Ivy Woods Healthcare Center.
2025 Wyoming Avenue, Cincinnati, OH 45205 · For profit - Corporation · 99 certified beds · (513) 251-2557 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (29% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0604, F0607, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (37) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $14,528 in federal fines (most recent 2023-10-05)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- about 19% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
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 | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 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 | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 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 improved from 3 to 4 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 | 2.8% | 5.3% | 15.4% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.4% | 6.2% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 0.4% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 46.1% | 30.1% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.2% | 3.2% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 5.4% | 6.1% | 16.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 22.8% | 25.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 70.1% | 94.5% | 95.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.4% | 3.4% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 26.7% | 21.4% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 4.0% | 8.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 3.1% | 1.2% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 18.8% | 75.6% | 79.4% | 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.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.12 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 8% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 19% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 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 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 99 beds and averages 92.2 residents a day — about 93% occupied, or roughly 7 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 3.14 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.53 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.87 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 2.95 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.21 on weekdays — 8% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.53 to 0.53 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 29% is below the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
37 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 26 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2023-10-05 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, observation, resident interview, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to provide pain management interventions in accordance with the resident's care plan. This resulted in Actual Harm to Resident #139 who had traumatic burn wounds to her bilateral lower extremities and was not medicated for pain prior to wound care which resulted in the resident exhibiting signs of severe pain. This affected one resident (#139) of three residents reviewed for pain management. The facility census was 90 residents. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #139 revealed an admission date of 09/29/23 with diagnoses of cellulitis and open wounds of the lower legs. Review of an admission nursing progress note for Resident #139 dated 09/29/23, revealed the resident was alert and oriented and was able to make her needs known. Review of the care plan for Resident #139 dated 09/29/23, revealed the resident had complaints of acute/chronic pain and/or was at risk for pain. Interventions included the following: administer…
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 before2026-01-17 · tag F0641 — patternEnsure 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 Long Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument 3.0 User's Manual (RAI manual), the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were accurate. This affected four (#52, #103, #46, and #92) of 19 residents reviewed for accuracy of the MDS assessment. The facility census was 89.Findings included:1. Review of the medical record revealed the facility admitted Resident #52 on 08/22/2025. Diagnosis included essential hypertension (high blood pressure). Review of Resident #52's Smoking assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident used three to five cigarettes daily, was aware of the risks, and was independent for smoking. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 08/29/2025, revealed Resident #52 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated the resident had intact cognition. Section J1300 of the admission MDS revealed code 0 and indicated 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 · D2026-01-17 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review and staff and resident interview, the facility failed to provide documentation of informed consent prior to the administration of psychotropic medications. This affected one (#17) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 89.Findings included:Review of the medical record indicated the facility admitted Resident #17 on 06/07/2025. Diagnosis included major depressive disorder (recurrent, mild).Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 12/18/2025, revealed Resident #17 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated the resident had intact cognition. The MDS indicated the resident received an antidepressant during the seven-day look-back period. Review of Resident #17's Care Plan included a focus area, initiated 06/07/2025, that indicated the resident was at risk for altered mood and behavior related to depression and anxiety. Interventions directed staff to monitor mood and behavior changes, administer medications as ordered, and provide…
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 · D2026-01-17 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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, observation, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the comprehensive care plans included the use of bed rails. This affected two (#20 and #43) of two sampled residents reviewed for bed rail use. The facility census was 89. Findings included:1. Review of the medical record revealed the facility admitted Resident #43 on 01/29/2022. Diagnoses included unspecified convulsions, acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, and unspecified dementia without behavioral disturbance.Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 11/09/2025, revealed Resident #43 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated the resident had intact cognition. The MDS indicated the resident required setup or clean-up assistance with rolling left and right in bed, sitting on the side of the bed and lying back down, standing, and transfers. The MDS also specified that bed rails were not used as a restraint.Review of Resident #43's physician order summary report with active orders…
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 before2026-01-17 · 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
Based on medical record review, observation, staff and resident interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to assess the use of bed rails for two (#20 and #43) of two residents sampled for use of bed rails. In addition, the facility failed to ensure bed rails were maintained. This affected one (#43) of two residents sampled for bed rails. The facility census was 89.Findings included:1. Review of the medical record revealed the facility admitted Resident #43 on 01/29/2022. Diagnoses included unspecified convulsions, acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, and unspecified dementia without behavioral disturbance.Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 11/09/2025, revealed Resident #43 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated the resident had intact cognition. The MDS indicated the resident required setup or clean-up assistance with rolling left and right in bed, sitting on the side of the bed and lying back down, standing, and transfers. The MDS also specified that bed rails were not used…
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 · D2026-01-17 · 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 facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was less than five percent. There were two medication errors out of 26 opportunities for error with a calculated medication error rate of 7.69 percent. This affected one (#01) of five residents reviewed during medication administration. The facility census was 89. Findings included:Review of the medical record indicated the facility admitted Resident #01 on 02/18/2020. Diagnoses included hemiplegia following cerebral infarction, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), vascular dementia, and constipation.Review of an annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 10/08/2025, revealed Resident #01 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10, which indicated the resident had moderate cognitive impairment.Review of Resident #01's Physician Order Summary Report, with active orders as of 01/13/2026, revealed an order dated 12/23/2025 for ascorbic acid (vitamin C) oral tablet 250 milligrams (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 · D2026-01-17 · 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, review of the Long Term Care Pharmacist Recommendation, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure discontinuation of physician orders were transcribed in the medical record. This affected one (#32) of five residents reviewed for Medication Regimen Review (MRR). The facility census was 89.Findings included:Review of the medical record revealed the facility admitted Resident #32 on 07/18/2025. Diagnosis included vascular dementia, unspecified severity with other behavioral disturbance.Review of an admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 07/25/2025, revealed Resident #32 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10, which indicated the resident had moderate cognitive impairment.Review of Resident #32's Long Term Care Pharmacist Recommendation dated 12/18/2025 revealed under Issues/Concerns: The resident had the following active orders: Folic acid (vitamin B-9) 1 mg daily, a multivitamin, Thiamine (vitamin B1) 100 mg daily, and cholecalciferol (vitamin D3) 1000 units daily.…
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 before2026-01-17 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
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, review of staff training transcripts, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure appropriate Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) was worn for one (#05) of two residents sampled for Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP). In addition the facility failed to clean and store nebulizer equipment after use. This affected two (#17 and #20) of four residents sampled for infection control. The facility census was 89.Findings included:1. Review of the medical record revealed the facility admitted Resident #05 on 11/18/2024. Diagnoses included gastrostomy status, systemic lupus erythematosus, and other paralytic syndrome following cerebral infarction. Review of an annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 11/26/2025, revealed Resident #05 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of six, which indicated the resident had severe cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #05's Care Plan Report included a focus…
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 · D2024-06-25 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
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 follow proper techniques while providing incontinence care. The affected one (#16) of the three residents reviewed for incontinence. The facility census was 90. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #16 revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE]. Diagnosis included diabetes, dementia, anxiety, and dysphagia. Review of Resident #16's care plan dated 07/19/22, revealed the resident had bladder/bowel incontinence. Interventions included checking resident for incontinence, and wash, rinse, and dry perineum and change clothing as needed after incontinence episodes. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #16 had moderate cognitive deficits and required extensive assistance with all activities of daily living (ADLs). Observation of incontinence care for Resident #16 on 06/24/24 at 3:41 P.M. with State Testing Nursing Assistant (STNA) #20 revealed 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 · D2023-11-16 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview, facility fall investigation review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure appropriate care was provided to a resident to avoid a preventable fall and the facility failed provided to thoroughly investigate a resident's fall and implement interventions to prevent a similar incident. This affected one (#10) out of three residents (#10,#84, #85) reviewed for falls. The facility census was 85. Findings Include: Review of medical record for Resident #10 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, vascular dementia malignant neoplasm of rectum, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, aphasia, insomnia, and epilepsy. Review of physician's orders dated 08/22/23 for Resident #10, revealed the resident was to be transferred via Hoyer lift for all transfers. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment 3.0 dated 10/01/23 for Resident #10, revealed the resident had severely impaired cognition. 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 before2023-11-16 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such 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 record review, staff interview, review of facility fall investigation, review of facility policy, the facility failed to timely and adequately address a resident's complaints of pain following a fall. This affected one (#10) out of three residents reviewed for pain. The facility census was 85. Findings Include: Review of the medical record for Resident #10 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, vascular dementia malignant neoplasm of rectum, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, aphasia, insomnia, and epilepsy. Review of the physician's orders dated 12/17/21 for Resident #10, revealed the resident was to be monitored for pain twice day (each shift) and Tylenol (pain relief) 650 milligrams (mgs) every four hours as needed (PRN) for pain. On 08/22/23, an order for the resident to be transferred via Hoyer lift for all transfers. On 10/26/23, an order for the resident to have an x-ray completed on his right knee and leg due to pain and swelling.…
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.
Show the remaining 26 citations
- Potential for harm · F2023-10-05 · tag F0868 — widespreadHave the Quality Assessment and Assurance group have the required members and meet at least quarterly
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to have the Medical Director in attendance at the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) meetings. This had potential to affect all 90 residents who resided in the facility. Findings include: Review of the QAPI quarterly meetings sign-in sheets dated 10/22/22, 01/15/23, 04/19/23 and 08/09/23, revealed no documented evidence the Medical Director attended the meetings. Interview with the Administrator on 10/05/23 at 2:32 P.M. verified the Medical Director did not attend the QAPI meetings on 10/22/22, 01/15/23, 04/19/23 and 08/09/23. The Administrator reported the Medical Director was required to attend all the QAPI Meetings as part of the required attendees.
- Potential for harm · E2023-10-05 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — patternEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, observations, staff interviews, review of resident's diet lists, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to provide menus as planned by a Registered Dietitian (RD). This affected 13 Residents (#11, #62, #61, #60, #17, #12, #22, #35, #14, #78, #40, #69, and #06) of the 13 residents observed in the main dining room. The facility also failed to provide appropriate substitutions to residents. This affected four residents (70, # 53, #38 and #07) of the four residents identified by the facility as receiving puree diets. The facility census was 90. Findings Include: 1. Observation of the initial dining service in the main dining room on 10/04/23 from 12:00 P.M. through 12:30 P.M. revealed all 13 residents (#11, #62, #61, #60, #17, #12, #22, #35, #14, #78, #40, #69 and #06) received a four ounce (one-half cup) serving of salad. Review of the menu spreadsheet dated 10/04/23 revealed residents on regular diet, 2-gram sodium diet, carbohydrate-controlled diet and dysphagia advanced diets were ordered to receive eight ounces (one cup) of salad during the lunch…
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 before2023-10-05 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure 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 record review, observation and staff interview, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve foods in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This had the potential to affect 89 residents who received food from the kitchen. The facility census was 90. Findings include: 1. Observations of the kitchen on 10/02/23 from 9:05 A.M. through 12:30 P.M. revealed the following: a. There was a trash can under the preparation (prep) sink that had no lid and was full of food debris and trash. b. The 100-A, 100-B, 200-A, and 200-B unit meal delivery carts were noted to have a large buildup of brownish food debris in the corners and sticky substances on the interior cart racks where meal trays were being stored during delivery. During lunch meal service, staff were observed placing the resident's food tray in the dirty carts and the trays being delivered were observed touching the soiled areas of the food carts racks. c. Numerous ceiling tiles directly above the stove were soiled with brownish substances which appeared to be from splatters. d. Two…
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 · E2023-10-05 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — patternKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain essential kitchen equipment in a safe and sanitary condition. This affected all 89 residents who received meals from the kitchen. The facility total census was 90. Findings include: Observation of the kitchen on 10/04/23 at 12:00 P.M., revealed the steam table had electrical wires in three sections hanging two inches below the back covering. There was an on/off switch inside the lower cabinet and all four temperature control knobs were missing. The steam team table had a brownish, sticky substance covering most of the steam table. Continued observation revealed the renal diet ravioli appeared to be dry and sticking to the steam table pan. Interview with [NAME] #64 on 10/04/23 at 12:45 P.M. verified food dries out quickly on the steam table as the temperature knobs are not available to control the steam temperature. She verified the ravioli was dry and stuck to the pan, making it less palatable. Interview with the Diet Manager (DM) #55 on 10/04/23 at 12:50 P.M. verified the hanging wires should not be exposed 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 · Dcited before2023-10-05 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, observation, resident interview, and review of facility policy and documents the facility failed to ensure residents were treated with dignity and respect. This affected two residents (#28 and #81) of the 18 residents sampled. The facility census was 90 residents. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #28 revealed an admission date of 06/17/22 with diagnoses including encephalopathy, diabetes mellitus (DM), neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder, and pressure ulcer of sacral region. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment 3.0 for Resident #28 dated 08/28/23, revealed the resident was cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance of two staff with activities of daily living (ADLs.) During a random observation on 10/02/23 at 9:49 A.M., revealed Housekeeper #105 passed by Resident #28's door and called out Hey, light skin. Resident #28 did not respond. Interview with Resident #28 on 10/02/23 at 9:50 A.M. confirmed Housekeeper #105 routinely addressed him in this manner, and he felt it was disrespectful. Resident #28…
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 · D2023-10-05 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
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, resident interview, and staff interview the facility failed to ensure residents had appropriate bedding and mobility devices to accommodate resident needs. This affected one resident (#140) of 18 residents sampled. The facility census was 90 residents. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #140 revealed an admission date of 09/29/23 with diagnoses including sepsis, cellulitis, metabolic encephalopathy, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), morbid obesity, hypertension (HTN), acute respiratory failure (ARF) with hypoxia. Review of the admission weight record for Resident #140 dated 09/29/23 revealed the resident weighed 350 pounds and was 71 inches tall. Review of an admission note for Resident #140 dated 09/29/23, revealed the resident had bilateral wounds to the lower extremities and his legs were wrapped. Review of a nurse progress note for Resident #140 dated 09/30/23, revealed the resident was up in a wheelchair, and he required assistance 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 · Dcited before2023-10-05 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy the facility failed to ensure residents had their advanced directives /code status noted in the medical record. This affected two residents (#28 and #21) of the four residents sampled for advanced directives. The facility census was 90 residents. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #28 revealed an admission date of 06/17/22 with diagnoses including encephalopathy, diabetes mellitus (DM), neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder, and pressure ulcer of sacral region. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #28 dated 08/28/23 revealed the resident was cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance of two staff with activities of daily living (ADLs.) Review of the hospital note for Resident #28 dated 06/17/22 revealed resident's code status was Do Not Resuscitate Comfort Care (DNRCC). Review of the care plan for Resident #28 dated 06/28/22 revealed the resident's code status was DNRCC.…
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 · D2023-10-05 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolatedKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, observation, resident interview, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure staff honored the residents' right to privacy by failing to knock prior to entering the resident's room and the resident's bathroom. This affected two residents (#09 and #140) of 18 residents sampled. The facility census was 90 residents. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #09 revealed an admission date of 03/08/17 with a diagnosis of peripheral vascular disease (PVD), diabetes mellitus (DM), alcoholic cirrhosis of the liver, and unspecified dementia without behavioral disturbance. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #09 dated 08/16/23 revealed the resident was cognitively intact and required limited assistance of one staff with activities of daily living. Review of the medical record for Resident #140 revealed an admission date of 09/29/23 with diagnoses including sepsis, cellulitis, metabolic encephalopathy, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), morbid obesity, hypertension (HTN), acute…
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 before2023-10-05 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor 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 record review, observation, resident interview, and staff interview the facility failed to ensure resident room furnishings were in good repair and properly functional. This affected two residents (#18 and #06) of 18 residents sampled. The facility census was 90 residents. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #81 revealed an admission date of 09/06/23 with diagnoses including atherosclerotic, cocaine use, hypertension (HTN), malignant neoplasm of the esophagus, dysphagia, and anemia. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment 3.0 for Resident #81 dated 09/15/23 revealed the resident was cognitively intact and required supervision and set up help of one staff with activities of daily living (ADLs.) Observation of Resident #81's room on 10/03/23 at 12:41 P.M. revealed the resident's foot board was broken and had a jagged edge exposed approximately one foot in length. Resident #81's closet door had a hole in it which measured approximately three inches in diameter and the electrical outlet in the resident's bathroom was non-functional. Interview…
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 · D2023-10-05 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop 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
Based on record review, observation, resident interview, review of the facility's Self-Reported Incidents (SRIs) and review of facility policy and documents the facility failed to ensure the facility's abuse policy was implemented when allegations of abuse were initiated by residents. This affected one resident (#28) of the one resident reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 90 residents. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #28 revealed an admission date of 06/17/22 with diagnoses including encephalopathy, diabetes mellitus (DM), neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder, and pressure ulcer of sacral region. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment 3.0 for Resident #28 dated 08/28/23, revealed the resident was cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance of two staff with activities of daily living (ADLs.) Observation on 10/02/23 at 9:49 A.M. revealed Housekeeper #105 passed by Resident #28's room and called out Hey, light skin. Resident #28 did not respond. Interview with Resident #28 on 10/02/23 at 9:50 A.M. confirmed Housekeeper #105…
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 · D2023-10-05 · 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 record review, observation, resident interview, review of facility's Self-Reported Incident (SRI) and review of facility policy and documents the facility failed to prevent further potential abuse while an abuse allegation investigation was in progress. This affected one resident (#28) of one resident reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 90 residents. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #28 revealed an admission date of 06/17/22 with diagnoses including encephalopathy, diabetes mellitus (DM), neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder, and pressure ulcer of sacral region. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment 3.0 for Resident #28 dated 08/28/23, revealed the resident was cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance of two staff with activities of daily living (ADLs.) During a random observation on 10/02/23 at 9:49 A.M., revealed Housekeeper #105 passed by Resident #29's room and called out Hey, light skin. Resident #28 did not respond. Interview with Resident #28 on 10/02/23 at 9:50 A.M., confirmed Housekeeper #105 routinely…
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 · D2023-10-05 · 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 record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the Ombudsman was notified when residents were discharged to the hospital. This affected three residents (#36, #70, and #85) out of three residents reviewed for discharges. The facility census was 90. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #36 revealed an admission date of 02/22/23. Diagnoses included congestive heart failure (CHF), bipolar disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and depression. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment 3.0 dated 08/17/23 for Resident #36, revealed the resident had moderate cognitive impairment as evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12. Review of the medical record for Resident #36, revealed the resident was sent to the hospital and admitted on [DATE] with no documented the Ombudsman was notified. Interview with the Administrator on 10/04/23 at 2:18 P.M., revealed notification to the Ombudsman had not been completed for Resident #36's discharge to 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 · D2023-10-05 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide 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 observation, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents' fingernails were timed and clean. This affected one resident (#239) of three residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs). The facility census was 90. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #239 revealed an admission date of 08/01/23. Diagnoses included paranoid schizophrenia, type two diabetes mellitus (DM II), antisocial personality disorder, and schizoaffective disorder. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment 3.0 dated 08/09/23 for Resident #239, revealed the resident had intact cognition as evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13. This resident was assessed to require one-person extensive assistance with dressing, eating, toileting, personal hygiene, and bathing. Observation of Resident #239 on 10/02/23 at 3:40 P.M. revealed the resident was lying in bed. Resident #239's fingernails were observed to extend approximately a quarter of an inch to a half an inch beyond his fingertips and were yellow in color 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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-05 · 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 medical record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a timely physician response to the monthly pharmacist drug regimen reviews. This affected one resident (#28) of five residents reviewed for medications. The facility census was 90 residents. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #28 revealed an admission date of 06/17/22 with diagnoses including encephalopathy, diabetes mellitus (DM), neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder, and pressure ulcer of sacral region. Review of the physician's orders dated 07/14/23 for Resident #28, revealed the resident was ordered to have the following laboratory (labs) tests drawn: complete blood count (CBC), comprehensive metabolic panel (CMP), thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH), fasting lipids, and hemoglobin A1C. Review of the pharmacist's recommendations dated 08/03/23 for Resident #28, revealed the resident had a physician's order on 07/14/23 to have labs completed which included CBC, CMP, TSH, fasting lipids, and hemoglobin A1C, but the lab results were not in 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 · D2023-10-05 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolatedProvide timely, quality laboratory services/tests to meet the needs of residents.
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 laboratory (labs) tests were completed in a timely manner as ordered by the physician. This affected one resident (#28) of 18 residents sampled. The facility census was 90 residents. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #28 revealed an admission date of 06/17/22 with diagnoses including encephalopathy, diabetes mellitus (DM), neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder, and pressure ulcer of sacral region. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment 3.0 for Resident #28 dated 08/28/23, revealed the resident was cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance of two staff with activities of daily living (ADLs.) Review of the physician's orders dated 07/14/23 for Resident #28, revealed the resident was ordered to have the following labs completed: complete blood count (CBC), comprehensive metabolic panel (CMP), thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH), fasting lipids, and hemoglobin A1C. Review of the medical record for Resident #28 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 · D2023-10-05 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolatedProvide or obtain dental services for each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical review, observation, resident interview, and staff interview, and review of the facility policy the facility failed to ensure residents received routine dental services. This affected one resident (#28) of 18 residents sampled. The facility census was 90. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #28 revealed an admission date of 06/17/22 with diagnoses including encephalopathy, diabetes mellitus (DM), neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder, and pressure ulcer of sacral region. Review of the physician's order for Resident #28 dated 11/10/22, revealed the resident may have a dental consult. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment 3.0 for Resident #28 dated 08/28/23 revealed the resident was cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance of two staff with activities of daily living (ADLs.) Observation of Resident #28 on 10/02/23 at 9:55 A.M. revealed the resident had a chipped upper front tooth. Interview with Resident #28 on 10/02/23 at 9:55 A.M. confirmed he had a chipped upper front tooth which was not painful, but it bothered…
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 before2020-02-20 · 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 facility policy, the facility failed to ensure food was stored and prepared in a clean environment, failed to ensure food items were dated and labeled as to the day they were opened, and failed to discard expired food items. This involved all 78 residents in the facility who received food from the kitchen. Findings include: 1. Observation on 02/18/20 at 8:40 A.M. during the initial tour of the kitchen with [NAME] #93 revealed [NAME] #93 was standing at the prep table with a cell phone in her hand which she placed in her pocket when surveyor entered the kitchen. A cell phone was sitting on the corner of the prep table. The dry storage had a plastic bag of hamburger buns with no expiration date which had been ripped open exposing the buns to air. The dry storage had an open jug of liquid butter and an open jug of hot sauce which had not been dated upon opening. The walk-in refrigerator had two pitchers of orange juice, one pitcher of milk, one pitcher of fruit punch, two pitchers of apple juice, none of which were dated or labeled.…
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 before2020-02-20 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based upon record review, observation, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to provide a dignified resident dining experience. This affected one (Resident #56) of 18 residents sampled. The census was 78. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #56 revealed an admission date of 01/09/20. Diagnoses included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebrovascular disease, cerebral palsy, and Alzheimer's disease. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 02/05/20, revealed Resident #56 was cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance of one staff with eating. Observation on 02/18/20 at 12:47 P.M. revealed State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #30 fed Resident #56 his lunch meal in his room with the door open. Resident #56 was sitting up in bed, and STNA #30 was standing over resident while feeding him. Interview on 02/18/20 at 12:59 P.M. with STNA #30 confirmed she stood over Resident #56 for the entirety of the lunch meal while feeding resident. STNA #30 further confirmed she stood for the entire meal because it was…
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 before2020-02-20 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based upon record review, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to accurately document the code status for one (Resident #56) of 18 residents sampled. The census was 78. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #56 revealed an admission date of 01/09/20. Diagnoses included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebrovascular disease, cerebral palsy, and Alzheimer's disease. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 02/05/20, revealed Resident #56 was cognitively impaired. Review of the medical record for Resident #56 revealed a form signed by the resident's attending physician indicating resident's code status was Do Not Resuscitate Comfort Care (DNRCC)-Arrest. Review of dashboard of the electronic medical record (EMR) for Resident #56 revealed resident's code status was listed as DNRCC. Review of the current physician orders in the EMR for Resident #56 revealed resident's code status was listed as DNRCC. Interview on 02/19/20 at 9:15 A.M. with Registered Nurse (RN) #22 confirmed Resident #56's correct code status was…
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 before2020-02-20 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor 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 upon record review, observation, resident interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain a homelike environment by storing wheelchairs and geri chairs in the room of one (#5) of 18 residents sampled. The census was 78. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #5 revealed an admission date of 05/12/18. Diagnoses included hemiplegia and vascular dementia with behavioral disturbance. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #5 dated 02/05/20 revealed resident was cognitively impaired, required extensive assistance with activities of daily living, and used a wheelchair for mobility. Observation on 02/18/20 at 10:00 A.M. of Resident #5's room revealed two wheelchairs in the room to the left of his bed and a geri chair in front of the bathroom door. Observation on 02/18/20 at 12:57 P.M. of Resident #5's room revealed two wheelchairs in the room to the left of his bed and a geri chair in front of the bathroom door. Interview on 02/18/20 at 12:59 P.M. with Resident #5 confirmed one of the two wheelchairs in his room belonged to him, but 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 · D2020-02-20 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolatedEnsure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
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, resident interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a Wander Guard restraining device was not used in the absence of wandering behaviors for one (#45) of two residents reviewed for restraints. The facility census was 78. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #45 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Diagnoses included altered mental status, legionella pneumonia, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder, hypertension, and anemia, Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 02/12/2020, revealed Resident #45 was cognitively intact. The resident required supervision and set up only for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toileting, personal hygiene and bathing. Resident #45 was independent in eating and required supervision only for toileting. Review of the elopement risk assessment, dated 06/29/19, identified Resident #45 as a low risk for…
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 before2020-02-20 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based upon record review, observation, and staff interview, the facility failed to accurately code the presence of side rail usage on the bed of one (#38) of two residents reviewed for restraints. The census was 78. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #36 revealed an admission date of 01/16/19 with a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease. Review of hospice admission orders dated 09/12/19, revealed Resident #36 was admitted to hospice with a diagnosis of end stage Alzheimer's disease and an order for the hospice company to provide a bed with bilateral half side rails for the resident. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 12/17/19, revealed Resident #36 was cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance of two staff with bed mobility. Section P for the presence of side rails was coded as not used. Observation on 02/18/20 at 1:07 P.M. of Resident #36's bed revealed it had bilateral half side rails to the upper half of his bed. The bed had a sticker to the frame indicating it was the property of the hospice company. Interview on 02/19/20 at…
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 · D2020-02-20 · tag F0660 — isolatedPlan the resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs.
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, resident interview, and staff interview the facility failed to develop a plan to reflect the discharge goals for one (#45) of two residents reviewed for discharge. The facility census was 78. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #45 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Diagnoses included altered mental status, legionella pneumonia, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder, hypertension, and anemia, Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 02/12/2020, revealed Resident #45 was cognitively intact. The resident required supervision and set up only for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toileting, personal hygiene and bathing. Resident #45 was independent in eating and required supervision only for toileting. Under section Q0500B does the resident desire to talk to someone about the possibility of leaving the facility and returning to the community to live it was coded…
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 before2020-02-20 · 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
Based on record review, observation, resident interview, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to assess the need for the use of bilateral half side rails on the bed of one (Resident #38) of two residents reviewed for restraints. The census was 78. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #38 revealed and admission date of 01/16/19 with a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease. Review of side rail assessment for Resident #38 dated 01/16/19 revealed resident did not use side rails and resident had not expressed a desire to have side rails on his bed. Review of hospice admission orders for Resident #38 dated 09/12/19 revealed the resident was admitted to hospice with a diagnosis of end stage Alzheimer's disease and an order for the hospice company to provide a bed with bilateral half side rails for the resident. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #38 dated 12/17/19 revealed resident was cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance of two staff with bed mobility. The MDS failed to code the presence of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2020-02-20 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
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 attempt gradual dose reduction (GDR) or document clinical contraindications to GDR for an antipsychotic medication, and failed to document behaviors necessitating the need for the use of an antipsychotic medication for one (Resident #5) of six residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The census was 78. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #5 revealed an admission date of 05/12/18 with a diagnosis of vascular dementia with behavioral disturbance. Review of the physician orders for Resident #5 revealed an order dated 07/06/18 for the antipsychotic Seroquel 25 milligrams (mg) to be administered twice daily for treatment of vascular dementia with behavioral disturbance. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments dated 02/15/19, 05/21/19, 08/12/19, 11/06/19, and 02/05/20 revealed Resident #5 was cognitively impaired, had received an antipsychotic medication for seven days during the reference period, no dosage reduction of the antipsychotic had been…
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 before2020-02-20 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide 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, observation, resident interview, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure respiratory equipment was cleaned for one (Resident #38) of two residents reviewed for respiratory care. The census was 78. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #38 revealed and admission date of 01/16/19 with a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 12/17/19, revealed Resident #38 was cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance of two staff with activities of daily living. Review of the physician orders for Resident #38 revealed an order dated 01/21/19 for resident to have a continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) applied every night. Review of physician orders for Resident #38 revealed an order dated 02/19/20 for resident's CPAP tubing mask to be cleaned every week on Wednesday. Review of Medication Administration Record (MAR) for January 2020 and February 2020 revealed there was no documentation of cleaning of resident's CPAP mask until 02/19/20. Observation on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“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
$14,528 in federal fines across 1 penalty. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.
- $14,528 — penalty dated 2023-10-05
- Medicare payment denial — starting 2023-11-01 for 35 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 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 4 of 5 | 3.2 | +0.8 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.6 | -0.6 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.5 | +0.5 vs chain |
The other 109 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.2★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 109; lowest-rated first.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BUCKEYE OP CO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 07/01/2021 |
| BUCKEYE HEALTHCARE HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 07/01/2021 |
| OMG MSTR LSCO, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 07/01/2021 |
| ROMEO, DOMINIC | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 04/01/2023 |
| STOLTZ, CHARLES | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 07/01/2021 |
| WILHEIM, RONALD | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 07/01/2021 |
| WYOMING MGT CO., LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 07/01/2021 |
| GROVES, DONNA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 04/14/2023 |
| KHAN, SHAZIA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2021 |
| WALTERS, HEATHER | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2021 |
| ODENTHAL, RICHARD | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/25/2025 |
| C.R. STOLTZ FAMILY INVESTMENT COMPANY INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2021 |
| C.R. STOLTZ IRREVOCABLE TRUST | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2021 |
| HEALTH CARE HOLDINGS, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2021 |
| I. ROSEDALE FAMILY INVESTMENT COMPANY INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2021 |
| I. ROSEDALE IRREVOCABLE TRUST | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2021 |
| R.S. WILHEIM IRREVOCABLE TRUST | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2021 |
| RONALD S WILHEIM 2012 SPOUSAL TRUST | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2021 |
| ROSEDALE FAMILY INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2021 |
| RRW, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2021 |
| S.L. ROSEDALE IRREVOCABLE TRUST | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2021 |
| WILHEIM FAMILY INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC. | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2021 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 27 rows in the source record cover these 22 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
15 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 $1.7M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 19% 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
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 365455. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-17, 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.