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

Twin Towers

5343 Hamilton Avenue, Cincinnati, OH 45224 · Non profit - Corporation · 75 certified beds · (513) 853-2000 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (513) 853-2000 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
1 actual-harm citation
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Urgent care / clinic
6103 Hamilton Ave Ste B · (513) 681-6667 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
4187 Hamilton Ave · (513) 541-0354 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
1048 Groesbeck Rd · (513) 265-7239 · Call to confirm hours
Park
5660 Belmont Ave · (513) 357-7665 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
5501 Hamilton Ave · (513) 541-2415

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 5 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 4 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased6.3%5.3%15.4%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight7.6%6.2%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.2%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.3%0.4%2.0%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%30.1%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury5.3%3.2%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened12.9%6.1%16.1%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication13.9%25.5%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine95.2%94.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers1.4%3.4%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control19.5%21.4%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table4.4%8.8%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.2%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine92.9%75.6%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission19.5%24.9%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit4.1%12.9%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.161.731.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.161.801.80worse

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

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.

46.1% 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 77 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

46.1%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
55.6%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.65U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.37hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.21hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.08hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 55.6% 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 27 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 0.65 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 90% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 18% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF46.1%CMS range 37.3–53.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.2%CMS range 6.8–15.210.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge55.6%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge40.7%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge48.1%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified94.1%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot 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 discharge100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.0%CMS range 3.0–12.07.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.681.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

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

Staffing

1.19
RN hours/ resident / day
1.27
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.60
Aide hours/ resident / day
5.06
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.92
RN hoursweekends
51.0%
Total nursing turnover
38.1%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 75 beds and averages 61.4 residents a day — about 82% occupied, or roughly 14 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 5.06 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.19 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.60 is at or above 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 4.66 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.22 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.31 to 0.92 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 51% 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

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-02-26)
7
at the previous standard inspection (2024-08-30)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

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

  • Actual harm · G2026-02-26 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, review of facility policy, and review of online guidelines from the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (NPUAP), the facility failed to thoroughly assess a resident's skin and failed to identify pressure ulcers (injuries to skin and underlying tissue caused by prolonged pressure, friction, or shear, usually over bony areas like the hips, heels, or tailbone) until they had reached an advanced stage. This resulted in Actual Harm for Resident #66 on 02/16/26, when the resident was admitted to the facility without pressure ulcers, was assessed to be at high risk for development of pressure ulcers and developed an avoidable unstageable pressure ulcer (a full-thickness wound where damage depth is hidden by slough [a soft, moist, yellow or white devitalized tissue comprised of dead cells, fibrin, and bacteria that forms in the wound bed, acting as a significant barrier to healing by stalling the inflammatory phase] or eschar [a thick, dry, black or brown…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-26 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
    Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on medical record review, family interview, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure resident responsible parties were notified of changes in condition. This affected two Residents (#08 and #12) of the five residents reviewed. The facility census was 61. Review of the medical record of Resident #08 revealed an admission date of 12/08/25. Diagnoses included end-stage renal disease (ESRD), dependence on renal dialysis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and hypothyroidism. Review of the medical record revealed on 12/09/25, Resident #08 weighed 118.6 pounds (lb.). On 12/13/25, the resident weighed 112 lb. On 12/23/25, the resident weighed 113.6 lb. On 12/31/25, the resident weighed 110.8 lb. On 01/10/26, the resident weighed 109.6 lb. On 01/21/26, the resident weighed 105.4 lb. On 01/01/26, the resident weighed 100.4 lb. On 02/05/26, the resident weighed 98.2 lb. On 02/18/26, the resident weighed 96 lb. On 02/22/26, the resident weighed 94.3 lb. On 02/24/26, the resident weighed 93 lb. Review of the comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS)…

    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 · D2026-02-26 · 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 record review, staff interviews and policy review, the facility failed to adequately monitor residents' weights to ensure accuracy of documented weight loss/gain. This affected two Residents (#10 and #12) out of three residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility census was 61. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #10 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Parkinsonism, cognitive communication deficit, and bipolar disorder.Review of the physician order dated 10/04/24, revealed Resident #10 was ordered to receive a regular diet, regular consistency. Review of the weights for Resident #10 revealed the resident had documented weights on 10/08/25 of 195 pounds (lbs.) and on 11/21/25 of 172.8 lbs. This represented an 11.38 percent (%) weight loss in forty-three days. The resident's next documented weight was on 12/19/25 (204.4 lbs.). Review of the nutrition progress note for Resident #10 dated 11/21/25 and authored by Registered Dietician (RD) #605, revealed Resident #10'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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-08-30 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff properly stored frozen foods and staff with beards wore beard guards during preparation of food to prevent contamination. The failure had the potential to affect 72 residents who received meals from the kitchen. The census was 72. Findings included: 1. During an observation on 08/26/24 at 9:09 A.M., Preparation (Prep) [NAME] #6 was observed preparing food with a full beard and no beard cover. During an interview on 08/26/24 at 9:35 A.M., Prep [NAME] #6 stated he was preparing the ham and putting up buns when the surveyor entered the kitchen. He stated he did not know if he should have been wearing a beard cover. During an interview on 08/26/24 at 9:40 A.M., the Dietary Manager (DM) stated Prep [NAME] #6 should have had a beard cover on while preparing food. During an interview on 08/29/24 at 10:18 A.M., the Administrator stated beard covers should be worn when preparing food. Review of a facility policy titled, Orientation and Education, revised 01/2024, revealed in the section…

    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 · F2024-08-30 · 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

    Based on observation, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure that staff were fit tested for a respirator required for respiratory protection when working with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) positive residents. This had the potential to affect all 72 residents that resided in the facility. The census was 72. Finding included: During an observation on 08/26/24 at 1:48 P.M., State Tested Nurse Aide (STNA) #8 was observed coming out of a COVID-19 positive resident's room with a bag of soiled items. STNA #8 had on a surgical mask and gloves. During a concurrent interview STNA #8 stated, when entering the room with a COVID-19 positive resident, she would put an N95 (respirator) mask on top of a surgical mask, gown, face shield, and gloves. STNA #8 stated there was a bin inside the room to discard all the personal protective equipment (PPE). STNA #8 stated she would discard everything and when she would exit the room, she would just have on a surgical mask and would put new gloves on when she came out. STNA #8 stated she had not been fit tested 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-30 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
    Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on staff interview, medical record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to notify the physician related to bleeding during indwelling urinary catheter changes for one (Resident #49) of three sampled residents reviewed for urinary catheters. The census was 72. Findings included: Review of a profile face sheet revealed the facility admitted Resident #49 on 10/26/22. According to the profile face sheet, the resident had a medical history that included diagnoses of benign prostatic hyperplasia with lower urinary tract symptoms and obstructive and reflux uropathy. Review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 06/04/24, revealed Resident #49 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of nine, which indicated the resident had moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS assessment indicated the resident had an indwelling urinary catheter. Review of Resident #49's physician orders contained an order dated 04/23/24 to change F/C (Foley catheter) #18 French size (Fr), a universal gauge system used to measure…

    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 · D2024-08-30 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, staff interview, medical record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff followed physician orders for indwelling urinary catheter care for one (Resident #49) of three sampled residents reviewed for urinary catheters. The census was 72. Findings included: Review of a profile face sheet revealed the facility admitted Resident #49 on 10/26/22. According to the profile face sheet, the resident had a medical history that included diagnoses of benign prostatic hyperplasia with lower urinary tract symptoms and obstructive and reflux uropathy. Review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 06/04/24, revealed Resident #49 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of nine, which indicated the resident had moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS assessment indicated the resident had an indwelling urinary catheter. Review of Resident #49's physician orders contained an order dated 04/23/24 to change F/C (Foley catheter) #18 French size (Fr), a universal gauge system used 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-30 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolated
    Ensure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on staff interview and medical record review, the facility failed to ensure nursing staff possessed and demonstrated competencies and skill set necessary to provide indwelling urinary catheter care for one (Resident #49) of the sampled residents reviewed for urinary catheters. The census was 72. Findings included: Review of a profile face sheet revealed the facility admitted Resident #49 on 10/26/22. According to the profile face sheet, the resident had a medical history that included diagnoses of benign prostatic hyperplasia with lower urinary tract symptoms and obstructive and reflux uropathy. Review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 06/04/24, revealed Resident #49 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of nine, which indicated the resident had moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS assessment indicated the resident had an indwelling urinary catheter. Review of Resident #49's physician orders contained an order dated 04/23/24 to change F/C (Foley catheter) #18 French size (Fr), a universal gauge system…

    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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-30 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on staff interview, medical record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure pharmacy recommendations were implemented for two (Resident #58 and Resident #72) of five sampled residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The census was 72. Findings included: 1. Review of a profile face sheet revealed the facility admitted Resident #58 on 09/20/23. According to the profile face sheet, the resident had a medical history that included diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease and dementia with other behavioral disturbance. Review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 05/24/24, revealed Resident #58 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of three, which indicated the resident had severe cognitive impairment. The MDS assessment revealed the resident received antipsychotic and antidepressant medications during the assessment period. Review of Resident #58's care plan included a category for psychotropic drug use, initiated 10/03/23, that indicated the resident had the potential for drug 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-30 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
    Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, staff interview, medical record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was less than five percent (%). There were five errors out of 31 opportunities, which resulted in a medication error rate of 16.13% for two (Resident #29 and Resident #49) of three residents observed for medication administration. The census was 72. Findings included: 1. Review of a profile face sheet revealed the facility admitted Resident #29 on 09/18/23. According to the profile face sheet, the resident had a medical history that included diagnoses of chronic kidney disease stage three and urinary tract infections. Review of Resident #29's physician's orders included an order dated 08/07/24 for the supplement cranberry concentrate 500 milligram (mg) capsule by mouth daily for recurrent urinary tract infections. During an observation of medication administration on 08/28/24 at 8:36 A.M., Registered Nurse (RN) #14 administered Azo-Cranberry for urinary tract health. During an observation and interview on 08/28/2024 at 3:32 P.M., RN #14…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2022-11-03 · 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, interview policy review, the facility failed to label and date foods, accurately test for dishwasher sanitation and use hand gloves in a sanitary manner during food service. This had the potential to affect all the resident's receiving food from the kitchen. The total facility census was 76. Findings Include: 1. During the kitchen tour observation on 10/31/22 at 8:30 A.M. revealed the following sanitation violations in the main kitchen: The ice machine scoop was laying horizontally on a counter and not draining vertically. In the walk in refrigerator there were undated, uncovered yogurt fruit plates, a serving container of gravy, and tub of macaroni and cheese. There were 12 undated and unlabeled pies and four serving containers of egg salad. There were two opened undated bags of bread. In the walk-in freezer there was food and paper debris on the floor. In the walk-in produce refrigerator there were two large bags of unopened vegetables with no label and date. In the dry storage area there was a bag of identified macaroni undated and unlabeled. Interview 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 · D2022-11-03 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolated
    Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, review of the recipes, review of the menu spreadsheet, and policy review, the facility failed to provide puree foods as planned by a Registered Dietitian. This affected two residents (#27 and #35) out of three residents reviewed for puree food diets. The facility census was 76. Findings Include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #27 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included bone necrosis of the mouth gums, dysphagia and gastro-esophageal reflux disease. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) comprehensive assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had moderately impaired cognition and received puree thin liquid diet. 2. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #35 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included dysphagia, Parkinson's disease, hypothyroidism, and atrial fibrillation. Review of the MDS comprehensive assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #35 had intact cognition and received pureed…

    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

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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
RIVERA, EMMANUELIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 03/01/2024
MCDONALD, KENNETHIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 01/01/2014
STRICKER, KRISTIEIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 07/22/2024
BOWERSOX, JAMESIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 11/14/2012
BURGESS, DOUGLASIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 11/17/2021
EAST, SANDRAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 11/17/2021
HILDAL, ROBYNIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 11/17/2021
KAHLE, THOMASIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 11/17/2021
MCQUINN, SCOTTIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 11/19/2014
PRESENT, PHILIPIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 11/17/2021

CMS files one row per role, so the 12 rows in the source record cover these 10 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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.

$10.7M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-15.2%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 17%Medicare 4%Other / private 79%

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

$456per resident / day
operating cost
$13,862per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$396per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

What families pay in OH

Paying with Medicaid

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

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

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

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 366023. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-26, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

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

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

What to do next