review of the facility policy titled Cleaning Instructions: Hoods and Filters undated revealed stove hoods and filters should be cleaned at least monthly and professionally cleaned at least yearly. 2.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-04-17 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to properly implement the Legionella plan. This had the potential to affect all of the residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 78. Findings include: Review of the facility's water management records revealed the facility failed to complete water temperatures for the year of 2023 which was one of the specific control measures the facility was using to monitor Legionella. Review of the facility temperature log revealed water temperatures had only been completed from January 2024 through March 2024. There were no water temperatures recorded for 2023. Interview on 04/10/24 at 1:03 P.M. with Maintenance Director (MD) #307 confirmed the facility had not completed water temperatures for the year 2023. Review of the facility policy titled Legionella Water Management Program dated July 2017 revealed the facility was committed to the prevention, detection, and control of water-borne contaminants, including Legionella. The purpose of the water management program was to identify…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-04-17 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop 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
Based on medical record review, staff interview, review of the facility policy, the facility failed to conduct care conferences as required. This affected four (Residents #16, #19, #23, and #41) of five residents reviewed for care planning. The facility census was 78. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #16 revealed an admission date of 10/25/23 with diagnoses including necrotizing fasciitis, generalized anxiety disorder, type two diabetes mellitus, peripheral vascular disease, anemia, lumbar spina bifida without hydrocephalus, atrial fibrillation, depression, and arthropathy. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #16 dated 02/26/24 revealed the resident had intact cognition, required setup assistance for eating, moderate assistance for oral hygiene, and maximal assistance for toileting, bathing, dressing, personal hygiene, bed mobility and transfer. Review of the social services progress note for Resident #16 dated 10/27/23 revealed the facility held a care conference with Resident #16. Further review of the social…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-04-17 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and review of facility recipes, the facility failed to properly prepare pureed food. This had the potential to affect five (Residents #12, #22, #47, #49, #50) of five facility-identified residents who received a pureed diet. The facility census was 78. Findings include: Observation on 04/03/24 at 1:08 P.M. revealed Dietary [NAME] (DC) #430 began process of making pureed broccoli. DC #430 placed 6 scoops (3 cups) of broccoli into the blender pitcher and then placed the pitcher under the water spigot and filled the pitcher to the 6-cup line. Continued observation revealed DC #430 blended the broccoli mixture in the blender for approximately four minutes. DC #430 then poured the contents into a pan, covered the pan, and placed it in the steamer. The contents of the pitcher were liquified and runny. Interview on 04/03/24 at 1:10 P.M. with DC #430 confirmed he used equal parts of water and vegetables because he wanted to make sure the food was as watery as possible to ensure the residents could digest it without choking. DC #430 confirmed the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-04-17 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, review of facility Self-Reported Incident (SRI), review of daily staffing sheet, review of time clock records, resident interview, staff interview, and review of the facility policy the facility failed to ensure residents were protected during abuse investigations. This affected one (Resident #14) of one reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 78. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #14 revealed an admission date of 01/31/24 with diagnoses including acute and respiratory failure with hypercapnia, congestive heart failure (CHF), bipolar disorder, chronic kidney disease stage three, and type two diabetes mellitus. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #14 dated 02/05/24 revealed the resident had intact cognition, required setup with eating, and was dependent on staff assistance with toileting, bathing, dressing, and transfers. Review of the Self-Reported Incident (SRI) #245840 for Resident #14 dated 04/01/24 timed at 2:11 P.M. revealed the resident alleged that on 03/11/24 State Tested Aide (STNA) #361…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-04-17 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to properly transfer the resident using an appropriate assistive lift device. This affected one (Resident #14) resident of two residents reviewed for falls. The facility census was 78. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #14 revealed an admission date of 01/31/24 with diagnoses including acute and respiratory failure with hypercapnia, congestive heart failure (CHF), bipolar disorder, chronic kidney disease stage three, and type two diabetes mellitus (DM II). Review of the care plan for Resident #14 dated 02/01/24 revealed the resident was at risk for falls related to DM II and CHF. Interventions included the following: call light and personal items within reach while in room, staff to ensure a clutter-free environment and adequate lighting, staff to observe for safety, staff to provide rest periods, staff to use proper assistive devices. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #14 dated 02/05/24 revealed the resident had intact…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-04-17 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to implement nutritional recommendations made per the licensed dietitian for residents with weight loss. This affected one (Resident #11) of three residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility census was 78. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #11 an admission date of 03/31/20 with diagnoses including polyneuropathy, cellulitis of right lower limb, generalized anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, dementia, other cervical disc degeneration, and peripheral vascular disease. Review of the plan of care dated for Resident #11 dated 01/03/24 revealed the resident was at risk for alteration in nutrition related to polyneuropathy, depression, hypertension, cervical disc degeneration, peripheral vascular disease, anemia, cognitive communication deficit, and anxiety. The plan of care also indicated the resident was at risk for malnutrition due to history of weight fluctuations and advanced age. Interventions included the following: administer medications as…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-04-17 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to implement physician orders following pharmacy recommendations. This affected three (Residents #5, #16, and #23) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 78. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #5 revealed an admission date of 09/12/22 with diagnoses including cerebral infarction, schizophrenia, anxiety, expressive language disorder, depression, and dementia. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #5 dated 01/15/24 revealed the resident had severe cognitive deficits and required extensive to total dependence with activities of daily living (ADLs.) Review of pharmacy recommendation for Resident #5 dated 06/21/23 revealed a recommendation to discontinue Seroquel 25 milligrams (mg) by mouth at bedtime signed by the medical director on 07/17/23 indicating agreement with the recommendation. Review of the physician orders for Resident #5 revealed an order dated 11/03/23 to discontinue Seroquel 25 mg.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-04-17 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a medication error of below five percent for medication administration observation. The medication error rate was eight percent (%.) This affected one (Resident #55) of four residents observed for medication administration. The facility census was 78. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #55 revealed an admission date of 02/16/23 with diagnoses including diabetes, atrial fibrillation, insomnia, hypertension, and Asperger's syndrome. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #55 dated 02/19/24 revealed the resident was cognitively impaired and required staff assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs). Review of physician orders for Resident #55 revealed the resident had an orders for pantoprazole 40 milligrams in the morning and Flonase nasal spray two sprays in each nostril each morning. Observation on 04/03/24 at 9:03 A.M. of medication administration for Resident #55 per Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN #505) 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-04-17 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, observation, staff interviews, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure insulin pens were properly labeled and stored. This affected two (Residents #23 and #55) of 39 residents with medications stored in the 700 hall cart. The facility census was 78. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #23 revealed an admission date of 09/29/21 with diagnoses including congestive heart failure (CHF), type two diabetes mellitus (DM II), and acute kidney failure. Review of the physician orders for Resident #23 revealed an order dated 01/17/24 for Lantus insulin inject ten units at bedtime. Review of the medical record for Resident #55 revealed an admission date of 02/16/23 with diagnoses including type one diabetes mellitus, atrial fibrillation, and Asperger's syndrome. Review of the physician orders for Resident #55 revealed an order dated 01/17/24 for Lantus insulin inject 25 units and an order dated 03/29/24 for Humalog insulin inject four units. Observation on 04/03/24 at 4:02 P.M. of medication cart on 700 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-17 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to provide the pneumococcal vaccine in a timely manner. This affected three (Residents #10, #11, and #21) of five resident reviewed for vaccinations. The facility census was 78. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #10 revealed an admission date of 10/22/19 with diagnoses including type two diabetes mellitus, generalized anxiety, depression, and chronic kidney disease stage three. Review of the medical record for Resident #10 revealed Pneumococcal vaccine 23 (PPSV23) was given on 02/01/13. Resident #10 should have received PCV15 or PCV20 at least one year after PPSV23. Review of the medical record for Resident #11 revealed an admission date 03/31/20 with diagnoses including generalized anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, and dementia. Review of the medical record for Resident #11 revealed the PPSV23 was given on 07/01/18. Resident #11 should have received PCV15 or PCV20 at least one year after PPSV23. Review of the medical record for Resident #21 revealed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-04-19 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to administer ordered medications with an error rate of less than 5 percent (%). There were six errors observed of 26 opportunities, resulting in an error rate of 23.08%. This affected two Residents (#17 and #24) of four observed for medication administration. The facility census was 71. Findings include: 1. Medical record review revealed Resident #24 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Alzheimer's, hypertension, depression, and pulmonary embolism. Review of Resident #24's physician's orders dated 05/24/19 revealed an order for Xarelto (blood thinner) tablet, 20 milligrams (mg) daily, Citracal (supplement) slow release tablet 600-40-500 mg, twice a day, Midodrine (for orthostatic low blood pressure) HCI tablet 2.5 mg before meals, and Citalopram (anti-depressant) hydrobromide 10 mg daily. There was no evidence in the medical record of any orders to crush the resident's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-04-19 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to label open vials of insulin and failed to dispose of expired medications in a timely manner. This affected two medication carts of three observed, and one out of one medication room observed for medication storage. The facility census was 71. Findings include: 1. Observation on 04/14/21 at 3:30 P.M. with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #8 of the east medication cart revealed one vial of Lantus (insulin) prescribed to Resident #16, a vial of Levemire (insulin) and Novolog (insulin) prescribed to Resident #14 were opened with no open date on the label. Interview at the time of the observation with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #8 verified the vials of insulin were opened and not dated. 2. Observation on 04/14/21 at 3:39 P.M. with LPN #5 of the south medication cart revealed a vial of Novolog with an opened date 02/16/21 prescribed to Resident #17, and a Basaglar insulin pen which had an expiration date of 03/21 prescribed to Resident #44. 3. Observation on 04/14/21 at 3:54 P.M. with the Director…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2019-01-31 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — patternDevelop 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 medical record review, resident and staff and interviews, review of self reported incidents (SRI's), personnel file review and policy review, the facility failed implement their policy to ensure allegations of sexual abuse and/or misappropriation were reported to authorities and thoroughly investigated. This affected four (#46, #58, #94, and #424) residents out of four SRI's reviewed during the annual survey. Facility census was 115. Finding included: 1. Review of Resident #424's medical record revealed an admit date of 08/01/18 and a discharge date of 08/14/18. The diagnosis included congestive heart failure, hypertension, gastroesophageal reflux disease, right artificial hip, unsteadiness on feet, and weakness. Review of admission Minimum Data set assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #424 was cognitively intact and required limited assist of one for activities of daily living. Review of a SRI dated 10/29/18 revealed Resident #424 complained of sexual abuse in a voice message left for the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2019-01-31 · tag F0608 — failed to report suspected crimes — patternDevelop and implement policies and procedures to ensure (1) employees report any suspicion of a crime against any resident, according to timelines; (2) post the notice of employee rights; and (3) prohibit and prevent retaliation for reporting.
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, resident and staff interviews, review of self reported incidents (SRI's), personnel file review and policy review, the facility failed to report allegations of sexual abuse and/or misappropriation to local authorities. This affected four (#46, #58, #94, and #424) residents out of four SRI's reviewed during the annual survey. Facility census was 115. Finding included: 1. Review of Resident #424's medical record revealed an admit date of 08/01/18 and a discharge date of 08/14/18. The diagnosis included congestive heart failure, hypertension, gastroesophageal reflux disease, right artificial hip, unsteadiness on feet, and weakness. Review of admission Minimum Data set assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #424 was cognitively intact and required limited assist of one for activities of daily living. Review of SRI form dated 10/29/18 revealed Resident #424 complained of sexual abuse in a voice message left for the Licensed Nursing Home Administrator and then a letter hand…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2019-01-31 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — patternRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 3. Resident #94 was admitted to the facility in February of 2015 with diagnoses including Parkinson's disease, dementia with lewy bodies, acute and chronic respiratory failure, congestive heart failure, atrial fibrillation, diabetes mellitus and anxiety disorder. The facility complete an annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment of Resident #94's cognitive status and physical functional abilities dated 01/04/19. The 01/04/19 assessment identified the resident with good memory and recall and requiring the physical assistance of at least one staff person for completion of all activities of daily living with the exception of eating for which she was independent. On 01/29/19 at 10:05 A.M. an interview was conducted with Resident #94 to discern if she had any concerns related to personal property being missing. She stated that about four months ago, a housekeeper, took $60.00 out of her room, and she reported it to staff. Resident #94 stated the facility came and asked her questions about the missing money, and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2019-01-31 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to secure hazardous materials. This had the potential to affect 19 (#4, #5, #7, #12, #14, #15, #21, #28, #31, #36, #37, #40, #55, #74, #86, #89, #91, #93, and #418) residents who the facility identified as cognitively impaired and independently mobile and that could potentially access the hazardous materials. Facility census was 115. Findings include: A random observation on 01/29/19 at 10:01 A.M. revealed the central shower room wall cabinet open with a large spray bottle of Virex (powerful cleaner, sanitizer and disinfectant) and a tub of Sani wipes (germicidal disposable wipes) visible. Labeling of both items indicated the product is hazardous to humans. Interview on 01/29/19 at 10:15 A.M. with the Director of Nursing (DON) reported the Virex and Sani wipes should be locked up when not in use by staff. She verified the unit had confused residents who wander. DON verified both items had labeling of keep out of reach of children and stated the cabinet door child proof device was broken. The 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.
- Potential for harm · D2019-01-31 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor 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 observation, resident and staff interviews, medical record review and policy review, the facility failed to gather resident preferences for care and failed to honor a resident's expressed care preferences. This affected two (#64 and #419) of three residents assessed for choices and had the potential to affect all residents. The facility census was 115. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #419 revealed an admit date of 01/14/19 with diagnosis including but not limited to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hypertension, chronic kidney disease, degenerative joint disease, and diabetes. A five-day Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated resident was cognitively intact and required limited assist of one for toileting, ambulation, and bed mobility. The MDS also indicated resident required extensive assist of one for dressing and locomotion with supervision for eating, and physical assistance for bathing. The MDS section F did not address showering frequency. A…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-01-31 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to inform the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman when a resident was transferred to an acute care facility. This affected one (#46) of two residents reviewed for hospitalizations. The facility census was 115. Findings include: Resident #46 was admitted [DATE] with diagnoses including dementia, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, major depressive disorder, cerebral infarction, and osteoarthritis. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] documented the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status of 12 out of 15, indicating moderately impaired cognition and required one-person extensive assistance for activities of daily living (ADL's). Review of the medical record progress note dated 07/30/18 revealed the resident was transferred to an acute care hospital 07/30/18 via 911 emergency, and returned to the facility 08/01/18. The medical record contained no evidence that the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-01-31 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure written bed hold information was provided to residents when hospitalized . This affected one (#110) of two residents reviewed for hospitalizations. The facility census was 115. Findings include: Resident #110 was admitted [DATE] with diagnoses including atrial fibrillation and Parkinson's Disease. Review if the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] documented the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status of 15 out of 15, indicating intact cognition. Review of the medical record revealed the resident was emergently transferred to an acute care hospital on [DATE]. The medical record contained no evidence that a written bed-hold notice provided to the resident or his/her representative when the resident was hospitalized . Interview on 01/29/19 at 2:37 P.M., Business Office Manager (BOM) #15 stated the facility provided written bed hold information to residents upon admission but…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-01-31 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 User's Manual, the facility failed to ensure resident assessments accurately reflected a resident's fall with major injury. This affected one (#46) of 26 residents sampled during the survey. Facility census was 115. Findings include: Resident #46 was admitted [DATE] with diagnoses including dementia, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, major depressive disorder, cerebral infarction, and osteoarthritis. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] documented the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status of 12 out of 15, indicating moderately impaired cognition and required one-person extensive assistance for activities of daily living (ADL's). The assessment indicated the resident had no falls since the prior assessment. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated five days earlier on 11/10/18 documented the resident had two falls without major injury. Review of the care…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-01-31 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, resident and staff interviews, medical record review and policy review, the facility failed to develop a baseline care plan to address a residents fluid restrictions. This affected one (#410) of two residents reviewed for hydration. The facility identified three residents with fluid restriction orders. Facility census was 115. Findings include: Review of Resident #410's medical record revealed an admit date of 01/26/19 with diagnosis including but not limited to rheumatoid arthritis, atrial fibrillation, osteoporosis, vertebral fractures, hypertension, esophageal strictures, and hyponatremia. A Minimum Data Set was not available for review since resident was such a recent admit. Review of a therapy progress note dated 01/28/19 and a nursing progress note dated 01/31/19 revealed Resident #410 was cognitively intact and required extensive assist of one for all activities of daily living except supervision only for eating. The notes also indicated resident was incontinent of bowel and bladder. Review of Resident of Resident #410's physician orders dated 01/26/19…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2019-01-31 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, resident and staff interviews, medical record review and policy review, the facility failed to implement a resident's physician ordered fluid restrictions. This affected one (#410) of two residents reviewed for hydration. The facility identified three residents with fluid restriction orders. Facility census was 115. Findings include: Review of Resident #410's medical record revealed an admit date of 01/26/19 with diagnosis including but not limited to rheumatoid arthritis, atrial fibrillation, osteoporosis, vertebral fractures, hypertension, esophageal strictures, and hyponatremia. A Minimum Data Set was not available for review since resident was such a recent admit. Review of a therapy progress note dated 01/28/19 and a nursing progress note dated 01/31/19 revealed Resident #410 was cognitively intact and required extensive assist of one for all activities of daily living except supervision only for eating. The notes also indicated resident was incontinent of bowel and bladder. Review of Resident of Resident #410's physician orders dated 01/26/19 revealed an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-01-31 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide 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 resident, resident representative and staff interview, medical record review and policy review, the facility failed to assess and implement interventions to prevent significant weight loss. This affect one (#68) of four residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility census was 115. Findings include: Review of Resident #68's medical record revealed an admit date of 12/19/18 with a readmit date of 01/06/19. Her diagnosis included but were not limited to wedge compression fracture of thoracic vertebra 11 and 12, fracture of pelvis, fracture of right lower leg, dysphagia, heart failure, hypertension, anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. A five-day Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] indicated resident was cognitively intact and required extensive assist of two for bed mobility, transfers, toileting, and locomotion. Resident #68 required extensive assist of one for dressing and hygiene but was supervision only for eating. A PHQ-9 depression screening…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-01-31 · tag F0740 — failed to provide behavioral / mental-health care — isolatedEnsure each resident must receive and the facility must provide necessary behavioral health care and services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident and staff interview, and medical record review the facility failed to provide behavioral health care services when requested. This affected one (#68) resident of four residents assessed for mood and behavior. The facility census was 115. Findings include: Review of Resident #68's medical record revealed an admit date of 12/19/18 with a readmit date of 01/06/19. Her diagnosis included but were not limited to wedge compression fracture of thoracic vertebra 11 and 12, fracture of pelvis, fracture of right lower leg, dysphagia, heart failure, hypertension, anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. A five-day Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] indicated resident was cognitively intact and required extensive assist of two for bed mobility, transfers, toileting, and locomotion. Resident #68 required extensive assist of one for dressing and hygiene but was supervision only for eating. A PHQ-9 depression screening tool included in 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-01-31 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
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 policy review, the facility failed to ensure any irregularities noted by the pharmacist during residents' monthly drug regimen reviews were reviewed and responded to in writing by residents' attending physician regarding any action to be taken, if any. This affected two residents (#16 and #21) of five residents reviewed for Unnecessary Medications. The facility census was 115. Findings include: 1. Resident #16 was admitted to the facility from an acute care hospital in July of 2018 with diagnoses including status post left hip fracture, wedge compression fracture, pain in thoracic spine, repeated falls, dementia without behavioral disturbance, unilateral primary osteoarthritis, anxiety disorder, insomnia, hypertension, and gastro-esophageal reflux disease. The facility completed a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment of Resident #16's cognitive and physical functional status dated 01/18/19. The 01/18/19 MDS identified the resident as having mild to moderate…
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.
- No harm found · Ccited before2021-04-19 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — widespreadDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on personnel record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to implement their abuse policy to ensure reference checks were completed for six employees, Registered Nurse (RN) #6, Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs) #5, #13, #30, and State Tested Nursing Assistants (STNAs) #4 and #19, of 11 personnel records reviewed. This had the potential to affect all 71 resident of the facility. Findings include: Review of personnel records revealed no evidence reference check were completed for RN #6, LPNs #5, #13, #30, and STNAs #4 and #19. Interview on 04/14/21 at 1:45 P.M. with Human Resources Director (HRD) #200 revealed per the recommendation of their talent acquisition agency they stopped doing reference checks on their employees on 12/01/19. Review of the facility's policy titled, Employment Eligibility Policy, dated 01/01/20, revealed pre-employment requirements included professional reference checks, where applicable.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$16,801 in federal fines across 1 penalty. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.
- $16,801 — penalty dated 2024-04-17
- Medicare payment denial — starting 2024-07-17 for 57 days
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to AVENTURA HEALTH GROUP — 11 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 1 of 5 | 1.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 1.4 | -0.4 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 2.0 | -1.0 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 3.9 | +0.1 vs chain |
The other 10 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.5★, 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 / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AWESOME HEALTHCARE ASSETS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 50% | since 03/01/2022 |
| EOM HEALTH CARE HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 50% | since 03/01/2022 |
| SYHEHE DOTOA TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 48% | since 03/01/2022 |
| WHITE HORSE FAMILY TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 48% | since 03/01/2022 |
| KASZIRER, MOISHE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 03/01/2022 |
| SCHARF, MORDECHAI | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 03/01/2022 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 7 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
4 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
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Ohio Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 365603. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-04-17, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.