Wellspring Health Center
8000 Evergreen Ridge Drive, Cincinnati, OH 45215 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 54 certified beds · (513) 948-2308 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- it has citations for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565, F0567)
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (33) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $110,468 in federal fines (most recent 2025-04-28)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (58%) 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 | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 2 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 fell from 3 to 2 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 | 6.6% | 5.3% | 15.4% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.8% | 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 | 0.0% | 0.4% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 7.9% | 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 | 2.0% | 3.2% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 7.8% | 25.5% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 94.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 6.2% | 3.4% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 17.9% | 21.4% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 10.2% | 8.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.6% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 89.3% | 75.6% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 28.6% | 24.9% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 20.6% | 12.9% | 12.0% | 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.
66.2% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 127 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 32.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 50 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 0.45 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 75% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 5% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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 | 66.2%CMS range 56.9–74.1 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.4%CMS range 6.6–13.2 | 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 | 32.0% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 36.0% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 20.0% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 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 | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this 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 | 2.5% | 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 | 2.5% | 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 | 7.4%CMS range 4.5–13.0 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.82 | 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 54 beds and averages 48.1 residents a day — about 89% occupied, or roughly 6 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.67 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.80 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.04 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 3.29 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.83 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.89 to 0.58 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 58% 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 fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
33 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 21 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2025-04-28 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the medical record, review of the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) report, staff interviews, review of witness statements, review of door repair invoices, review of maintenance work orders, review of facility Self-Reported Incident (SRI), review of hospital records and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent an elopement from the Memory Care Unit (MCU) of one resident (#45) who ambulated through a door on the MCU with a malfunctioning alarm and into the East side stairwell where Resident #45 fell down 11 cement stairs. This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy and the potential for serious-life threatening injuries, negative health outcomes and/or death for one resident when Resident #45 exited the third-floor MCU on 03/27/25 through a door with a malfunctioning alarm and into the East side stairwell and fell down the stairs without staff's knowledge. Resident #45 was missing for approximately one hour before the staff determined the resident 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.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2026-02-18 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview, review of the facility's investigation and policy review, the facility failed to provide adequate physical assistance for a resident who was dependent on staff for toileting, personal hygiene, and bed mobility. Actual Harm occurred on 01/19/26 at approximately 6:00 P.M. when one staff member was providing incontinent care to Resident #39 while in bed. Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #250 rolled Resident #39 to his left side and the resident fell from the bed onto the floor. Resident #39 had fractures to his right humerus (upper arm bone), right coronoid (elbow), left femur (upper leg bone), and left patella (kneecap). This affected one (Resident #39) of three residents reviewed for falls. The census was 48.Findings Include:Resident #39 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included osteoarthritis, hypokalemia, congestive heart failure, hypertensive heart and chronic kidney disease, low tension glaucoma, dementia, vitamin D deficiency, atherosclerotic heart…
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 · D2026-06-01 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from significant medication errors. This affected one (Resident #10) of three residents reviewed for pain medication. The facility census was 43 residents.Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #10 revealed an admission date of 03/09/26 with diagnoses including left lower leg fracture, depression, adjustment disorder, and anxiety disorder. Resident #10 was discharged home with family on 03/30/26. Review of the care plan for Resident #10 dated 03/20/26 revealed the resident had the potential for pain related to status post fracture repair and multiple contributing factors. Review of the physician order audit revealed an order for hydrocodone-acetaminophen 5-325 milligrams (mg) (opioid pain medication) give one tablet by mouth every four hours as needed for pain for 30 days was created on 03/20/26 and backdated to 03/17/26. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for Resident #10 dated for 03/2026 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 · Fcited before2025-12-04 · 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, interview, facility policy and document review, and the Food and Drug Administration 2022 Food Code, the facility failed to ensure meals were prepared and food was stored in accordance with professional standards for food safety. This had the potential to affect 38 residents who received meals from the kitchen. The facility census was 40. 1. A facility policy titled, Sanitation - Dish and Utensil Procedure Guideline, dated 03/19/2019, specified, The following guidelines provides an overview of routine cleaning services and the general frequency of various cleaning tasks. The policy specified, 6. Dishes and utensils shall be air dried before storage. Do not towel dry, and 10. Cutting boards need to be washed and sanitized between each use. Replace cutting boards once they have deep knife marks and are unsanitizeable. Color-coated cutting boards are useful for designating boards for raw products verses cook products. A. During the initial tour on 12/01/2025 at 9:11 AM, it was discovered the facility had a main kitchen and also a serving kitchen that was 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-04 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure care was provided in a dignified manner for one (Resident #43) of one resident reviewed for urinary catheter management. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Resident #43's urinary catheter drainage bag was covered and urine in the bag was not visually exposed. The facility census was 40. A facility policy titled, Skilled Promoting/Maintaining Resident Dignity, dated 09/10/2025, indicated, It is the practice of this facility to protect and promote resident rights and treat each resident in a manner and in an environment that maintains or enhances the resident's quality of life by recognizing each resident's individuality. A facility policy titled, Urinary Catheter Care, dated 09/08/2013, indicated, Catheter bag should not be visible when in public areas. A catheter bag/cover should be utilized to maintain privacy and dignity. An admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #43 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 · D2025-12-04 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility document and policy review, the facility failed to ensure fingernails were clean and trimmed for one (Resident #26) of one resident reviewed for activities of daily living. The facility census was 40. A facility policy titled, Skilled - Nail Care, dated 09/10/2025, revealed, 3. Routine cleaning and inspection of nails will be provided during Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care on an ongoing basis. The policy continued, 5. The resident's plan of care will identify: a. The frequency of nail care to be provided. b. The type of nail care to be provided. An admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #26 on 03/08/2025. According to the admission Record, the resident had a medical history that included diagnoses of contracture of the right hand, adjustment disorder, and mild cognitive impairment. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 11/28/2025, revealed Resident #26 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 9, which indicated the resident had moderate…
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 before2025-12-04 · 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 interview, record review, and facility document and policy review, the facility failed to provide proper treatment and care to one (Resident #19) of one resident reviewed for bowel management. Specifically, the facility failed to address Resident #19's lack of a bowel movement for over three days. The facility census was 40. A facility policy titled, Constipation - Skilled, reviewed 07/14/2022, revealed, 1. The staff will be aware that if a resident has not had a bowel movement after three (3) days, further intervention may be necessary. 2. The certified nursing assistance [sic] will be responsible for documenting if the resident had a bowel movement in Point of Care [the electronic medical record, EMR]. This will be addressed at least every shift and PRN [as needed]. 3. Point of Care has triggers that if no BM [bowel movement] documentation has been noted by the certified nursing aide for 3 days, a Clinical Alert will be posted to the nursing dashboard in Point Click care. 4. The licensed staff will be responsible to follow-up with the nursing aide to ensure if no…
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 before2025-12-04 · 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 observation, interview, record review, and facility document and policy review, the facility failed to ensure effective coordination between facility staff, the provider, and the pharmacy regarding a refill for a narcotic medication for one (Resident #19) of five residents reviewed for pharmacy services. As a result, the pharmacy was unable to fill Resident #19's prescription for as-needed oxycodone (a narcotic pain reliever), and the resident did not have access to the medication for seven days. The facility census was 40. A facility policy titled, Unavailable Medications - Skilled, revised 04/02/2024, revealed, Policy: When medications or treatments are unavailable, the community should make every effort to obtain the medication or treatment for the resident prior to the scheduled dose. The policy also revealed, 2) Upon notification that a medication or treatment is unable to be supplied by the Preferred Pharmacy, the back up Pharmacy, or the resident/legally responsible party, the Director of Nursing, Administrator or designee should: a) Contact the pharmacy or…
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 before2025-04-28 · 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, observations, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure infection control measures were followed when providing catheter care. This affected one (#20) of three residents reviewed for urinary tract infections. The facility census was 44. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #20 revealed an admission date of 11/15/24. Diagnoses included dementia, benign prostatic hyperplasia with lower urinary tract symptoms, and obstructive and reflux uropathy. Review of the Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #20 had moderate cognitive impairment as evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12. This resident was assessed to require setup with eating, dependent with toileting, bathing, and dressing, and substantial assistance with transfers. Review of Section H for Bowel and Bladder of the Significant Change MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #20 had an indwelling catheter and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-02-18 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure medications for administration was not pre-poured prior to administration. This affected eight residents (#2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #18, #19, and #20) of thirteen residents who resided on the 200 hall reviewed for medication administration. The census was 43. Findings includes: Observation on 02/18/25 at 7:43 A.M. revealed the inside of the medication cart Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #200 was using revealed medication cups pre-filled with Resident's #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #18, #19, and #20 medications for the morning doses. Interview with the LPN #200 on 02/18/25 at 7:45 A.M. revealed she was an agency nurse and confirmed she pre-poured the medications for above mentioned residents. She said she wasn't sure if she could do this at this facility, but has done it at other facilities. Review of policy entitled, Medication Administration, dated 02/23/24 revealed medications may not be prepared in advance.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-18 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to follow physician orders for weekly weights and medication administration. This affected three residents (#36, #16, and #2) of eight residents reviewed for following physician orders. The census was 43. Findings included: 1. Medical record review for Resident #36 revealed an admission date of 08/23/22. Medical diagnoses included cerebrovascular attack (CVA), dementia, and aphasic. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #36 was moderately cognitively impaired. Review of the physician orders dated 06/07/24 revealed to obtain weekly weights for Resident #36. Review of the care plan dated 06/07/24 revealed Resident #36 was at risk for weight loss and an intervention was for weekly weights. Review of the weights since 11/27/24 for Resident #36 revealed there were missing weights for 11/27/24, 12/11/24, 12/18/24, 12/28/24, 01/04/25, 01/18/25, and 01/28/25. Interview with the Registered…
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 before2025-02-18 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, medical record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to administer medications as ordered. This affected one (Resident #32) of three residents observed for medication administration. The facility census was 43. Findings include: Medical record review for Resident #32 revealed an admission date of 12/05/24. Medical diagnosis included Alzheimer's disease. Review of the admission MDS dated [DATE] revealed Resident #32 was moderately cognitively impaired. Review of physician orders dated 12/05/24 revealed Folic Acid Oral Tablet one milligram (mg) to give one mg by mouth one time a day for dietary supplement During medication observation with agency Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #210 on 02/18/25 at 8:50 A.M. revealed she took a Folic Acid 880 micrograms (mcg) medication out of the bottle and placed in the medication cup. Interview with the LPN #210 on 02/18/25 at 8:52 A.M. revealed she didn't work at the facility. She said the closet medication to the one mg of Folic Acid was the 880…
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 21 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-21 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents representatives were notified of a change in condition. This affected two (#25 and #42) of three residents reviewed for a change in condition. The facility census was 41. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record of Resident #42 revealed an admission date of 01/03/24. The resident was discharged from the facility on 01/11/24 to another nursing home. Diagnoses included Coronavirus (COVID-19), hyperlipidemia, essential hypertension, shortness of breath, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), depression, atrial fibrillation, and urinary retention. Review of the comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #42 had intact cognition. The resident required partial/moderate assistance with toileting, personal hygiene, and all mobility. Review of a progress note dated 01/11/24 at 5:04 A.M. revealed Resident #42 had a witnessed fall at approximately 4:50 A.M. when…
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 before2024-02-21 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff utilized appropriate practices to ensure residents were free from falls. This affected one (#42) of three residents reviewed for falls. Additionally, the facility also failed to ensure all falls were investigated. This affected one (#25) of three residents reviewed for falls. The facility census was 41. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record of Resident #42 revealed an admission date of 01/03/24. The resident was discharged to another nursing home facility on 01/11/24. Diagnoses included (Coronavirus) COVID-19, hyperlipidemia, essential hypertension, shortness of breath, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), depression, atrial fibrillation, and urinary retention. Review of the comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #42 had intact cognition. The resident required partial/moderate assistance with toileting, personal hygiene, and all mobility. Review 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 · Fcited before2022-08-30 · 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
Based on staff interview, review of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) memo, review of the infection control log, and policy review, the facility failed to implement a program to prevent Legionella (a type of pneumonia caused by bacteria). This had the potential to affect all residents at the facility. The facility census was 46. Findings include Review of the facility policy packet titled, Water Program, dated 12/29/17 included a plan to reduce the risk for growing and spreading Legionella. Maintenance will provide a continuous review of the water management system. The water management program revealed no evidence of a water management team, roles of the team, no evidence of a description of the building water system. The policy revealed to make sure the program was running and the design was effective. Interview on 08/24/22 at 10:45 A.M., and at 2:32 P.M., Maintenance Director #217 revealed he had no documentation of implementing the water management plan/program. Interview on 08/25/22 at 1:36 P.M., the Administrator verified the facility had failed to implement…
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 · E2022-08-30 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — patternHonor 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 record review, facility policy review, and interview the facility failed to obtain witnessed authorization forms for residents and/or resident representatives allowing the facility to manage their funds in an interest bearing account. This affected four out of four Residents (#12, #13, #15, #19) reviewed for resident funds. The facility census was 46. Findings include Review of the facility resident accounts files for Resident #12, #13,#15, #19 revealed no witnessed authorization forms permitting the facility to manage their funds. Further review of the resident fund accounts for Resident #12, #13, #15, #19 revealed no interest earned on their accounts. Interview on 08/23/22 at 3:33 P.M. with the Business Office Manager (BOM) # 117 confirmed the facility failed to obtain witnessed authorization fund forms from Resident #12, #13, #15,and #19. BOM #117 confirmed no interest was identified on the resident fund account forms for Resident #12, #13,#15, and #19. Review of the facility policy titled, Resident Personal Funds, dated November 2017, the resident has a right to manage…
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 before2022-08-30 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a cognitively impaired resident was clothed while out in a common area. This affected one resident (#16 ) out of three residents reviewed for dignity. The facility census was 46. Findings Include: Review of Resident #16's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease, dementia, and anxiety. Review of Resident #16's Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 quarterly assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had severe cognitive impairment. Review of the behavior plan of care dated on 06/05/22 revealed the resident would bite and chew on her clothes. Observations on 08/22/22 at 11:10 A.M. revealed Resident #16 was sitting in the hall by the nurses station. Resident #16 had other residents sitting near by her. Resident #16 was chewing and biting on her top. Resident #16 would pull her top up from the bottom. When Resident #16 pulled her shirt up her breast…
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 · D2022-08-30 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — isolatedHonor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, facility policy review, and interview, the facility failed to provide follow up regarding concerns during Resident Council Meetings. This affected two (Resident #07 and #29) out of three residents reviewed for Resident Council concerns. The facility census was 46. Findings include 1. Record review for Resident #07 was admitted to to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included urinary tract infection, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes mellitus II, asthma, peripheral vascular disease, vascular dementia, hyperlipidemia, major depressive disorder, spinal stenosis, essential primary hypertension, gastro- esophageal reflux disease, insomnia, and tinea pedis. Resident #07 required an electric scooter for mobility. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], revealed he had intact cognition. Further review of MDS assessment revealed he required extensive assistance with bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toilet use, and personal hygiene. He 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 · D2022-08-30 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, facility policy review, and interview, the facility failed to provide a homelike environment for three residents (#07, #29, and #30) out of three residents reviewed. The facility census was 46. Findings include 1. Record review for Resident #07 was admitted to to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included urinary tract infection, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes mellitus II, asthma, peripheral vascular disease, vascular dementia, hyperlipidemia, major depressive disorder, spinal stenosis, essential primary hypertension, gastro- esophageal reflux disease, insomnia, and tinea pedis. Resident #07 required an electric scooter for mobility. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], revealed he had intact cognition. Further review of MDS assessment revealed he required extensive assistance with bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toilet use, and personal hygiene. He was independent with eating and required no assistance from staff. 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 · D2022-08-30 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that resident medical records provided an accurate depiction of resident medication administration. This affected one resident (Resident #353) of 17 residents reviewed for medications. The facility census was 46. Findings included: Review of the medical record for Resident #353 revealed an admission date of 05/09/22 and a discharge date of 06/13/22 with diagnoses including fracture of the left radius, left femur, congestive heart failure (CHF), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #353 was cognitively intact and was independent for eating, required supervision for personal hygiene, limited assistance of one for bed mobility, walking, and locomotion, and extensive assistance of one for dressing and toileting. Review of physician's orders revealed from 05/10/22 to 05/16/22 an order for Ativan tablet 0.5 milligram (mg) (Lorazepam) Give one tablet by mouth…
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 before2019-04-04 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — widespreadEnsure 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, policy review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure that medications were secured inside the medication carts and did not have loose medications, personal items, food and discontinued blood glucose monitoring test fluids were not stored in the carts. The facility also failed to ensure the medications rooms were clean, orderly and in good repair. This affected three of four medication carts and two of two medications rooms. This had the potential to affect all 64 residents residing in the facility. Findings include: On 04/02/19 at 4:00 P.M., observation of medication cart #1 on the second floor nursing unit was completed. In a small drawer, along with bottles of over the counter medications were loose pills. One large white tablet and eight medium brown tablets. The loose pills were shown to Registered Nurse (RN) #97. RN #97 confirmed that the loose pills should have not been in the drawer. On 04/02/19 at 4:15 P.M., observation of medication cart #2 on the second floor nursing…
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 before2019-04-04 · 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 maintain a clean sanitary environment for food preparation. This had the potential to affect all 64 residents residing in the facility as all residents consumed meals from the kitchen. Findings include: Initial observation tour of the kitchen facilities on 04/01/19 from 8:11 A.M. to 8:45 A.M. revealed the floors were littered with debris under the various tables and shelving areas. The cover base was covered with thick black buildup. A conveyor toaster was covered with dried, gummy brown substance on outer and inner surfaces. There was rust present on the inner shelf and on the conveyor grate and revolving arms. The plate warmer cabinet had thick dried tan substance on inner walls and base where plates sat before use. The table under the conveyor toaster had thick gummy buildup at each crevice and rust covering the joints and extending out to flat surfaces. Interview during the observations with Kitchen Manager #90 verified the findings and rubbed the gummy substance off the toaster in a small area. Observation on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2019-04-04 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate falls and ensure the physician ordered and care planned interventions for fall preventions were in place. This affected four (#5, #10, #20 and #25) of four residents reviewed for accidents. The facility policy was 64. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #10's medical record revealed an admission date of 02/21/13. Diagnoses included subdural hematoma (brain bleeding), hypertension, repeated falls, dysphagia, fracture of right and left arm, heart failure, anxiety, anemia, and dementia. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 01/01/19, indicated Resident #10 was cognitively impaired and required extensive assist of one for all activities of daily living except supervision only for eating. A fall risk assessment dated [DATE] indicated a high risk for falls. Review of Resident #10's April 2019 physician's orders revealed an order for dycem (anti-slid material) to geri-chair…
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 · E2019-04-04 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — patternMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure geri chairs were clean. This affected two (Residents #10 and #34) of 24 residents reviewed for environment. In addition, the facility failed to secure and/or repair a ripped transition strip to the threshold of the third floor dining and activity area. This had the potential to affect all 30 the residents residing on the third floor (Residents #1, #2, #4, #6, #10, #11, #12, #14, #19, #20, #21, #22, #23, #25, #30, #31, #32, #33, #34, #36, #38, #39, #90, #91, #92, #93, #247, #248, #249 and #250). The facility census was 64. Findings include: 1. Review of facility work orders for the past 30 days revealed the work orders did not include the ripped transition strip to the threshold of the third floor dining and activity area. Observations on 04/02/19 at 12:01 P.M. and on 04/03/19 at 8:19 A.M. revealed the transition strip on the floor to the threshold of the third floor dining room was ripped with a partially loose piece of rubber…
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 before2019-04-04 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, observation, staff interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to transport a resident in his reclining chair in a dignified manner. This affected one (Resident #25) of four residents reviewed for accidents. The facility census was 64. Findings include: Review of record for Resident #25 revealed an admission date of 02/09/16 with a diagnosis of Parkinson's disease. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 02/07/19, revealed the resident was cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance of staff with mobility once in the reclining chair. Review of physician orders for April 2019 for Resident #25 revealed an order to use geri chair for positioning and comfort as tolerated. Review of the fall care plan for Resident #25 dated 12/07/18 revealed the resident was at risk for falls related to Parkinson's disease. Interventions included to use a geri chair for positioning. Observation on 04/02/19 at 3:21 P.M. revealed State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #5 pulled Resident #25 down the hallway in his geri chair. Resident #5 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 · D2019-04-04 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, review of facility policy and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure call lights were within reach of the residents. This affected three (#19, #30 and #90) of seventeen residents investigated in the final sample. The facility census was 64. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #19 medical record revealed an admission date of 04/28/18. Diagnoses included fracture of pelvis, repeated falls, dementia and osteoarthritis left knee. Review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #19 was cognitively impaired and required extensive assist of one for all activities of daily living except supervision only for eating, no behaviors, and had no restraints or alarms. 2. Review of the medical record for Resident #30 revealed an admission date of 01/26/18. Diagnoses included schizoaffective disorder, psychosis, disorder of adult personality and behavior, insomnia, heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and convulsions. 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 before2019-04-04 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, family interview, review of facility policy and staff interviews, the facility failed to notify a resident and/or resident representative of a resident's significant weight loss. This affected one (#34) of five residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility identified five residents who had significant weight loss or gain. The facility census was 64. Findings include: Review of Resident #34's medical recorded revealed an admission date of 08/14/18. Diagnoses included stricture of ureter obstructive uropathy, pneumonia, anemia, congestive heart failure, atrial fibrillation, gastroesophageal reflux disorder and dysphagia. Review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #34 had cognitive impairment and had weight loss greater than 10 percent while not on a prescribed weight loss regimen. Review of Resident #34's weight record revealed weights on 10/27/18 of 159.9 pounds (lbs.), 12/02/18 was 157.8 lbs., 01/20/19 was 143.4 lbs., 02/05/19 was 144.0 lbs.,…
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 · D2019-04-04 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to notify the resident and/or resident's representative and the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman in writing upon the resident's transfer to the hospital. This affected three (Residents #5, #17 and #20) of three residents reviewed for hospitalization. The facility census was 64. Findings include: 1. Review of record revealed Resident #5 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included end stage renal disease. Review of the nursing progress notes, dated 02/20/19 through 02/23/19, revealed the facility was notified that the resident was sent to the hospital from the dialysis center on 02/20/19 for evaluation of a cough. The nursing progress notes revealed Resident #5 was admitted to the hospital on [DATE] with a diagnosis of respiratory infection. Review of the record for Resident #5 revealed the record was silent regarding written notification to the resident and/or resident's representative and the Office of the State Long-Term Care…
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 · D2019-04-04 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
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 facility policy, the facility failed to provide the resident and/or resident's representative with written notification of the facility's bed hold policy upon the resident's transfer to the hospital. This affected three (Residents #5, #17, #20) of three residents reviewed for hospitalization. The facility census was 64. Findings include: 1. Review of record revealed Resident #5 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included end stage renal disease. Review of the nursing progress notes, dated 02/20/19 through 02/23/19, revealed the facility was notified that the resident was sent to the hospital from the dialysis center on 02/20/19 for evaluation of a cough. The nursing progress notes revealed Resident #5 was admitted to the hospital on [DATE] with a diagnosis of respiratory infection. Review of the record for Resident #5 revealed the record was silent regarding written notification to the resident and/or resident's representative of the facility's bed…
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 · D2019-04-04 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to complete a Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) when admitting a resident with mental illness. This affected one (#30) of seventeen residents reviewed in the final sample. The facility census was 64. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #30 revealed an admit date of 01/26/18. Admitting diagnoses included schizoaffective disorder, psychosis and disorder of adult personality and behavior. The medical record failed to reveal any evidence of PASARR information. Interview on 04/02/19 at 12:56 P.M. with Social Worker #115 reported she would locate and supply the PASARR. Interview on 04/04/19 at 9:48 A.M. with Assistant Director of Nursing Registered Nurse (RN) #48 to request Resident #30's PASARR information. During the exit conference on 04/04/19, the PASARR information for Resident #30 was never provided to the survey team by the facility.
- Potential for harm · D2019-04-04 · 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 Based on observation, record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to care plan a seat belt and update a resident's potential for alteration in skin integrity care plan with interventions to prevent the development of pressure ulcers. This affected two (#19 and #39) of 17 residents who were reviewed for care plans in the final sample. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #19 medical record revealed an admit date of 04/28/18 with diagnosis including but not limited to urinary tract infection, fracture of pelvis, peripheral vascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, repeated falls, hypertension, anemia, gastroesophageal reflux disease, dementia, and osteoarthritis left knee. Review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #19 was cognitively impaired and required extensive assist of one for all activities of daily living except supervision only for eating, no behaviors, and no restraints or alarms. Review of physician orders for April 2018…
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 · D2019-04-04 · tag F0807 — failed to offer suitable drinks — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides drinks consistent with resident needs and preferences and sufficient to maintain resident hydration.
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, and staff interview, the facility failed to serve resident liquids thickened according to the physician's order. This affected one (Resident #39) of one residents reviewed for hydration. The facility census was 64. Findings include: Record review for Resident #39 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included muscle weakness, dysphagia, Parkinson's disease, and glaucoma. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #39 dated 03/06/19 revealed the resident was cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance of staff with eating. Review of the nutrition care plan for Resident #39 initiated 02/24/19 revealed resident was at nutritional risk due to diagnoses which included dysphagia. Interventions included provide diet as ordered. Review of the speech therapy evaluation, dated 02/25/19, revealed the resident was at risk for aspiration and that diet might need to be modified due to medical status. Review of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-04-04 · 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 and policy review, the facility failed to maintain appropriate infection prevention regarding tube feeding and failed to utilize appropriate hand hygiene during a wound care treatment. This affected one (Resident #38) of four residents observed for pressure ulcer treatments and one ( Resident #77) of two residents observed with a tube feed. The facility identified seven residents with pressure ulcers and three residents who utilize tube feed. The facility census was 64. Findings include: 1. Record review for Resident #38 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included dementia with behavioral disturbance. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 02/15/19, revealed the resident was cognitively impaired and totally dependent of staff for activities of daily living. Review of physician order for Resident #38 revealed the resident had an order to cleanse pressure ulcer to the right buttock with normal saline…
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
$110,468 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $110,468 — penalty dated 2025-04-28
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CCRC OPS MB1-T LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 12/03/2014 |
| AURORA VITALITY LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/28/2022 |
| AURORA VITALITY PARTNERS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/28/2022 |
| CCRC OPS MB2-T LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 12/03/2014 |
| CCRC OPS MB3-T LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 12/03/2014 |
| CCRC OPS MB4-T LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 12/03/2014 |
| CCRC OPS MB5-T LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 12/03/2014 |
| CCRC OPS MB6-T LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 12/03/2014 |
| CWP BIDCO LP | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/28/2022 |
| CWP JV LP | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/28/2022 |
| GA HC REIT II TRS MIDWEST CCRC HOLDINGS, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 12/03/2014 |
| HCI CWP CAPITAL LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/28/2022 |
| HCI CWP INVESTOR LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/28/2022 |
| HCI CWP LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/28/2022 |
| HCI CWP PARENT LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/28/2022 |
| HEALTHCARE GA HOLDINGS GENERAL PARTNERSHIP | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 12/03/2014 |
| HEALTHCARE GA HOLDINGS NT-HCI, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 12/03/2014 |
| HEALTHCARE GA HOLDINGS-T LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 12/03/2014 |
| HEALTHCARE GA OPERATING PARTNERSHIP T LP | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 12/03/2014 |
| KGT INVESTMENTS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/28/2022 |
| NK CWP LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/28/2022 |
| NORTHSTAR HEALTHCARE INCOME INC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 12/03/2014 |
| NORTHSTAR HEALTHCARE INCOME OPERATING PARTNERSHIP LP | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 12/03/2014 |
| NORTHSTAR HEALTHCARE JV HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 01/19/2017 |
| NORTHSTAR HEALTHCARE JV LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 01/19/2017 |
| NORTHSTAR TK HEALTHCARE OPERATING COMPANY LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 01/19/2017 |
| NORTHSTAR TK HEALTHCARE REIT LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 01/19/2017 |
| NRF HOLDCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 01/10/2017 |
| NRFC HEALTHCARE HOLDING COMPANY LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 03/31/2015 |
| PINTA VITALITY LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/28/2022 |
| SGT CWP INVESTMENTS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/28/2022 |
| STRICKLAND, JENNIFER | Individual | CONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 01/16/2023 |
| CUMMINGS, CHRISTIAN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 05/01/2023 |
| HARRINGTON, ANN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 03/26/2018 |
| SL WELLSPRING LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 04/01/2014 |
32 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.
A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in OH
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 365812. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-04, 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.