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

Eastgate Health Care Center

4400 Glen Este Withamsville Road, Cincinnati, OH 45245 · For profit - Corporation · 175 certified beds · (513) 752-3710 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (513) 752-3710 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citations — no harm found (F0609, F0610) — most recent Aug 2025
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed

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.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
4404 Glen Este Withamsville Rd · (513) 943-1000 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
815 Clepper Ln · (513) 753-9280 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
830 Clepper Ln · (513) 947-1222 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 5 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 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased1.1%5.3%15.4%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight7.2%6.2%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.2%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%0.4%2.0%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms88.1%30.1%6.5%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury0.4%3.2%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened2.8%6.1%16.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication15.6%25.5%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.5%94.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers0.9%3.4%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control24.6%21.4%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table4.3%8.8%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.4%1.2%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine92.1%75.6%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission18.5%24.9%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit7.3%12.9%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.251.731.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.001.801.80better

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.

50.0% 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 225 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

50.0%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
16.6%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
82.5%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.38U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.16hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.16hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 82.5% 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 80 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 0.38 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 64% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 9% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF50.0%CMS range 43.0–55.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF16.6%CMS range 13.7–19.410.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge82.5%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge73.8%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge65.0%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.8%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization8.4%CMS range 5.6–13.57.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.061.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

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

Staffing

0.77
RN hours/ resident / day
0.88
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.35
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.99
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.56
RN hoursweekends
40.7%
Total nursing turnover
12.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 175 beds and averages 159.4 residents a day — about 91% occupied, or roughly 16 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.99 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.77 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.35 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 3.57 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.17 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.85 to 0.56 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 41% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

6
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-08-28)
2
at the previous standard inspection (2022-05-09)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

10 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-08-28 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, staff interview, facility document review, and policy review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This had the potential to affect all the residents who received nourishment from the kitchen.Findings include:Observation on 08/18/25 at 9:40 A.M. of the walk-in refrigerator revealed it included the following: a large container of pancake batter with an open date of 08/12/25 and a discard date of 08/17/25, a large, opened container of sour cream without an open date, a large, opened container of canola oil without an open date. Interview on 08/18/25 at 9:44 A.M. with the Corporate Chef (CC) confirmed items in the refrigerator should have an open date and a discard date and items should be discarded by the discard date. The CC confirmed the sour cream and canola oil lacked open dates, and the pancake batter should have been discarded by the discard date on the label. 2. Observation on 08/18/25 at 9:43 A.M. of the dry storage revealed there were 21 boxes of salt which…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-28 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on medical record review, staff interview, facility document review, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure allegations of abuse were reported to the state survey agency (SSA). This affected two (Residents #156 and Resident #120) of three residents reviewed for abuse. Findings include:1. Review of the medical record for Resident #52 revealed an admission date of 12/26/2023 with diagnoses of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Review of the MDS for Resident #52 dated 05/21/25 revealed the resident had intact cognition. Review of the care plan for Resident #52 dated 04/16/24 revealed the resident had a history of behaviors which included wandering and making inappropriate comments to staff. Interventions included the following: direct staff to assist the resident to develop more appropriate methods of coping and interacting, encourage the resident to express feelings appropriately, offer tasks that divert the resident’s attention. Review of the medical record for Resident #156 revealed an admission date of 09/20/23 with a diagnosis of dementia with…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-28 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on medical record review, staff interview, facility document review, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate allegations of resident abuse and ensure residents were protected from further potential abuse during the course of the investigation. This affected two (Residents #156 and Resident #120) of three residents reviewed for abuse. Findings include:1. Review of the medical record for Resident #52 revealed an admission date of 12/26/2023 with diagnoses of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.Review of the MDS for Resident #52 dated 05/21/25 revealed the resident had intact cognition. Review of the care plan for Resident #52 dated 04/16/24 revealed the resident had a history of behaviors which included wandering and making inappropriate comments to staff. Interventions included the following: direct staff to assist the resident to develop more appropriate methods of coping and interacting, encourage the resident to express feelings appropriately, offer tasks that divert the resident's attention. Review of the medical record for 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-28 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on medical record review, resident interview, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to provide nail care for one (Resident #13) of four residents reviewed who were dependent on facility staff for activities of daily living (ADL). Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #13 revealed an admission date of 05/23/22 with diagnoses including dementia without psychotic disturbance, type two diabetes mellitus, blindness to the right eye, and bilateral glaucoma. Review of the care plan for Resident #13 dated 05/05/23 revealed the resident had a self-care performance deficit and staff were to assist with ADLs as needed. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #13 dated 07/08/25 revealed the resident had severe cognitive impairment, was dependent on staff for personal hygiene, and had not rejected care during the assessment look-back period. Observation on 08/20/25 at 8:05 A.M. revealed Resident #13's fingernails on both hands were three to four inches long, extending beyond the fingertips. Resident #13's nails…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-28 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolated
    Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to prevent a significant medication error that placed 1 (Resident #132) of 1 resident reviewed for insulin administration at risk for hypoglycemia. Specifically, Resident #132 received short-acting insulin (Humalog) instead of long-acting insulin (Lantus) and required transfer to a hospital emergency department for observation.The findings included: Review of the medical record for Resident #132 revealed an admission date of 07/11/25 with diagnoses including myocardial infarction, chronic kidney disease, and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #132 dated 07/17/25 revealed the resident had intact cognition. Review of the care plan for Resident #132 revealed the resident had diabetes mellitus with diabetic polyneuropathy. Interventions directed staff to administer diabetes medication as ordered by clinicians. Review of the physician's orders for Resident #132 revealed an order dated 07/11/25 for Lantus insulin subcutaneously 95 units at bedtime. Review…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-28 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
    Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to maintain medical records that were complete and accurate. This affected one (Resident #154) of 48 sampled residents. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #154 revealed an admission date of [DATE] with a diagnoses of protein-calorie malnutrition and a discharge date of [DATE]. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #154 revealed the resident had severe cognitive impairment. Review of the do not resuscitate (DNR) order form for Resident #154 dated [DATE] revealed the physician signed an order for DNR comfort care indicating staff would not perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR.) Review of the order recap report for Resident #154 revealed an order dated [DATE] for the resident's code status as DNR comfort care. Review of the social service assessment for Resident #154 dated [DATE] per Social Worker (SW) #12 revealed the resident was a full code Review of the progress notes…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-05-09 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the residents were treated with dignity and respect at meal service. This affected one (Resident #120) of 11 residents whom were eating lunch in the dining room. The facility census was 148. Findings include: Record review for Resident #120 revealed Resident #120 was admitted on [DATE]. Diagnoses included congestive heart failure, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, obesity, chronic kidney disease, and anemia. Review of the five-day Medicare Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #120 had no cognitive deficits and required supervision during eating. Observation of lunch service on 05/02/22 from 12:15 P.M. to 12:45 P.M. revealed State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #46 brought Resident #120 into the dining room and placed Resident #120 at the table with Resident #20. Resident #20 was served her lunch at 12:15 P.M. and STNA #46 continued to serve the other nine residents (#14, #25, #31,…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-05-09 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolated
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the resident's foods were handled in a manner to prevent the potential spread of food borne illness. This affected three residents (Residents #7, #29, and #60) observed during the afternoon meal. The facility census was 148. Findings include: 1. Observations on 05/02/22 at 12:48 P.M. revealed the residents were being served their afternoon meal. The residents were receiving hamburgers on bun with condiments and toppings consisting of lettuce, tomatoes, mayonnaise and mustard in individual packs. State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #63 was assisting Resident #60 with meal set up. STNA#60 asked Resident #60 what they wanted on their hamburger. The STNA opened the packs of mayonnaise and mustard put on the top bun. STNA# 63 then picked up the lettuce, and tomatoes with her bare hand and placed them on the hamburger, the STNA then wiped her hands on her scrub top and picked up the top bun placed it on the hamburger, used her bare hand to smash the sandwich down and then cut it with the knife.…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-07-25 · tag F0623 — isolated
    Provide 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 policy review, the facility failed to provide a copy of the transfer or discharge notification to the Ombudsman for discharges from the facility. This affected two (#24 and #114) of nine residents reviewed for discharge notification. The facility census was 167. Findings include: 1. Record review revealed Resident #24 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses include epilepsy, apraxia, weakness, pain, unspecified convulsions, abnormal findings of blood chemistry, non toxic multinodular goiter, muscle weakness, anemia, peripheral vascular disease, acquired absence of left leg below knee, essential hypertension, anxiety disorder, atrial fibrillation, type two diabetes mellitus with hyperglycemia and hyperlipidemia. Review of Resident #24's quarterly Minimum Data Sets (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident to be cognitively impaired and require limited assistance with personal hygiene. Resident #24 also required supervision with eating 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-07-25 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a nurse provided the correct pressure ulcer dressing for a resident in accordance with a physician order. This affected one (#84) out of four residents reviewed for pressure wounds. The facility census was 167. Findings include: Review of Resident #84's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses include degeneration of brain, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, dysphagia, hyperlipidemia, electrolyte/fluid balance disorders, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, vitamin D, peripheral vascular disease, anxiety, hypertension, hypokalemia, transient ischemic attack, hemiplegia, anxiety, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, osteoporosis, and dementia. Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #84 has severe cognitive deficits, and requires extensive assist to total dependence for activities of daily living, is frequently…

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

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

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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to CARESPRING — 16 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 5 of 54.0+1.0 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 53.6+0.4 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 52.4+0.6 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 54.6+0.4 vs chain
The other 15 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.0★, per CMS)

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
CARESPRING HEALTH CARE HOLDINGS LPOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 10/01/2013
EPPERS, DAVIDIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER15%since 10/01/2013
FELDKAMP, STEPHANIEIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 01/28/2024
PINK, CHESTRAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 01/01/2022
CHIRUMBOLO, CHRISTOPHERIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 09/01/2016
CARESPRING HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT, LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 02/28/2007

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.

2 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.

$20.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+1.2%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.2M
Related-party expense6% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 18%Medicare 10%Other / private 72%

This home reported $1.2M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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

$363per resident / day
operating cost
$11,029per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$367per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

What families pay in OH

Paying with Medicaid

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

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

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

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 365772. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-28, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

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

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

What to do next