Scarlet Oaks Nursing And Rehabilitation Center

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

Met the expected recovery: 21.4% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 42 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.38 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 65% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 10% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 70 beds and averages 64.4 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 6 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.51 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.67 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.36 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 4.03 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.70 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.74 to 0.51 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 54% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

25 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 15 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-01-23 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure food was stored and served in accordance with professional standards for food safety. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all 65 residents who received food from the kitchen. The facility census was 65. Findings included: Observations, during initial tour of the kitchen, on 01/20/25 from 8:50 A.M. to 9:10 A.M., with the facility's Dietary Manager (DM) revealed the following: one 5-pound bag of frozen tater tots that was not in the original packaging and not labeled or dated with a use-by date in the walk-in freezer; one 16-ounce bag of broccoli that was not in the original package and was not labeled or dated with a use-by date in the walk-in freezer; one 5-pound container of peanut butter that was opened but not labeled with a date that was opened on the counter; and four 18-ounce containers of spices (one paprika, one garlic powder, one Italian seasoning, and one seasoned salt) that were opened but not labeled with a use-by date or the date they were opened that were noted 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-01-23 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to inform and provide written information regarding the resident's right to formulate an advance directive. This affected three (#16, #51, and #63) of three residents reviewed for advanced directives. The facility census was 65. Findings included: 1. Review of the admission record revealed Resident #51 was admitted on [DATE]. Resident #51 had a medical history that included diagnoses of chronic respiratory failure, atrial fibrillation, tracheostomy status, malignant neoplasm of the prostate, and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of [DATE], revealed Resident #51 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 9, which indicated the resident had moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated the resident was dependent on staff for all activities of daily living (ADLs). Review of Resident #51's care plan included a focus area revised on [DATE],…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-01-23 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
  Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview, provider interview, email communication reviews and policy reviews, the facility failed to implement the policy to ensure a nurse practitioner (NP) immediately reported an allegation of abuse to facility management when made aware of the allegation, resulting in late reporting to the state agency by the facility. This affected one (#59) of three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 65. Findings included: Review of the admission record revealed Resident #59 was admitted on [DATE]. Resident #59 had a medical history including diagnoses of chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, epilepsy, tracheostomy status, gastrostomy status, dependence on respiratory (ventilator) status, and dependence on supplemental oxygen. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 12/04/24, revealed Resident #59 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12, which indicated the resident had moderate cognitive…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-01-23 · tag F0637 — isolated
  Assess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review, staff interviews, Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument 3.0 User's Manual review, and policy review, the facility failed to identify and complete a Significant Change in Status Assessment (SCSA) when a resident was discharged from Hospice care. This affected one (#48) of 20 sampled residents reviewed. The facility census was 65. Findings included: Review of the admission record revealed Resident #48 was on 03/20/23. Resident #48 had a medication history including diagnoses of unspecified sequelae of nontraumatic intracerebral hemorrhage, vascular dementia with other behavioral disturbance, hemiplegia (partial paralysis) affecting the left nondominant side, dysarthria (difficulty speaking) following cerebral infarction (stroke), acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, tracheostomy status, and gastrostomy status. Review of the quarterly minimum data set (MDS) assessment, with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 10/23/24, revealed Resident #48 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3, which indicated the resident had severe…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-23 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interviews, record reviews, and policy reviews, the facility failed to ensure comprehensive person-centered care plans were developed and implemented. This affected four (#6, #11, #60, and #63) of 20 sampled residents reviewed. The facility census was 65. Findings included: 1. Review of the admission record revealed Resident #6 was admitted on [DATE]. Resident #6 had a medical history including diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 10/10/24, revealed Resident #6 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 11, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated the resident required partial to moderate assistance with all activities of daily living (ADLs). Review of Resident #6's care plan revealed no evidence of a focus, goal, or interventions related to the administration of oxygen therapy. Review of Resident #6's Order Summary Report, with active orders as 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-01-23 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
  Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure resident's who were at nutritional risk had weights completed per policy. This affected two (#60 and #63) of three residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility census was 65. Findings included: 1. Review of the admission record revealed Resident #60 was admitted on [DATE]. Resident #60 had a medical history including diagnoses of a nontraumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage (brain bleed), dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), and gastrostomy status. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 11/07/24, revealed Resident #60 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 5, which indicated the resident had severe cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated the resident was dependent on staff for all activities of daily living (ADLs). The MDS revealed and a (-) dash was placed where the resident's height and weight were to be recorded, as there was no admission height or weight…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-23 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff obtained physician's orders for the use of supplemental oxygen. This affected one (#6) of two residents reviewed for oxygen therapy. The facility census was 65. Findings included: Review of the admission record revealed Resident #6 was admitted on [DATE]. Resident #6 had a medical history including diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 10/10/24, revealed Resident #6 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 11, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated the resident required partial to moderate assistance with all activities of daily living (ADLs). Review of Resident #6's care plan revealed no evidence of a focus, goal, or interventions related to the administration of oxygen therapy. Review of Resident #6's Order Summary Report, with active orders as of 01/20/25, revealed…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-23 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide 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 observation, staff interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain appropriate infection control practices while providing tracheostomy care. This affected one (#51) of one resident observed for tracheostomy care. The facility census was 65. Findings included: Review of the admission record revealed Resident #51 was admitted on [DATE]. Resident #51 had a medical history including diagnoses of chronic respiratory failure and tracheostomy status. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 12/20/24, revealed Resident #51 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 9, which indicated the resident had moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated the resident was dependent on staff for all activities of daily living (ADLs) and received tracheostomy care while at the facility and within the last 14 days of the assessment period of the MDS. Review of Resident #51's care plan included a focus area initiated on 10/26/24, that indicated…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-11-21 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure a handwashing sink with flowing water had a filter in place to prevent the spread of Legionella. This affected all 34 residents (#34, #35, #36, #37, #38, #39, #40, #41, #42, #43, #44, #45, #46, #47, #48, #49, #50, #51, #52, #53, #54. #55, #56, #57, #58, #59, #60, #61, #62, #63, #64, #65, #66 and #67) on the third floor but had the potential to affect all 62 residents who resided in the facility. The facility also failed to ensure there were handwashing stations in resident rooms who were in Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBPs). This affected 24 residents (01, #02, #03, #04, #05, #06, #07, #08, #09, #10, #11, #12, #13, #14, #16, #19, #22, #23, #27, #29, #32, #33, #48, and #66) of the 24 residents who the facility identified as being in EBPs, but had the potential to affect all 62 residents who resided in the facility. The facility also failed to ensure outside a Laboratory Phlebotomist wore the appropriate personal protective…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2024-11-21 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — widespread
  Make sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on observation, staff interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure water temperatures were maintained within an appropriate range. This affected all 62 residents who resided in the facility. Findings include: Observation of the facility on 11/18/24 at 8:48 A.M., revealed the water temperature of the only operational handwashing sink located in the third floor shower room was 84 degrees Fahrenheit. The water temperature of the only operational handwashing sink located in the second floor shower room was 91.6 degrees Fahrenheit. Interview with Maintenance Assistant #79 on 11/18/24 at 8:48 A.M. verified the water temperature of the handwashing sink in the third floor shower room was 84 degrees Fahrenheit and the water temperature of the handwashing sink in the second floor shower room was 91.6 degrees Fahrenheit. Review of the facility's safety of water temperatures policy dated December 2009 revealed water heaters that service resident rooms, bathrooms, common areas and shower areas shall be set to temperatures between 105 and 120 degrees Fahrenheit.

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to CCH HEALTHCARE — 33 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

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

Who owns this facility

2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

About 74% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $543K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

Cost & finances

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

What families pay in OH