Eliza Jennings Home

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

52.7% 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 34 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 22.7% 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 22 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

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

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 28% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 126 beds and averages 113.6 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 12 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.10 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.62 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.51 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 3.76 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.25 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.72 to 0.40 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 60% is well above the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.

This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.

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.

19 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 9 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-07-25 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  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 medical record review, facility electronic mail communication with local health department, and interview the facility failed to timely report rashes of unknown origin which were suspicious of scabies to the local health department. This affected five residents (Resident #207, #213, #245, #284 and #298) of 19 residents residing in the memory care unit (#201, #202, #207, #213, #220, #225, #228, #230, #232, #233, #245, #257, #274, #279, #284, #296, #297, #298, and #308). The facility census was 118. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #207 revealed an admission date of 04/06/21. Diagnoses included but were not limited to allergic contact dermatitis (10/05/23), paranoid schizophrenia, vascular dementia, and anxiety disorder. Resident #207 was noted to have severe cognitive impairment and required supervision for activities of daily living. Review of the facility's infection control log for the past six months revealed concerns were logged and identified. Following a dermatologist appointment for Resident #207, on 06/25/24, for a rash of unknown origin,…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-12-07 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — widespread
  Make sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain a clean, safe, sanitary and well-maintained environment in resident common areas and resident rooms. This had the potential to affect all 115 residents living in the facility. Findings include: Interview was conducted on 12/04/23 at 12:30 P.M. with the Director of Environmental Services (DES) #422 who revealed the housekeeping staff were to make sure all floors in the resident common areas and resident rooms were kept clean. DES #422 explained the floor scrubber was broke so the staff were to use whatever equipment they had to keep the floors clean. Observations of the general facility environment and resident rooms were conducted on 12/05/23 from 12:00 P.M. and 12:25 P.M. with the Director of Maintenance (DM) #359 and revealed carpeted areas in resident rooms and common areas throughout the facility were covered in stains and/or various debris indicating the carpet was not being maintained in a clean manner. In addition, the following findings were observed: • Resident #52's bathroom door had a wire clothing…

  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.

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-11-16 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — widespread
  Make sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation and staff interview the facility failed to maintain a clean, safe, sanitary and well-maintained environment. This had the potential to affect all residents. The facility census was 113. Findings include: An environmental tour was conducted on 11/16/23 between 10:45 A.M. and 11:20 A.M. with the Administrator. The following was observed and verified with the Administrator at the time of discovery. • Carpeted areas throughout the facility in resident rooms and common areas were noted with stains and debris throughout. • The unit three air purifier had a thick coating of dust and debris covering every part of its filter. • The room occupied by Resident #43 was noted with a non-hospital grade power strip with four outlets in use plugged in to the wall. • The poles used to hang intravenous (IV) medication used by Residents #53 and #219 were not clean. • The bathroom in Resident #52's room and had noticeable cobwebs on the light fixture about the mirror. • The recliner chair in Resident #36's room was dirty and with numerous unknown debris on it. • The footboard on 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.

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-11-16 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor 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 and interview the facility failed to provide dignified feeding assistance to Resident #15 and Resident #217. This affected two residents (#15 and #217) of four residents observed for feeding assistance. The facility identified eight residents (#15, #19, #32, #34, #64, #76, #87, and #217) who required feeding assistance. The facility census was 113. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #15's medical records revealed an admission date of 08/24/22. Diagnoses included dementia, anorexia and malnutrition. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed no cognition score due to Resident #15 was rarely understood. Resident #15 required extensive assistance with eating. Review of the care plan dated 11/03/23 revealed Resident #15 was at risk for nutritional deficits. Interventions included provide assistance at meals. Observation was conducted on 11/14/23 at 8:43 A.M. of the breakfast meal for Resident #15. The observation revealed State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #972…

  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 · D2023-11-16 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, interview, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure resident's wishes regarding advanced directives were accurate and clearly identified in a resident's medical record. This affected one resident (Resident #76) of five residents reviewed for advanced directives. The facility census was 113. Findings include: Review of Resident #76's medical record revealed an admission date of [DATE] and a facility re-entry date of [DATE] with diagnoses including myositis ossificans traumatica, adult failure to thrive, severe protein calorie malnutrition, anorexia, dementia, stage three chronic kidney disease, and longstanding persistent atrial fibrillation. Review of physician orders for Resident #76 dated [DATE] revealed a Do Not Resuscitate Comfort Care Arrest (DNR CC-Arrest) order which instructed Do Not intubate Protocol is activated when the patient experiences cardiac or respiratory arrest and further clarifies all other necessary treatments should be initiated prior 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-11-16 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide 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 observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure physician orders were followed for the use of Prevalon boots. This affected one resident (#7) of two residents observed for Prevalon boots. The facility census was 113. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #7 revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease, dementia, and hypertension. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #7 had a memory problem, inattention, altered level of consciousness, and was a two-person total dependence for activities of daily living (ADLs). Review of the care plan dated 9/21/23 revealed Resident #7 medical conditions required monitoring and managed as ordered and interventions included to administer medications and treatments as ordered. Review of the physician orders dated 06/21/22 revealed an order for Prevalon boots every shift. Observation on 11/13/23 at 10:12 A.M. revealed Resident…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-11-16 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure 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, observation and interview the facility failed to ensure flammable materials were not left in resident rooms. This affected one resident (#21) of four residents reviewed for accident hazards. The facility census was 113. Review of Resident #21's medical records revealed an admission date of 02/01/19. Diagnoses included schizoaffective disorder and anxiety. Review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #21 had intact cognition. Resident #21 required supervision with transfers, ambulation and personal hygiene. Review of the care plan dated 09/20/23 revealed Resident #21 was an independent smoker. Review of smoking assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #21 was safe to smoke unsupervised. Observation on 11/15/23 at 7:53 A.M. revealed Resident #21 had a pack of cigarettes, lighter and a canister of lighter fluid on his dresser. Interview on 11/15/23 at 11:29 A.M. with State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #949 confirmed Resident #21 was an independent smoker 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-09-07 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to notify Resident #8's family representative a change in resident's pressure ulcer condition. This finding affected one (Resident #8) of three residents reviewed for notification of changes. Findings include: Review of Resident #8's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including adult failure to thrive, diabetes and anemia. Review of Resident #8's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident exhibited moderate cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #8's progress note dated 08/04/23 at 8:35 A.M. revealed the wound to the sacrum had a moderate amount of odorous serosanguinous drainage. Interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #803 at 09/07/23 at 1:09 P.M. confirmed she left a message on Certified Nurse Practitioner (CNP) #830's notification board for him to address the odor in Resident #8's sacral wound. LPN #803 confirmed she did not notify Resident #8'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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Fcited before2021-07-06 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the kitchen was maintained in a clean and sanitary manner. This had the potential to affect 105 of the 107 residents. Two Resident's (#17 and #260) did not receive food from the facility. The facility census was 107. Findings include: Observations during the initial tour on 06/28/21 at 8:40 A.M. revealed the oven door had dried on spills down the front. The control knobs on the oven and stove top were dirty. The hood and overhead vents were greasy and dusty, the spigots for fire suppression system were greasy and dusty. These findings were verified by Dietary Manager #401 at the time of the observation.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2021-07-06 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  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, interview and policy review, the facility failed to implement an ongoing infection prevention and control program related to COVID 19. This affected six Resident's (#76, #84, #158, #159, #160 and #161) who resided on the observation for COVID 19 unit out of 107 residents in the facility. Findings include: Interview with the Administrator on 06/28/21 at 9:00 A.M. reported the facility had no residents with COVID 19 but had one staff test positive so they were in outbreak testing. She reported the observation unit was located on the second floor and this was where new admissions spend their first 14 days. She indicated full personal protective equipment had to be worn in the resident rooms. On 06/28/21 at 10:00 A.M. during the initial tour of the facility, a small unit on the second floor had the double doors at both ends of the unit closed. Signs were posted for authorized employees only and had N95 masks at the entrance to the unit. There was no eye protection available and staff working the unit were not observed wearing eye protection. Resident's in the…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 36 rows in the source record cover these 28 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

This home reported $941K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in OH