Forest Hills Healthcare Center.

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

63.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 111 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 60.0% 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 25 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 0.29 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 44% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 138 beds and averages 114.6 residents a day — about 83% occupied, or roughly 23 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.71 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.89 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.01 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 3.39 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.84 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.91 to 0.84 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 48% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

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

Inspection trend

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

29 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 18 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-05-14 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY THE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCY REPRESENTS AN INCIDENT OF PAST NONCOMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY. Based on observations, medical record review, review of the incident log, review of facility in-service records, review of a personnel file, review of the safety inspection bus checklist, review of witness statements and the facility's internal investigation, review of policies, review of the emergency medical services (EMS) report, review of emergency room (ER) notes, interview with the Medical Director, and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident dependent on staff, was safely secured in the wheelchair with an appropriate seat belt during transportation in a facility van to a physician's visit. This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy when one resident (#15) was placed at potential risk for serious life-threatening harm and/or injuries, when Former Transport Driver (FTD) #34 abruptly stopped the facility van, causing Resident #15 to come out of her wheelchair…

  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 · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · Fcited before2026-04-30 · 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, resident interview, and policy review, the facility failed to store food in a manner to prevent against the potential spread of foodborne illness. This had the potential to affect 109 of 112 residents in the facility. The facility identified three residents (#01, #05, and #37) who did not receive food from the kitchen. The facility census was 112. 1.Observation on 04/27/26 at 8:22 A.M. with Director of Dietary Services (DDS) #505 of the walk-in cooler revealed it contained the following items:two cartons of heavy whipping cream opened and partially used, with no open date, a cart with two bins of individually poured and covered beverages with no date, a tray of individual fruit cocktail bowls which were covered but did not have a date, a large pan of pasta with ground meat with the serving scoop inside, resting on the food, covered with plastic wrap and not dated. A cart containing a 22-quart container of a dark liquid with no label or date, a pink plastic pitcher next to the bin resting directly on the cart which was coated with a dark…

  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 · Edisputed · IDR2026-04-30 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — pattern
  Honor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on review of Resident Council minutes, resident interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to respond to resident concerns expressed during Resident Council meetings. This affected (Residents #4, #7, #17, #24, #48, #67, #91, #96, #101, #107, #108, #118 and #132) who have attended Resident Council in the previous three months and had the potential to affect all of the residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 112 residents. Findings include: Review of the Resident Council Minutes dated January 2026, February 2026, March 2026 revealed residents expressed the following concerns: noise at night, aides not staying on task on nightshift, not being assisted out of bed in time for activities, bathrooms not being cleaned properly, running out of food ordered, rooms not being cleaned on the weekends. Review of the minutes revealed no follow-up to the concerns expressed by the residents in the Resident Council meetings. Interview on 04/29/26 at 10:59 A.M. with Resident #132, the Resident Council President, with Resident #20 and with Resident #96 confirmed…

  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 · E2026-04-30 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
  Ensure 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 interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure resident medications were properly labeled and stored. This affected two (Residents #82 and #95) of six residents reviewed for insulin administration. Based on observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure medication carts were locked. This had the potential to affect three facility identified cognitively impaired and mobile residents (Residents #8, #10, and #75) of 26 residents residing on the 1100 hallway. The facility census was 112 residents.Findings include: 1.Review of the medical record for Resident #95 revealed an admission date of 12/16/25 with diagnoses including fibromyalgia, type two diabetes, and polyneuropathy. Review of the physician's orders for Resident #95 dated April 2026 revealed an order for insulin aspart injection per sliding scale. Observation on 04/29/26 at 11:35 A.M of the Rehab South medication cart with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #432 revealed Resident #95's insulin aspart pen…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-04-30 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
  Ensure 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 the facility recipe, the facility failed to prepare pureed foods in a manner to preserve the nutritional content of the food. This had the potential to affect 13 residents in the facility who received pureed foods. The facility census was 112 residents.Findings include: Observation on 04/29/26 at 11:20 A.M. of [NAME] #500 preparing pureed peas revealed the cook poured peas from a large metal pan into the food processor and added approximately one quart of chicken broth and two tablespoons of thickening powder. [NAME] #500 began to blend the contents together and checked the consistency of the peas and added approximately one tablespoon of thickener and continued to run the food processor. [NAME] #500 continued on to run the food processor, adding an additional six tablespoons of thickener and blended until he achieved the appropriate consistency. Interview on 04/29/26 at 11:35 A.M. with [NAME] #500 verified he blended approximately two liters of peas, one quart of chicken broth, and nine tablespoons of thickener when preparing…

  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 · D2026-04-30 · tag F0655 — isolated
  Create 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to implement a baseline care plan which included information regarding resident activities of daily living (ADL) care needs. This affected one (Resident #16) of 13 residents reviewed for baseline care plans. The facility census was 112 residents.Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #16 revealed an admission date of 04/09/26 with diagnoses including postprocedural intestinal obstruction and dementia. The resident transferred to the hospital on [DATE] and had not yet returned to the facility. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #16 dated 04/13/26 revealed the resident had severely impaired cognition and required staff assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs.) Review of the baseline care plan for Resident #16 dated 04/09/26 revealed the resident had an ADL self-care performance deficit due to her comorbidities. The care plan did not include further details regarding the…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-04-30 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's limited range of motion was addressed in the comprehensive care plan. This affected one (Resident #1) of one resident reviewed for limited range of motion. The facility identified eight residents who had a limited range of motion. The facility census was 112 residents. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #1 revealed an admission date of 03/09/26 with diagnoses including anoxic brain damage, persistent vegetative state, and type two diabetes mellitus. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #1 dated 03/16/26 revealed the resident was in a persistent vegetative state with no discernible consciousness, was dependent on staff for all activities of daily living (ADLs), and had impaired range of motion to all extremities. Review of the care plan for Resident #1 dated 04/27/26 revealed it did not include interventions related to the resident's impaired range of motion. Interview on 04/29/26 at 12:37 P.M. with MDS Licensed Practical…

  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 · D2026-04-30 · 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, observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure all residents received adequate assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs). This affected two (Residents #1 and #113) of five residents reviewed for ADLs. The facility census was 112 residents.Findings include: 1.Review of the medical record of Resident #113 revealed an admission date of 09/12/25 with diagnoses including type two diabetes mellitus, legal blindness, and adult failure to thrive. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #113 dated 03/22/26 revealed the resident had intact cognition and required partial/moderate assistance with bathing and personal hygiene. Observation on 04/27/26 at 11:50 A.M. revealed Resident #113's fingernails were long and extended approximately one half inch beyond the fingertip. Interview 04/27/26 at 11:50 A.M. with Resident #113 confirmed he did not like having his fingernails so long because it interfered with his ability to press buttons on his tv remote. Interview on 04/27/26 at 12:06 P.M. with Activity…

  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 · D2026-04-30 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
  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, family interview, and policy review, the facility failed to provide the care and services to prevent a decrease in range of motion on a resident who was at risk for the development of contractures. This affected one (Resident #1) of one resident reviewed for limited range of motion. The facility identified eight residents who had limited range of motion. The facility census was 112 residents.Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #1 revealed an admission date of 03/09/26 with diagnoses including anoxic brain damage, persistent vegetative state, and type two diabetes mellitus. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #1 dated 03/16/26 revealed the resident was in a persistent vegetative state with no discernible consciousness, was dependent on staff for all activities of daily living and had impaired range of motion to all extremities. Interview on 04/27/26 at 2:13 P.M. with Resident #1's responsible party…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-30 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
  Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on medical record review, resident interview, and staff interview the facility failed to ensure medications were available for administration per physician order. This affected two (Residents #17 and #55) of 23 facility-identified residents with orders for routine opioid analgesics. The facility census was 112 residents.Findings include: 1.Review of the medical record for Resident #17 revealed an admission date of 08/27/25 with diagnoses including wedge compression fractures of T1, T7-T8 and T11-T12, muscle weakness and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #17 dated 02/13/26 revealed the resident had intact cognition and required staff assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs). Review of the physician's orders for Resident #17 revealed an order dated 03/27/26 for oxycodone 10 milligrams (mg) every six hours. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for Resident #17 revealed the 6:00 P.M. evening dose of oxycodone for 04/27/26 was not signed off as administered. Interview on 04/29/26 at 4:30 P.M.…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited beforedisputed · IDR2026-04-30 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolated
  Ensure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on medical record review, observation, resident interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered only with an appropriate indication for use. This affected one (Resident #13) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 112 residents.Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #13 revealed an admission date of 03/06/26 with diagnosis including heart disease, myocardial infarction, and tobacco use. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #13 dated 03/13/26 revealed resident was cognitively intact and required minimal assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs.) Review of the physician's orders for Resident #13 dated April 2026 revealed an order for a transdermal nicotine patch to be applied once daily for smoking cessation. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for Resident #13 dated April 2026 revealed the resident was documented for refusal of the patch from 04/14/26 to 04/29/26. Interview on 04/29/26 at 9:29 A.M with Resident #13 confirmed…

  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

“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.

“Disputed” is CMS’s own flag, not our reading: the CMS deficiency file records whether the home has formally contested a citation, and we reproduce that. IDR is Informal Dispute Resolution, run by the state survey agency that wrote the citation; IIDR is Independent Informal Dispute Resolution, a separate process before an outside entity, available when CMS has proposed a civil money penalty. They are different processes and we mark them differently. Two things to hold at once. A disputed citation is still a citation — it was written by a surveyor, it stands on the record unless and until it is changed, and we neither hide it nor discount it. And we cannot tell you how the dispute came out: CMS publishes that a citation is under dispute, not the outcome, so a tag marked here may since have been upheld, reduced, or deleted, and an unmarked tag may have been disputed and resolved before this file was cut. Ask the home what it disputed and why — it is entitled to tell you, and the answer is often the most informative thing on this page.

Fines & penalties

$16,801 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $16,801 — penalty dated 2024-05-14

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 COMMUNICARE HEALTH — 110 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

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

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 27 rows in the source record cover these 20 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

14 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 $3.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 24% 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 2024. 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, FY2024). 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