Parkside Health Care Center
930 East Park Avenue, Columbiana, OH 44408 · For profit - Corporation · 75 certified beds · (330) 482-5547 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (30% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0602), cited Sep 2022
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0569)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (30) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- about 24% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 to 4 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 | 4.1% | 5.3% | 15.4% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.8% | 6.2% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.7% | 0.2% | 0.9% | worse 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 | 11.7% | 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 | 2.4% | 3.2% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 4.9% | 6.1% | 16.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 30.8% | 25.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 92.2% | 94.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 8.4% | 3.4% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 17.3% | 21.4% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 6.6% | 8.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.8% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 54.2% | 75.6% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 11.3% | 24.9% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 19.4% | 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.
43.9% 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 49 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 25 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 0.36 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 62% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 37% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 43.9%CMS range 31.3–55.2 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.4%CMS range 6.9–15.3 | 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 | 28.0% | 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 | 24.0% | 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 | 30.8% | 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 | 2.6% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.2%CMS range 3.0–11.9 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.12 | 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 75 beds and averages 62.4 residents a day — about 83% occupied, or roughly 13 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.37 hrs/resident/day is below 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 1.71 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 2.66 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.66 on weekdays — 27% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.79 to 0.21 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 30% is below 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 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.
30 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 20 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-14 · 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 record review, interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to treat residents with dignity and respect. This affected one resident (#224) of four residents reviewed for dignity. The facility census was 68.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #224 revealed an admission date of 06/17/22. Diagnoses included hypertensive heart disease with chronic kidney disease, infectious gastroenteritis, type two diabetes mellitus with diabetic neuropathy, chronic kidney disease stage four, permanent atrial fibrillation, gout and end state renal disease. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 on a 0-15 scale. A BIMS score of 15 would indicate the resident was cognitively intact. The MDS indicated the resident used a wheelchair for transportation, and was dependent on staff for transfers, bathing and toileting. Review of a care plan for Resident #224, initiated on 06/29/23 and revised…
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 · D2026-05-14 · 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 record review, observation, interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure call lights were within reach of residents to allow them to notify staff of the need for assistance. This affected two residents (#221, #273) of four residents reviewed for call lights. The facility census was 68.Findings include:1.Review of the medical record for Resident #221 revealed an admission date of 07/23/24. Diagnoses included Parkinson's disease without dyskinesia, repeated falls, insomnia, other symbolic dysfunctions, need for assistance with personal care, dysphagia, chronic kidney disease stage three, major depressive disorder, psychotic disorder with delusions, psychotic disorder with hallucinations, and Alzheimer's disease. Review of a quarterly Minimal Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of four on a 0-15 scale. A BIMS score of 4 would indicate severe problems with thinking and memory. The MDS also indicated the resident had…
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 before2026-05-14 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate an incident of alleged verbal abuse. This affected one resident (#224) of four residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 68.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #224 revealed an admission date of 06/17/22. Diagnoses included hypertensive heart disease with chronic kidney disease, infectious gastroenteritis, type two diabetes mellitus with diabetic neuropathy, chronic kidney disease stage four, permanent atrial fibrillation, gout and end state renal disease. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #224, dated 10/23/25, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 on a 0-15 scale. A BIMS score of 15 would indicate the resident was cognitively intact. The MDS indicated the resident used a wheelchair for transportation, and was dependent for transfers, bathing and toileting. Review of a care plan for Resident #224, initiated on 06/24/23 and revised on 07/21/24, revealed a focus of care for person centered care. This focus…
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 before2026-05-14 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide personal care assistance to a resident who was dependent on staff for care needs. This affected one resident (#221) reviewed for activities of daily living assistance needs. The facility census was 68.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #221 revealed an admission date of 07/23/24. Diagnoses included Parkinson's disease without dyskinesia, repeated falls, insomnia, other symbolic dysfunctions, need for assistance with personal care, dysphagia, chronic kidney disease stage three, major depressive disorder, psychotic disorder with delusions, psychotic disorder with hallucinations, and Alzheimer's Disease. Review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of four on a 0-15 scale. A BIMS score of 4 would indicate severe problems with thinking and memory. The MDS also indicated the resident had behaviors which…
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 · F2025-08-04 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespreadHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
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 nursing schedule, the [NAME] Staffing Data Report, the Facility Assessment, the facility punch detail reports and interview, the facility did not ensure a registered nurse (RN) worked eight consecutive hours a day seven days a week. This had the potential to affect all residents. The facility census was 54. Findings include: Review of the [NAME] Staffing Data Report for the second quarter of fiscal year 2025 revealed the facility triggered for no RN hours for 01/19/25, 02/15/16, 02/16/25, and 03/29/25. Interview on 07/31/25 at 2:00 P.M. with the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed the facility was short on RN's every other weekend due to a recent termination; however, the DON personally covered said shifts, and recruitment efforts to hire weekend RNs was ongoing. Review of the nursing schedule for the 03/29/25 revealed no RN was scheduled for that day. Review of the punch detail report for 03/29/25 confirmed six licensed practical nurses (LPNs) each worked at least eight hours; however, it…
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 before2025-08-04 · 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
Based on observation, interview, medical record review, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure proper infection control measures were adhered to during wound care for Resident #51 and catheter care for Resident #76. This affected one resident (Resident #51) of three residents who were reviewed for appropriate care and services for pressure ulcers and one resident (Resident #76) of six residents who had indwelling urinary catheters. The facility census was 54. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #51 revealed an admission date of 02/17/25 and a re-entry date of 06/25/25. Diagnoses included neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder, Cauda Equina Syndrome, arthrodesis status (when two or more bones in a joint are surgically fused together), urinary retention, colostomy status, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), radiculopathy and spinal stenosis with neurological claudication of the lumbar region, major depressive disorder, Hodgkin lymphoma, and an unstageable pressure ulcer (full thickness tissue loss in which the base of the ulcer…
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 before2024-08-01 · 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 and interview the facility did not ensure contact isolation precautions were implemented timely. This affected one of three residents reviewed for infection control, Resident #61. The facility census was 60. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #61 was admitted [DATE] with diagnoses including acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and parainfluenza virus. Resident #61 required assistance with bathing, dressing, mobility, and toileting. No cognitive deficit was noted, however Resident #61 refused all food and beverages and received hospice care. Review of the hospital after visit summary dated 06/14/24 revealed under the area of continuity of care (COC) instructions Resident #61 was diagnosed with Parainfluenza with an onset date of 06/08/24. Further review of the COC instructions revealed under the area of isolation/infection: isolation. Review of Resident #61's Physician's orders revealed an order dated 06/24/24…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-22 · 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 record review, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure appropriate care and treatment of Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters (PICC). This affected three residents (#19, #48 and #60) of three residents reviewed for PICC lines. The facility census was 59. Findings include; 1. Review of Resident #48's medical record revealed a 07/13/23 admission with diagnoses including osteomyelitis, methicillin-resistant staphylococcal aureus, type two diabetes, migraines, gastroesophageal reflux disease, fibromyalgia, urinary incontinence and asthma. The resident was admitted with a PICC line. The infection control log revealed the resident had a wound infection 01/10/24 to a coccyx ulcer. Physician orders included to change the PICC line dressing and cap every Tuesday. Review of the treatment sheets for January, February and March 2024 revealed there was no evidence of a weekly dressing change on 01/23/24, 02/27/24, and 03/12/24. There was no evidence of a cap change on 01/16/24, 01/23/24,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-01 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, abuse policies review, resident council minutes review, written statements review and interview, the facility failed to ensure allegations of verbal allegations were reported to the Administrator in a timely manner and failed to ensure the allegations were reported to the State Survey Agency. This affected two (Residents #1 and #28) of 12 residents interviewed regarding abuse. The facility census was 62. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #28's open medical record revealed diagnoses including irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhea, obsessive compulsive disorder ( long-lasting disorder in which a person experiences uncontrollable and recurring thoughts (obsessions), engages in repetitive behaviors (compulsions), or both.), somatization disorder (a form of mental illness that causes one or more bodily symptoms, including pain. The symptoms may or may not be traceable to a physical cause.), adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood, histrionic disorder (personality…
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 before2024-03-01 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, abuse policies review, resident council minutes review, written statements review and interview, the facility failed to ensure allegations of verbal abuse were thoroughly investigated and failed to remove staff alleged to have committed the abuse pending the completion of a thorough investigation This affected two (Residents #1 and #28) of 12 residents interviewed regarding abuse. The facility census was 62. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #28's open medical record revealed diagnoses including irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhea, obsessive compulsive disorder ( long-lasting disorder in which a person experiences uncontrollable and recurring thoughts (obsessions), engages in repetitive behaviors (compulsions), or both.), somatization disorder (a form of mental illness that causes one or more bodily symptoms, including pain. The symptoms may or may not be traceable to a physical cause.), adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood, histrionic disorder (personality…
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 20 citations
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-01 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolatedEnsure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review and interview, the facility failed to provide a timely physical therapy (PT) evaluation to assess for a restorative nursing program. This affected one (Resident #28) of three residents reviewed for restorative nursing services. The facility identified 39 residents receiving restorative nursing programs. The facility census was 62. Findings include: Review of Resident #28's open medical record revealed diagnoses including type two diabetes mellitus with diabetic neuropathy, irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhea, anemia, obsessive compulsive disorder, diabetic retinopathy with macular edema in both eyes, somatization disorder, adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood, histrionic personality disorder, and narcissistic personality disorder. A plan of care initiated 05/25/22 and revised on 01/24/24 indicated Resident #28 required an ambulation restorative program due to weakness related to diabetes with neuropathy. A nursing note dated 07/26/23 at 10:03 A.M. indicated Resident #28 requested his restorative program be placed on hold.…
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 before2024-03-01 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure bathing was offered in accordance with bathing schedules and resident preferences. This affected one (Resident #28) of three residents reviewed for activities of daily living. The facility census was 62. Findings include: Review of Resident #28's medical record revealed diagnoses included type two diabetes mellitus with diabetic neuropathy, irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhea, obsessive compulsive disorder, and anxiety disorder. A care plan regarding development of person-centered care, initiated 12/27/21, indicated Resident #28 required two or more assists for bathing. A care plan initiated 01/06/22 indicated a self care deficit with interventions to bathe per Resident #28's preference. A care plan initiated 04/07/22 indicated Resident #28 had a conflict with staff related to being accusatory of staff, being demanding, being argumentative, and refusing showers and/or bed baths. Review of a plan of care note dated 02/16/23 at 2:46 P.M. indicated Resident #28 requested he have one bed bath a week. The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-01 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, review of physician orders, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were available for administration resulting in the omission of four medications being administered out of 25 opportunities resulting in a 16% medication error rate. This affected one (Resident #56) of two residents observed for medication administration. Findings include: During observation of medication administration on 02/27/24 at 8:53 A.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #125 was observed preparing medications for administration to Resident #56. LPN #125 searched for, but was unable to locate, the following ordered medications: chewable aspirin 81 milligram (mg), vitamin D 50 micrograms (mcg), bumex 1 mg (mg), fludrocortisone acetate 0.1 mg, and ferrous gluconate 324 mg. LPN #125 stated Resident #56 only had a 14 day supply of medication delivered at any given time. LPN #125 stated she knew she had re-ordered the medications but they were not in the cart. LPN #125 stated when she finished her medication pass she would look to see if any of the medications…
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 before2024-03-01 · 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 observation, medical record review, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure catheter tubing was placed in a manner that would limit the potential for introduction of pathogens. This affected one (Resident #1) of three residents reviewed for urinary tract infections. The facility census was 62. Findings include: Review of Resident #1's open medical record revealed diagnoses including type two diabetes mellitus, flaccid neuropathic bladder, and neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder. A plan of care related to use of an indwelling catheter was initiated 08/18/23. Interventions included keeping the foley (catheter) tubing free of kinks and keeping the bag covered and off the surface of the floor. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #1 was cognitively intact and had an indwelling urinary catheter. A laboratory report for urine collected on 02/19/24 indicated the identification of mixed flora and indicated further work-up and sensitivity testing…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-16 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews the facility failed to develop a comprehensive behavioral care plan for Resident #53 sexual behaviors. This affected one resident (Resident #53) of three residents reviewed for behavior care plans. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #53 revealed an admission date of 05/12/23. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, major depressive disorder and generalized anxiety disorder. Review of the 5-day Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment revealed Resident #53 required extensive assistance for bed mobility, dressing and personal hygiene. He was totally dependent for transfers and toilet use. He was independent for locomotion and eating. He was cognitively intact and there were no behaviors noted. Review of October 2023's behavior tracking revealed Resident #53's exhibited behavior of making sexually inappropriate remarks. Review of Resident #53's care plan revealed there was no comprehensive care plan in place for any behaviors related to being sexually inappropriate or making inappropriate sexual comments 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 · F2022-09-30 · tag F0868 — widespreadHave the Quality Assessment and Assurance group have the required members and meet at least quarterly
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) sign-in sheets, record review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure quarterly QAA meetings were conducted and failed to ensure all required members, including the Medical Director (MD) participated/attended the meetings as required. This had the potential to affect all 58 residents residing in the facility. Findings include: Review of an undated facility Quality Assessment Performance Improvement (QAPI) member list revealed the MD was listed as a member of the facility QAPI committee. The QAPI list revealed the following facility staff/positions were part of the QAPI committee: The Administrator, Director of Nursing, Medical Director (MD), Clinical Director, Nurse Aide Supervisor, QA Coordinator, Nutrition Services Director, Restorative Supervisor, Wound Nurse, Social Services, Pharmacy and Laboratory. The Activity Director, Maintenance Director, MDS, Admissions Director, Housekeeping/Laundry Supervisor, and Rehabilitation Director were included on the facility monthly meeting list.…
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 before2022-09-30 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide 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, record review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #3, Resident #5, Resident #9 and Resident #27, who required staff assistance with activities of daily living (ADL) care received timely and adequate nail care to maintain proper hygiene. This affected four residents (#3, #5, #9 and #27) of five residents reviewed for activities of daily living. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #3's medical record revealed a 02/28/17 admission date with diagnoses including hypokalemia, major depressive disorder, osteoarthritis, hypothyroidism, Alzheimer disease, dementia, chronic kidney disease, need for assist with personal care and anxiety. A plan of care, dated 03/20/19 revealed resident care would be provided according to the plan. An intervention revised 07/13/21 included grooming and hygiene would be provided with assist of one (staff). Review of the 07/02/22 annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment revealed the resident was moderately impaired for daily decision making, totally dependent on two staff for 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 · E2022-09-30 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, manufacturer guidelines review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed vials of Tuberculin were dated when opened. This affected six residents (#25, #54, #109, #110, #111 and #208) of 58 residents residing in the facility. Findings include: On 09/28/22 at 10:00 A.M. observation of the East medication room refrigerator revealed an opened multi use vial of Tuberculin (purified protein derivative (PPD)) solution, used to detect tuberculosis disease. The bottle did not contain a date when it had been opened. The label indicated the vial was dispensed from the pharmacy on 04/28/22. Directions on the label included discard after 30 days once opened. On 09/28/22 at 10:16 A.M. interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #81 confirmed the Tuberculin vial was open and was not dated as to when it had been opened. On 09/28/22 at 10:22 A.M. observation of the North medication room revealed an opened multi use vial of Tuberculin (purified protein derivative (PPD)) solution. The bottle did not contain a date when it had been opened. The label…
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 · D2022-09-30 · tag F0569 — isolatedNotify each resident of certain balances and convey resident funds upon discharge, eviction, or death.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure residents who were within $200.00 of the Social Security Income (SSI) resource limit of $2,000.00 were appropriately assisted in spending down the money so the resident did not lose their Medicaid eligibility. This affected one resident (#23) of two residents reviewed for personal fund account spend down. Findings include: Review of Resident #23's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including respiratory diseases, hypertension, depression and dementia. Record review revealed the resident did not have a financial power of attorney or legal guardian. Review of Resident #23's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 07/14/22 revealed the resident was moderately cognitively impaired. Review of Resident #23's personal funds account revealed on 09/29/22 the resident had a balance of $2,364.38 in her personal funds account. As of 11/03/21 Resident #23's account had exceeded 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 · D2022-09-30 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolatedProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
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 ensure Resident #17 was free from financial exploitation by Former Dietary Aide (DA) #155. This affected one resident (#17) of one resident reviewed for misappropriation/exploitation. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #17 revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including encounter for orthopedic aftercare following surgical amputation of left great toe, history of a stroke, type II diabetes and peripheral vascular disease. Review of a facility Self-Reported Incident (SRI), tracking number 218531 initiated 03/02/22 revealed DA #155 asked to borrow $200.00 from Resident #17. The DA reported this to Former Business Office Manager (BOM) #150 on 02/18/22. She was told by the BOM that she should not have done that and needed to give the money back. The DA claimed to have returned the money on 02/19/22 when she placed an envelope with $200.00 in the resident's top drawer. However, no money was found in 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-09-30 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure an allegation of financial exploitation involving Resident #17 by former Dietary Aide (DA) #155 was reported to the Administrator timely and failed to ensure the incident was reported to the State agency timely and as required. This affected one resident (#17) of one resident reviewed for misappropriation/exploitation. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #17 revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including encounter for orthopedic aftercare following surgical amputation of left great toe, history of a stroke, type II diabetes and peripheral vascular disease. Review of a facility Self-Reported Incident (SRI), tracking number 218531 initiated 03/02/22 revealed DA #155 asked to borrow $200.00 from Resident #17. The DA reported this to Former Business Office Manager (BOM) #150 on 02/18/22. She was told by the BOM that she should not have done that and needed to give the money back. The DA claimed to have…
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 · D2022-09-30 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #29 was provided timely nutritional intervention following a significant weight loss. This affected one resident (#29) of one resident reviewed for weight loss. The facility identified 11 residents with unplanned weight loss or gain. Findings include: Review of Resident #29's medical record revealed a 12/18/03 admission dated with diagnoses including cerebral palsy, Alzheimer's disease, moderate intellectual disabilities, Stage III (full thickness tissue loss. Subcutaneous fat may be visible but bone, tendon, or muscle are not exposed) pressure ulcer to right buttock, peripheral vascular disease, anemia, Vitamin D deficiency, gastroesophageal reflux disease and dysphagia. Review of the physician's orders revealed a diet order, dated 03/21/19 for no concentrated sweets diet, pureed texture, regular/thin consistency liquids related to dysphagia oropharyngeal phase. An order, dated 05/13/19 for Arginaid…
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 · D2022-09-30 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, policy and interview and interview the facility failed to ensure care plans were developed for oxygen use and failed to ensure oxygen tubing was properly dated and/or changed to maintain proper infection control practices. This affected two resident (#3 and #5) of two residents reviewed for respiratory care. The facility identified four residents with respiratory treatments. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #3's medical record revealed a 02/28/17 admission date with diagnoses including hypokalemia, major depressive disorder, osteoarthritis, hypothyroidism, Alzheimer's disease, dementia, chronic kidney disease and need for assist with personal care and anxiety. Review of the 07/02/22 annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment revealed the resident was moderately impaired for daily decision making, totally dependent on two staff for bed mobility and transfers and required extensive assistance from one staff for personal hygiene. The assessment revealed the resident had no behaviors. The resident was on anti-psychotic medication,…
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 before2019-09-12 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to properly disinfect the blood sugar testing device, a glucometer. This had the potential to affect eight residents (Resident's #16, #29, #41, #49, #52, #54, #65 and #169) receiving glucometer testing with the glucometer in the medication cart for the East hall and [NAME] short hall. The facility census was 65. Findings include: Observation on 09/10/19 at 3:33 P.M. of glucometer testing, blood sugar testing, was conducted with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #14 on the [NAME] hall. There was one glucometer in the medication cart for use for the residents who received medications from the cart. The cart was used for medications for residents residing on the East and [NAME] halls. LPN #14 indicated the meter had already been cleaned. LPN #14 performed a glucometer test on Resident #29. LPN #14 returned to the medication cart, opened the bottom drawer and pulled out a Clorox bleach wipe manufactured for Clorox Professional Products Company. LPN #14 wiped the surfaces of the outside of the glucometer for less…
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 · D2019-09-12 · 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 and interview the facility failed to notify the physician when Resident #20 left on a leave of absence (LOA) without her prescribed continuous oxygen. This affected one of three residents reviewed for respiratory care. The facility census was 65. Findings include: Medical record review revealed Resident #20 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), bipolar disease, and anxiety. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 07/09/19 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating she was alert, oriented and had intact cognition. The MDS further revealed she was receiving oxygen therapy and had not exhibited any rejection of care behaviors. Review of a physician order, dated 07/09/19, revealed staff were to administer continuous oxygen at one to four liters per nasal cannula, to maintain her oxygen saturation levels above 90%. Review of a nursing progress note, dated 06/05/19, revealed Licensed…
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 · D2019-09-12 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to accurately stage Resident #45's pressure ulcer. This affected one of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility census was 65. Findings include: Medical record review revealed Resident #45 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including hemiplegia (weakness affecting one side of the body), dementia, and diabetes mellitus. Review of Resident #45's skin/wound assessment note, dated 08/14/19, revealed a pressure ulcer located on the right buttock. It was listed as a Stage 1, an area of intact skin with a localized area of non-blanchable erythema (redness) which in darker skin tones, may appear with persistent red, blue, or purple hues. Measurements were documented as 0.7 centimeters (cm) long by 0.8 cm wide and 0.2 cm deep. The wound was described as being beefy red with granulation tissue noted. The skin/wound assessment incorrectly identified this pressure ulcer as a Stage 1, which would have intact skin. This assessment…
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 · D2019-09-12 · 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
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure fall safety measures were in place and the plan of care updated for a resident with a history of falls. This affected one (Resident #59) of one resident reviewed for accidents. Findings include: Review of Resident #59 revealed an admission date of 02/12/19. Current diagnoses included dislocation of internal right hip prosthesis, high blood pressure, depression, legally blind, abnormal posture, muscle weakness, lack of coordination, displaced fracture of base of neck of right femur, osteoarthritis, senile degeneration of brain, wedge compression fracture of lumbar vertebra, osteoporosis, chronic kidney disease and repeated falls. The admission Morse Fall Risk assessment indicated the resident was a high fall risk due to previous falls, diagnoses, use of wheelchair and weakness while walking. Review of the 08/09/19 quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment revealed Resident #59 was severely cognitively impaired for daily decision making, required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility,…
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 · D2019-09-12 · tag F0745 — failed to provide medically-related social services — isolatedProvide medically-related social services to help each resident achieve the highest possible quality of life.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide medically-related social services to obtain necessary medical equipment for Resident #20 to use for during a personal leave of absence (LOA) from the facility. This affected one of three residents reviewed for respiratory care. The facility census was 65. Findings include: Medical record review revealed Resident #20 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), bipolar disease, and anxiety. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 07/09/19 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating Resident #20 was alert, oriented and had intact cognition. The MDS further revealed she was receiving oxygen therapy and had not exhibited any rejection of care. Review of a physician order, dated 07/09/19, revealed an order for continuous oxygen at one to four liters per nasal cannula, to maintain oxygen saturation levels above 90%. Review of a nursing progress note,…
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 · D2019-09-12 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the attending physician documented rationale in the resident's medical record when declining recommendations by the pharmacist. This affected one (Resident #22) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Findings include: Review of Resident #22 revealed an admission date of 04/26/17 with diagnoses including vascular dementia with behavioral disturbance, depression, insomnia, dementia with psychosis, and vascular dementia with delusions and delusional disorder. Review of the 07/10/19 quarterly minimum data set assessment revealed the resident was moderately cognitively impaired for daily decision making and displayed no behaviors. This assessment indicated Resident #22 had moods including having little interest or pleasure in doing things, feeling down, and feeling tired or having little energy. There was no evidence of hallucinations, delusions or behaviors. Resident #22 was coded as receiving antipsychotic, antidepressant medications in the seven day look back period. Physician orders included a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-09-12 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure gradual dose reductions were attempted for antipsychotic medications and failed to monitor behaviors for Resident #22. This affected one of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Findings include: Review of Resident #22 revealed an admission date of 04/26/17 with diagnoses including vascular dementia with behavioral disturbance, depression, insomnia, dementia with psychosis, and vascular dementia with delusional and delusional disorder. A diagnosis of dementia with psychosis was added 05/09/17. Physician orders included an order on 11/11/17 for Remeron, an antidepressant, 45 milligrams (mg) for depression and an order on 11/13/17 for Seroquel, an antipsychotic, 25 mg three times a day for vascular dementia with behavioral disturbance. On 11/27/17 a physician progress note indicated Resident #22 had vascular dementia with delusions and delusional disorder. Pharmacy recommendations on 10/09/18 and 04/11/19 recommended the physician attempt a dose reduction for the antipsychotic, Seroquel 25 mg. These…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to WINDSOR HOUSE, INC. — 11 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 3 of 5 | 3.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 3.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 3.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
The other 10 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.5★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MASTERNICK, JOHN | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | 100% | since 02/29/1980 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 5 rows in the source record cover these 1 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
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 $1.6M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 24% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. 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 365766. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-04, 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.