St. Theresa Care Center
7010 Rowan Hill Drive, Cincinnati, OH 45227 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 99 certified beds · (513) 271-7010 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Jan 2026
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has citations for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0567, F0569)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (36) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (71%) runs well above the national median (45%)
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) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 3 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 | 3.1% | 5.3% | 15.4% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 20.2% | 6.2% | 5.4% | worse |
| 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 | 0.7% | 0.4% | 2.0% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 18.0% | 30.1% | 6.5% | better 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 | 0.4% | 3.2% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 2.9% | 6.1% | 16.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 25.0% | 25.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 88.7% | 94.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.3% | 3.4% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 20.8% | 21.4% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 1.9% | 8.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 25.8% | 75.6% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 19.2% | 24.9% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 17.9% | 12.9% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 3.86 | 1.73 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 3.04 | 1.80 | 1.80 | 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.
51.3% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 50 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.44 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 74% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 8% 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 | 51.3%CMS range 38.8–66.9 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.0%CMS range 7.4–16.0 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 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 | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.8%CMS range 3.9–12.7 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.97 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 99 beds and averages 77.4 residents a day — about 78% occupied, or roughly 22 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.59 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.52 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.03 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.15 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.77 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.58 to 0.35 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 71% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
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.
36 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 26 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · E2026-01-12 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, resident and staff interviews, review of Resident Council and Food Committee meeting minutes, observation of a meal test tray, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure meals were served at palatable temperatures. This had the potential to affect all residents, except two (#1 and #5) identified by the facility as receiving no food from the kitchen. The facility census was 76.Findings include: Observations on 01/07/26 at 2:47 P.M. of the kitchen revealed the plate warmer equipment was not fully functional. Further observation revealed the hot plate pellet system only had one side of the equipment in service and could hold approximately 30 plates at a time. Interview on 01/07/26 at 2:47 P.M. with [NAME] #300 verified the plate warmer equipment was not fully operational and only one side of the equipment worked. [NAME] #300 stated the equipment had not worked for several months and was not aware of any repairs pending completion. Interview on 01/07/26 at 2:50 P.M. with Dietary Manger (DM) #500 verified the plate warmer equipment had not been in…
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 · D2026-01-12 · tag F0557 — isolatedHonor the resident's right to be treated with respect and dignity and to retain and use personal possessions.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a dignified dining experience. This affected three (#60, #4 and #68) of three residents reviewed for dignity during meal service. The facility census was 76. Findings include:1. Review of Resident #60's medical record revealed an admission date of 09/09/21. Diagnoses included dementia, dysphagia and respiratory failure.Review of the Minimum Data Set, (MDS) assessment, dated 10/26/25, revealed Resident #60 had severely impaired cognition and was dependent on staff for eating.Additional review of the medical record revealed Resident #60 received a puree consistency diet and resided on the memory care unit. 2. Review of Resident #4's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included dementia and dysphagia.Review of the MDS assessment, dated 12/18/25, revealed Resident #4 had severely impaired cognition and was dependent on staff for eating.…
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 · D2026-01-12 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, review of a facility submitted Self-Reported Incident (SRI), review of staff timecards and schedules, review of a police report, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to prevent potential abuse following an allegation of staff to resident verbal abuse. This affected one (#30) of three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 76.Findings include:Record review for Resident #30 revealed this resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included lack of coordination, Type II diabetes, and anxiety disorder. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 01/06/26, revealed Resident #30 had intact cognition, as evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15. Resident #30 was assessed to require setup or clean up assistance for eating, oral hygiene, and dressing, supervision or touching assistance for toileting and personal hygiene, and partial to moderate assistance for showers/bathing. Review of a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-14 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to manage his or her financial affairs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on resident and staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the residents had had access to their personal funds outside of normal business hours and on weekends. This affected one (Resident #9) of one resident reviewed for personal funds. Findings included: Review of Resident #9's admission record revealed Resident #9's admission date was 05/25/23. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment date 04/04/25 revealed Resident #9 had intact cognition. During an interview on 06/11/25 at 10:12 A.M., Business Office Manager #100 stated she believed residents went to the front desk during the week from 8:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M. to request money from their personal funds from either Receptionist #12 or Receptionist #13. During an interview on 06/11/25 at 10:23 A.M., Receptionist #12 stated the hours the residents could receive money from their personal fund was Monday through Friday from 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. Receptionist #12 stated on the weekends, the residents knew they could not obtain any of their money. During an 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 · D2025-06-14 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely 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 2. Review of the Resident #176's medical record revealed an admission date of 05/21/25. Diagnoses included rheumatoid arthritis, chronic pain syndrome, and fibromyalgia. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #176 had intact cognition. Review of Resident #176's care plan revealed a focus area initiated 05/21/25, indicating the resident was at risk for alteration in their comfort related to generalized pain, discomfort, fibromyalgia, chronic pain, depression, and rheumatoid arthritis. Interventions directed staff to administer analgesia per orders and to anticipate the resident's need for pain relief and to respond immediately to any complaints of pain. Review of the SRI dated 05/27/25 revealed Resident #176's family expressed to hospital staff that a facility staff member was rough and verbally mean to the resident. The facility notified the State Survey Agency of the allegation of physical and emotional/verbal abuse on 05/27/25 at 3:59 P.M. During an interview on 06/10/25 at 2:50…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-14 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, record review, review of Self-Reported Incidents (SRI) and time cards, and facility policy review, the facility failed to immediately protect the resident(s) from the alleged perpetrator(s) when a resident reported an allegation of staff-to-resident physical abuse. This affected one (Resident #176) of five residents reviewed for abuse. Findings included: Review of the Resident #176's medical record revealed an admission date of 05/21/25. Diagnoses included rheumatoid arthritis, chronic pain syndrome, and fibromyalgia. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #176 had intact cognition. Review of Resident #176's care plan revealed a focus area initiated 05/21/25, indicating the resident was at risk for alteration in their comfort related to generalized pain, discomfort, fibromyalgia, chronic pain, depression, and rheumatoid arthritis. Interventions directed staff to administer analgesia per orders and to anticipate the resident's need for pain relief and to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-14 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as 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 interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to refer to the appropriate state-designated authority for a level II pre-admission screening and resident review (PASARR) when residents were diagnosed with a new mental illness diagnosis. This affected one (Resident #21) of five residents reviewed for PASARR. Findings included: Review of Resident #21's medical record revealed an admission date of 04/20/24 with a diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia. Resident #21 received a diagnosis of anxiety disorder on 02/21/25. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #21 had severe cognitive impairment. Resident #21 had active diagnoses to include anxiety disorder and schizophrenia. Review of Resident #21's care plan revealed a focus area initiated 10/10/24, which indicated the resident was prescribed psychotropic medication, was at risk for adverse reactions, and had a diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia. Interventions directed the staff to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-14 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 2. Review of Resident #21's medical record revealed an admission date of 04/29/24 with a diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #21 had severe cognitive impairment and had an active diagnosis of schizophrenia. Resident #21's Preadmission Screening and Resident Review Result Notice dated 05/03/24, indicated the resident had no indications of a serious mental illness and/or developmental disability. During an interview on 06/10/25 at 1:31 P.M., Social Services Director (SSD) #105 stated she was responsible for the residents' PASARRs in the facility, but she did not know who was responsible to ensure the accuracy of the PASARR. SSD #105 stated she assumed the PASARR should be accurate when the resident admitted to the facility from a hospital. SSD #105 stated she should have submitted a new PASARR for Resident #21 since it appeared the one that came from the hospital was inaccurate. During an interview on 06/13/25 at 10:19 A.M., 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 before2025-06-14 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the medications were securely stored. This affected one of five medications carts. Findings included: During an observation on 06/12/25 at 6:08 A.M., the surveyor noted an unlocked medication cart parked in the doorway facing a resident's room. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #10 was inside a different resident's room, and the unlocked medication cart was not within her line of sight. During an interview on 06/12/25 at 6:10 A.M., LPN #10 stated medication carts should be locked when not in the line of sight of the nurse, because someone could access the medications stored inside the cart. During an interview on 06/12/25 at 7:03 A.M., the Director of Nursing stated she expected medication carts to be locked when not within the line of sight of the nurse. During an interview on 06/13/25 at 11:19 A.M., the Administrator stated she expected medication carts to be locked any time they were not within the nurse's line of sight to prevent residents from being able to access medications stored inside the carts.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-14 · 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 2. During a concurrent interview and medication administration observation on 06/12/25 at 6:39 A.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #10 removed a Prilosec (reduces the amount of acid produced in the stomach) and vitamin B-12 (vitamin) tablet from a bottle, placed them in her bare hand before she placed the tablets in a medication cup, and proceeded to administer the medications to Resident #72. LPN #10 verified she touched the two medications with her bare hands and stated she should never touch the medications with her hands, the medication should be dispensed directly into a medication cup to prevent cross contamination. During an interview on 06/12/25 at 7:03 A.M., the Director of Nursing stated she expected when nurses dispensed medications, they should dispense the medications directly into medication cups without touching the medications. During an interview on 06/13/25 at 11:20 A.M., the Administrator stated she expected the nurses to follow their policy during medication administration to ensure…
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 · Dcited before2024-06-30 · 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 record review, observation, staff interview, review of online resources from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), and policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff utilized proper handwashing technique while completing wound care. This affected one (#15) of the three Residents (#13, #14, and #15) reviewed for wound care. The facility census was 65. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #15 revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE]. Diagnoses included, but not limited to, Stage IV (full thickness tissue loss with exposed bone, tendon or muscle. Slough or eschar may be present on some parts of the wound bed) sacral decubitus ulcer, depression, pulmonary embolism, and osteomyelitis. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #15 had mild cognitive deficits and required extensive assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs). Review of the care plan dated 04/23/24, revealed Resident #15 had skin breakdown/open area to bilateral gluteal…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-04-09 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observations, interviews with staff and Environmental Specialist, review of the facilities approved water management plan and timeline and policy review, the facility failed to timely implement their approved water management plan to potentially prevent a Legionella outbreak. This affected one (#84) out of three residents reviewed for Legionella and had the potential to affect all 68 residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 68. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #84 revealed the resident was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and was readmitted following a hospital stay on 10/24/23. Resident #84 left the faciity on [DATE], against medical advice. Diagnoses included diabetes mellitus, illicit drug use, history of respiratory failure, and pneumonia. Review of Resident #84's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 10/31/23, revealed the resident had intact cognition. Review of Resident #84's medical record 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 · D2024-02-02 · tag F0745 — failed to provide medically-related social services — isolatedProvide medically-related social services to help each resident achieve the highest possible quality of life.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, resident interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure medical appointments were scheduled timely and transportation was arranged for medical appointments. This affected one (Resident #45) of three residents reviewed for medical appointments. The census was 69. Findings include: Review of Resident #45's medical record revealed Resident #45 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #45's diagnoses included but were not limited to type two diabetes, asthma, anxiety disorder, heart failure, tachycardia, acute kidney failure, chest pain, encephalopathy, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and cognitive communication deficit. Review of Resident #45's Minimum Data Set assessment, dated 01/11/24, revealed Resident #45 was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #45's progress note, dated 09/01/23, revealed social services scheduled a dental/oral surgery appointment for Resident #45 on 01/11/24. The progress note stated she communicated this information, but the note did…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-01-09 · 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 and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the dishwasher was properly functioning to ensure the proper sanitation of dishes. This had the potential to affect 65 out of 65 residents who receive their meals from the kitchen, the facility identified one (#62) resident that received no food by mouth/no meals from the kitchen. The facility census was 66. Findings include: Observation of the facility's dishwasher on 01/09/24 at 8:50 A.M. revealed the temperature of the facility's dishwasher was 120 degrees Fahrenheit (F) but the chemicals were zero parts per million (PPM). There was no chemical observed going through the tubing from the chemical tubes to the dishwasher. The dishwasher was not observed to have any leaks. Interview with Maintenance Director #73 on 01/09/24 at 8:50 A.M. verified the temperature of the facility's dishwasher was 120 degrees F and the chemicals were zero parts PPM. Maintenance Director #73 verified the chemical was not entering the dishwasher from the chemical tubs. Interview with the Administrator on 01/09/24 at 11:47 A.M.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-01-09 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide 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 record review, observations, staff and resident interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure appropriate personal protective equipment was used in an isolation room. This affected one (#53) out of three residents reviewed for infection control practices. This had the potential to affect 16 (#42, #43, #44, #45, #46, #47, #48, #49, #50, #51, #52, #54, #55, #56, #57, #58) residents residing on the 3rd floor South Unit floor. The facility census was 66. Findings include: Record review revealed Resident #53 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis of Clostridioides difficile (C-diff), anxiety, depression and dementia. Review of Resident #53 physician orders revealed an order dated 01/09/24 for Isolation: C-Diff. Review of lab results for Resident #53 revealed a positive result for Toxigenic C. difficile DNA with a collection date of 01/05/24 and a reported to facility date of 01/08/24. Review of nurse's progress note dated 01/09/24 8:48 A.M. revealed C-diff results positive 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 · D2024-01-09 · tag F0636 — isolatedAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to complete the comprehensive admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #12 within 14 days after admission. This affected one (#12) out of five residents reviewed for MDS assessments. The facility census was 66. Findings include: Review of medical record for Resident #12 revealed an admission date of 12/11/23. Diagnoses included sequelae of cerebral infarction, burn of unspecified region and vascular dementia. Review of physician orders dated 01/01/24 revealed resident was to receive Eliquis five mg daily due to cerebral infarction, liquid protein two times daily to promote would healing, Silvadene external cream 1% - apply to right lateral thigh, apply adaptic, abdominal dressing and wrap with kerlix daily. Review of the baseline care plan dated 12/12/23 revealed Resident #12 had tested positive for COVID-19 and was at risk for further complications and potentially infecting others, would be free from complications related to infection through the review date and would be free of infection by the review…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-09 · 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 record review and staff interview, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive person-centered care plan for Resident #12. This affected one (#12) out of five residents reviewed for care plans. The facility census was 66. Findings include: Review of medical record for Resident #12 revealed an admission date of 12/11/23. Diagnoses included sequelae of cerebral infarction, burn of unspecified region and vascular dementia. Review of physician orders dated 01/01/24 revealed resident was to receive Eliquis five mg daily due to cerebral infarction, liquid protein two times daily to promote wound healing, Silvadene external cream 1% - apply to right lateral thigh, apply adaptic, abdominal dressing and wrap with kerlix daily. Review of the baseline care plan dated 12/12/23 revealed Resident #12 had tested positive for COVID 19 and was at risk for further complications and potentially infecting others, would be free from complications related to infection through the review date and would be free of infection by the review date. There was no information in the baseline care plan…
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 · D2023-05-18 · tag F0569 — isolatedNotify each resident of certain balances and convey resident funds upon discharge, eviction, or death.
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, review of the facility policy, and record review, the facility failed to notify residents that the amount of funds in their accounts was 200 dollars less than the social security income resource limit and that the residents may lose eligibility for Medicaid or social security income. This affected three (#17, #19, and #31) of five residents reviewed for personal funds. The facility census was 56. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #17's chart revealed Resident #17 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #17 was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #17's payer source information dated 05/16/23 revealed Resident #17 was on Medicaid from 01/01/20 to 05/03/23 and was changed to Medicare on 05/03/23 when he returned from a hospitalization. Review of Resident #17's account balance dated 05/16/23 revealed Resident #17 had a balance of $2,614.32 in his resident funds account. Review of Resident #17's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-05-18 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, review of the facility policy, and staff interview, the facility failed to develop care plans for a resident's cognitive impairment, wandering, and activity needs. This affected two (#43 and #47) residents out of 17 residents reviewed for accuracy of assessments. The facility census was 56. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #47's medical record revealed Resident #47 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses including dementia with psychotic disturbance. Review of the progress note dated 05/02/23 revealed Resident #47 was not found in his room at 9:30 P.M. and Resident #47 had made several attempts to leave his room and floor prior. Resident #47 stated he was going home. Staff later found Resident #47 on the first floor. Resident #47 was moved to the secured unit for the night. The progress note dated 05/03/23 revealed Resident #47's physician was in to see Resident #47 and a new order was added to place a wanderguard on the left ankle. Review of the physician order dated…
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 · D2023-05-18 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 2. Review of Resident #17's medical record revealed Resident #17 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included type two diabetes mellitus without complications, major depressive disorder, muscle weakness, and dysphagia. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #17 was cognitively intact. Resident #17 required supervision from staff with transfers, dressing, eating, toileting, and personal hygiene. Resident #17 was independent with bed mobility. Review of Resident #17's care conferences from 11/15/22 to 05/18/23 revealed Resident #17 had one care conference completed on 01/04/23. Interview with Resident #17 on 05/15/23 at 10:54 A.M. revealed Resident #17 had not been invited to any care conferences and did not have the opportunity to participate in the development of his care plan. Interview with Social Services Director (SSD) #418 on 05/17/23 at 2:27 P.M. verified Resident #17 only had one care conference completed on 01/04/23. SSD #418 stated she 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 · D2023-05-18 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
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, observations, staff interviews, and review of tube feed product and preparation guidance, the facility failed to ensure a resident's tube feed formula was properly dated and stored prior to administration. This affected one (#38) of two residents reviewed for tube feeds. The facility census was 56. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #38 revealed an admission date of 03/22/22. Diagnoses included cerebral infarction and aphasia. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #38 was not able to complete a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) because he was rarely/never understood. Review of the care plan dated 01/20/23 revealed Resident #38 had a nutritional problem related to dysphagia, cognitive communication deficit, aphasia, and unintended weight loss. Interventions included staff to administer water flush through g-tube as ordered. Staff to encourage to allow tube flush. Staff to provide and serve supplement/tube…
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 before2020-01-09 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to label open medications properly, and remove expired medications from active medication drawers. This affected three medication storage areas observed during the survey and had the potential to affect one (#15) resident on the [NAME] unit, two (#31 and #170) residents on the [NAME] unit who were identified by the facility as a newly admitted and any other resident who could use a stock supply of expired medications. Facility census was 72. Findings include: 1. Observation on 01/07/12020 at 2:27 P.M. with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #395 revealed one opened Lantus pen (insulin) open with no date when opened or when expires in the North [NAME] medication cart. Interview on 01/07/2020 at 2:33 P.M. with LPN #395 verified that the Lantus pen was not dated and should have an open date or expired date. LPN #395 confirmed the Lantus pen belonged to Resident #15. 2. Observation on 01/07/19 at 2:38 P.M. with LPN #320 revealed a bottle 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 · D2020-01-09 · 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, resident and staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a resident was afforded with dignity when staff failed to provide timely toileting assistance during meal time. This affected one (#26) of 18 residents sampled during the survey. The census was 72. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #26 revealed an admitted date of 10/16/19 with diagnoses which included osteomyelitis, diabetes, morbid obesity, and peripheral vascular disease. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #26 dated 10/23/19 revealed resident was cognitively intact, required extensive assistance of one staff with toilet use, and was always continent of bowel and bladder. Review of nurse progress note for Resident #26 dated 10/29/19 revealed resident was alert and oriented, able to make needs known and call for assistance when needed, was continent of bowel and bladder and used a bedpan when having a bowel movement. Review of care plan for Resident #26 dated 11/01/19 revealed resident had a self-care performance deficit related…
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 before2020-01-09 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to manage his or her financial affairs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, review of personal funds documentation, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to obtain written authorization to manage resident personal funds. This affected one (#53) of five residents reviewed for personal funds. The census was 72. Findings include: Review of medical record for Resident #53 revealed an admission date of 07/03/19 with a diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #53 dated 12/25/19 revealed resident was cognitively intact. Review of facility resident trust account quarterly statement for Resident #53 dated 09/30/19 revealed resident had an account with the facility with a balance of approximately $1300. Review of the facility resident trust account records revealed the facility did not have written authorization from Resident #53 to manage her personal funds. Interview on 01/09/29 at 11:20 A.M. with Business Office Manager (BOM) #365 confirmed facility had not obtained authorization in writing to manage Resident #53's funds. Review of facility policy…
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 · D2020-01-09 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide notification of transfer to the Ombudsman. This affected one (#57) of one reviewed for hospitalizations. The facility census was 72. Findings include: Review of Resident #57 medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses include hyperlipidemia, encephalopathy, symbolic dysfunctions, mixed receptive expressive language disorder, dementia in other diseases classified, psychosis not due to substance or known, supraventricular tachycardia, Alzheimer's disease, hypercholesterolemia, insomnia, anxiety, epilepsy and major depressive disorder. Review Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for admission dated 12/06/19 documented the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 99 indicating severe impaired cognition and extensive assistance required for activities of daily living (ADLs). Further review of the medical record revealed Resident #57 was transferred to the hospital 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2020-01-09 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview, and review of the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual, the facility failed to ensure accuracy of resident assessments regarding discharge status. This affected one (#72) of two closed records reviewed. The census was 72. Findings include: Review of the closed medical record for Resident #72 revealed resident was admitted on [DATE] with a diagnosis of peritoneal abscess and was discharged on 11/28/19. Review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #72 revealed resident was discharged with a return not anticipated to an acute care hospital. Review of nurse progress note and discharge summary for Resident #72 dated 11/28/19 revealed the resident was discharged to home in the community. Review of nurse progress notes for Resident #72 dated 06/24/19 through 11/28/19 revealed resident had no hospital transfers during his stay at the facility. Interview on 01/09/20 at 2:20 P.M. with Registered Nurse (RN) #15 confirmed the MDS dated [DATE] for Resident #72 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 before2020-01-09 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to complete comprehensive care plans. This affected two (#65, & #120) out of 18 residents reviewed for care plans. Facility census was 72. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #65's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a re-entry on 07/01/19. Diagnoses including congenital malformations of the brain, epilepsy, hypomagnesemia, post traumatic seizures, anxiety, diabetes, hypertension, idiopathic gout, malignant neoplasm of the brain, and bladder cancer. Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #65 has no cognitive deficits, requires only supervision with all activities of daily living, and is always continent of bowel and bladder. Review of care plans revealed there were no care plan present for Resident #65 regarding his discharge status or discharge plans. Interview on 01/09/2020 at approximately 12:30 P.M. with Social Service Designee #425 verified there 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 · D2020-01-09 · 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 medical record review, observation, resident and staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to provide activities of daily living (ADL) assistance to dependent residents. This affected one (#69) of three residents reviewed for ADLs. The census was 72. Findings include: Review of record for Resident #69 revealed an admission date of 07/31/19 with diagnoses which included diabetes, right below the knee amputation, and schizophrenia. Review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #69 dated 12/27/19 revealed resident was cognitively intact, was coded as negative for rejection of care, and required extensive assistance of one staff with bathing and personal hygiene. Review of care plan for Resident #69 dated 03/13/19 revealed resident had a self-care performance deficit related to amputation of lower leg. Interventions included to assist with bathing as needed. Review of nurse progress notes for Resident #69 dated 12/01/19 through 01/06/20 revealed there was no documentation regarding refusal of shower and/or refusal of resident to have her hair washed.…
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 · D2020-01-09 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, observation, resident and staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to change a resident's intravenous (IV) dressing as ordered by the attending physician. This affected one (#69) of 18 residents sampled during the survey. The census was 72. Findings include: Review of record for Resident #69 revealed an admission date of 07/31/19 with diagnoses which included diabetes, right below the knee amputation, and schizophrenia. Review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #69 dated 12/27/19 revealed resident was cognitively intact, was coded as negative for rejection of care, and required extensive assistance of one staff with activities of daily living. Review of physician orders for Resident #69 dated 12/05/19 revealed an order to change IV dressing to right upper chest weekly every Friday and as needed. Review of nurse progress note for Resident #69 dated 01/02/20 revealed IV dressing to resident's right upper chest was intact and due to be changed on 01/03/20. Review of nurse progress note for Resident #69 dated 01/03/20…
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 · D2020-01-09 · 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 medical record review, resident and staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to adequately treat and manage resident pain. This affected one (#26) of four residents reviewed for pain management. The census was 72. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #26 revealed an admitted date of 10/16/19 with diagnoses which included osteomyelitis, diabetes, morbid obesity, and peripheral vascular disease. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #26 dated 10/23/19 revealed resident was cognitively intact and required extensive assistance of one staff with activities of daily living. Further review of the MDS revealed resident reported almost constant pain which made it difficult to sleep at night, and pain level over the last five days had been a level six on a scale from one to 10 with 10 being the worst pain. Review of care plan for Resident #26 dated 11/02/19 revealed resident had acute and chronic pain. Interventions included administer pain medication as ordered, anticipate the resident's need for pain relief and respond…
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 · D2020-01-09 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, resident interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure resident medication was available for administration. This affected one (#69) of five residents reviewed for medications. The census was 72. Findings include: Review of record for Resident #69 revealed an admission date of 07/31/19 with diagnoses which included diabetes, right below the knee amputation, and schizophrenia. Review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #69 dated 12/27/19 revealed resident was cognitively intact and required extensive assistance of one staff with activities of daily living (ADLs). Review of physician order dated 08/04/19 for Resident #69 revealed an order for Trulicity an injectable medication for diabetes to be administered once weekly. Review of Medication Administration Record (MAR) for Resident #69 revealed resident did not receive two of her weekly doses of Trulicity on 10/06/19 and 10/13/19. Review of nurse progress note for Resident #69 dated 10/06/19 revealed resident's Trulicity was not available for administration. Further review of note revealed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2020-01-09 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of facility policy the facility failed to ensure resident's were free from unnecessary medications when staff failed to monitor pain level for residents receiving opioid pain medications. This affected two (#44 and #26) of six residents reviewed for medications. The census was 72. Findings include: 1. Review of record for Resident #44 revealed an admission date of 04/04/19 with a diagnosis of osteoporosis. Review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #44 dated 11/21/19 revealed resident was cognitively intact and required supervision with activities of daily living (ADLs). Further review of MDS revealed resident reported pain almost constantly with no effect on functioning, and pain was a level three on a scale of one to 10 at its worst. Review of care plan for Resident #44 dated 11/26/18 revealed resident was at risk for pain due to history of pain. Interventions included the following: administer pain medication as ordered, observe for pain/discomfort and perform pain assessment as needed, observe for worsening 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 · D2020-01-09 · 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 record review and resident and staff interview, the facility failed to arrange for routine dental services for residents. This affected one (#69) of 18 residents sampled during the survey. The census was 72. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #69 revealed an admission date of 01/16/19 with a diagnoses which included diabetes, right below the knee amputation, and schizophrenia. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #69 dated 12/27/19 revealed resident was cognitively intact and required extensive assistance with activities of daily living. Review of the medical record for Resident #69 revealed a consent form to receive dental services from the facility in-house dentist was signed by the resident. Review of the medical record for Resident #69 revealed it did not include any dental progress notes for resident. Interview on 01/06/20 at 1:27 P.M. with Resident #69 confirmed she had requested to see the facility dentist on multiple occasions, but she had not seen a dentist during her staff at the facility. Interview on 01/08/20 at 1:00…
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 · D2020-01-09 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolatedMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
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, observations, and resident and staff interview, the facility failed to have all call lights functioning properly. This affected one (#32) out of 18 residents reviewed and observed for the initial pool for functioning of the call light system. Facility census was 72. Findings include: Review of Resident #32's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses include dementia, obesity, pressure ulcer right heel, hypotension, fall history, peripheral vascular disease, mood disorder, traumatic brain injury, abnormal gait, anxiety, benign prostatic hyperplasia, dysphagia, depression, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, muscle weakness, gastro-esophageal reflux disease, schizophrenia, and cognitive communication deficit. Review of the Annual Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] revealed Resident #32 has severe cognitive deficits, requires total dependence with toileting, extensive assistance with personal hygiene, dressing, bed mobility, limited…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · Bcited before2023-05-18 · 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 record review, review of the facility policy, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the resident's skin conditions, discharge locations, and feeding tubes were accurately coded on the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment. This affected three (#23, #38, and #52) of 17 residents reviewed for accuracy of assessments. The facility census was 56. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #23's chart revealed Resident #23 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including muscle weakness and congestive heart failure. Review of Resident #23's physician order dated 04/17/23 revealed Resident #23 was ordered to cleanse the left labia, apply lotrisone cream to open area and cover with hydrocolloid twice a day and as needed for moisture associated skin damage (MASD). Review of Resident #23's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident to be cognitively intact and Resident #23 had no MASD. Interview on 05/17/23 at 9:11 A.M. with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #433…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · C2020-01-09 · tag F0577 — widespreadAllow residents to easily view the nursing home's survey results and communicate with advocate agencies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and resident and staff interview, the facility failed to display the state agency survey results, where residents and visitors could visibly access them. This had the potential to affect all 72 residents residing in the facility. Facility censes 72. Findings include: A tour of the second and third floor of the facility on 01/06/20 at 3:00 P.M., revealed the state agency survey results were not readily accessible to residents or visitors without having to ask for them. Observations revealed there was no sign posted to identify where the results were located. Interview on 01/08/20 at 1:59 P.M., revealed five (#4, #15, #17, #44, #50 and #52) residents reported they were unaware of the posting of the state agency survey results. Observation on 01/08/20 at 3:05 P.M., revealed an empty space with Velcro on the wall next to the receptionist desk. Interview on 01/08/20 at 3:07 P.M., revealed social services (SS) #425 pointed out the survey results were placed where the Velcro was located. Receptionist staff (RS) #170 reported the book had fallen and she did not know…
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
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YYAM HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 06/29/2023 |
| YYAM IRREVOCABLE TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 95% | since 06/29/2023 |
| NUSSBAUM, MATTISYAHU | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER | 5% | since 06/20/2023 |
| LUXOR HEALTHCARE GROUP LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTEREST | — | since 06/29/2023 |
| WEINER, JEFFREY | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 06/29/2023 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 6 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
3 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 $269K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in OH
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Ohio Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 365946. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-06-14, 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.