Crown Pointe Care Center
1850 Crown Park Court, Columbus, OH 43235 · For profit - Corporation · 90 certified beds · (614) 459-7293 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
- 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 (F0600), cited Oct 2023
- 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
- a high number of inspection citations overall (35) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- about 17% 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) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 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 3 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 | 6.1% | 5.3% | 15.4% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.4% | 6.2% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 0.4% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 38.1% | 30.1% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.6% | 3.2% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 4.3% | 6.1% | 16.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 16.1% | 25.5% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 94.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.4% | 3.4% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 21.5% | 21.4% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 4.7% | 8.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 3.3% | 1.2% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 66.1% | 75.6% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 15.7% | 24.9% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 6.2% | 12.9% | 12.0% | better |
‡ 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.
45.6% 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 64 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 25.0% 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 24 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 0.14 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 11% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 8% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 45.6%CMS range 35.7–55.6 | 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 | 10.5%CMS range 6.5–14.4 | 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 | 25.0% | 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 | 29.2% | 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 | 29.2% | 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 | 84.4% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.3%CMS range 4.2–14.3 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.01 | 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 90 beds and averages 81.7 residents a day — about 91% occupied, or roughly 8 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.29 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.57 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.03 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.02 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.40 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.62 to 0.45 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 42% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
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.
35 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 25 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · E2026-02-20 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — patternProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure incontinent care was provided at least once every shift. This affected five (Resident #1, #2, #3, #4, and #17) out of nine residents reviewed for incontinence care. The facility census was 78.Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #1 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included acute and chronic respiratory failure, cerebral infarction, hemiplegia and hemiparesis, aphasia, anxiety disorder, and benign prostatic hyperplasia. Review of Resident #1's care plan dated 05/08/24 revealed Resident #1 had alteration in elimination and required assistance with toileting. Interventions included to provide incontinence care as needed. Review of Resident #1's bowel and bladder assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #1 was always incontinent of bowel and bladder. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #1 had severe cognitive impairment and was dependent on staff for toileting. 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 · Fcited before2025-07-28 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff wore hair nets in the kitchen as required. This had the potential to affect 88 residents in the facility. The facility identified one resident (#03) who did not receive food from the kitchen. The facility census was 89. 1. Observation on 07/23/25 at 7:20 A.M. revealed [NAME] #168 assisting [NAME] #119 with obtaining food temperatures on the steam table. [NAME] #168 was observed with braids which extended approximately 18 inches down her back and was not wearing a hair net. Observation on 07/23/25 at 7:36 A.M., [NAME] #168 was observed briefly leaving the kitchen and returned, wearing a hair net, however her braids still remained hanging outside of the hairnet. [NAME] #168 was then observed tending to food items on the facility stove.Interview on 07/23/25 at the time of the observation., [NAME] #168 verified she had not been wearing a hairnet until she left the kitchen and returned wearing the hair net, which still did not contain all of her hair. 2. Observation on 07/23/25 at 7:47…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-28 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents had access to their call lights. This affected two (#01 and #28) of two residents reviewed for access to call lights. The facility census was 89. 1. Review of the medical record of Resident #28 revealed an admission date of 06/01/19. Diagnoses included acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, cerebral infarction, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebrovascular disease, aphasia, hypothyroidism, anxiety, depression. Review of the quarterly minimum data set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had severely impaired cognition. The resident required supervision with eating, substantial/maximal assistance with toileting, bed mobility, and was dependent on staff for bathing and transfers. Review of the care plan dated 06/13/19 revealed the resident was at risk for falls due to a history of cerebrovascular accident, debilitation, weakness, impaired balance, unsteady gait, and use of psychotropic 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 · D2025-07-28 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's responsible party was notified of a new order for a therapy evaluation. This affected one (#97) of one residents reviewed for a change in condition. The facility census was 89. Review of the medical record of Resident #97 revealed an admission date of 10/15/21. The resident discharged from the facility on 07/15/25. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, morbid obesity, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting left-non-dominant side, hyperlipidemia, atrial fibrillation, depression, dementia, anxiety, legal blindness, mood disorder, insomnia, and dysphagia. Review of the quarterly minimum data set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had moderately impaired cognition. Review of the medical record revealed an order dated 04/15/25 for the resident to have a physical therapy and occupational therapy evaluation and treatment. The order was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-28 · tag F0636 — isolatedAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure admission comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were completed within the required timeframes. This affected two (#03 and #37) of three residents reviewed for resident assessment. The facility census was 89. 1. Review of the medical record of Resident #37 revealed an admission date of 12/24/24. The resident transferred to the hospital on [DATE] and returned to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and dementia. Review of the medicare 5-day MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had severely impaired cognition. Further review of completed MDS assessments revealed the resident's admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] was not completed until 01/10/25. The resident's discharge MDS assessment dated [DATE] was not completed until 02/10/25. The resident's entry MDS assessment dated [DATE] was not completed until 02/10/25. Interview on 07/24/25 at 1:13 P.M., Licensed Practical Nurse…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-28 · tag F0640 — isolatedEncode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure entry and discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were completed in a timely manner. This affected two (#37 and #40) of three residents reviewed for resident assessment. The facility census was 89.Findings Include:1. Review of the medical record of Resident #37 revealed an admission date of 12/24/24. The resident transferred to the hospital on [DATE] and returned to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and dementia. Review of the Medicare 5-day MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had severely impaired cognition. Further review of completed MDS assessments revealed the resident's discharge MDS assessment dated [DATE] was not completed until 02/10/25. The resident's entry MDS assessment dated [DATE] was not completed until 02/10/25. Interview on 07/24/25 at 1:13 P.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #144 verified Resident #37's discharge MDS assessment dated [DATE] and entry MDS…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-28 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews , medical record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure fall interventions were in place for one, (Resident #76) of one reviewed for falls. The facility census was 89. Review of the medical record for Resident #76 revealed an admission date of 06/08/23. The record revealed the resident had severe cognitive deficits. Resident #76's diagnoses included dementia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart disease, anemia, depression, and chronic kidney disease. The resident was documented to require one-to-two-person assistance with activities of daily living and ambulation, and the resident had a history of falls.Review of Resident #76's nurse progress notes revealed on 05/29/25 the nurse was called by certified nursing assistant (CNA) at 12:40 P.M. to report he had seen Resident #76 on the floor in bedroom. The nurse went in immediately and found the resident lying on the floor in front of the closet in the bedroom. When the staff asked Resident #76 what happened, the resident told the nurse he fell. Resident #76 was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-28 · tag F0826 — isolatedProvide specialized rehabilitative services by qualified personnel, when ordered for a resident by a doctor.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, resident interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to timely provide a physical therapy evaluation. This affected one (#04) of two residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 89. Findings include:Review of the medical record of Resident #04 revealed an admission date of 01/30/23. Diagnoses included metabolic encephalopathy, parkinsonism, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar disorder, and hypertension. Review of the quarterly minimum data set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had intact cognition. The resident was assessed as exhibiting delusions, verbal behavioral symptoms directed towards others during the assessment period. The resident utilized a walker and wheelchair for mobility. The resident required setup/clean-up assistance with eating, partial/moderate assistance for dressing, substantial/maximal assistance for toileting, bed mobility, and transfers, and was dependent for bathing. Review of a self-reported incident (SRI) dated 05/27/25…
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 before2025-07-28 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation , interview and facility policy review the facility failed to follow proper infection control policies when an outbreak of a contagious skin infection occurred in the facility. This affected two residents (#46 and #87) out of 13 residents who resided in the three hundred unit. The facility also failed to follow appropriate infection control practices by not performing proper hand hygiene after performing catheter care for one resident (#6) . The census was 89. 1.Review of the medical record for Resident #87 revealed an admission date of 04/23/24 with a brief interview of mental status (BIMS) score of 99 indicating severe cognitive deficits. Diagnoses included cerebral infarction, malignant neoplasm, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, anxiety, hyperlipidemia , dementia, gastro esophageal reflux disease (GERD) and hypertension. The resident was independent with ambulation and wanders throughout the facility. Review of Resident #87's physician orders revealed a rash appeared on his body around…
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 before2024-10-10 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, record review, review of the facility's Self-Reported Incidents and investigations, and policy review, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate and obtain statements from staff for an injury of unknown origin for Resident #50 and Resident #101. This affected two (Resident #50 and #101) of three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 85. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #50 revealed an admission date of 05/27/21 with diagnoses including aphasia, disorder of bone density and structure, generalized osteoarthritis, Alzheimer's disease, osteoarthritis, presence of right artificial hip, and age related osteoporosis. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #50 was rarely or never understood and does not use and mobility devices. Review of the progress note dated 09/27/24 at 8:32 A.M. revealed Resident #50 was experiencing pain in lower extremities. Nurse Practitioner notified and ordered bilateral x-rays of hips…
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 25 citations
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-03-13 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of monthly infection control surveillance logs, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to to maintain a complete and accurate tracking system for all infections. This had the potential to affect all 86 residents residing in the facility. The census was 86. Findings Include: Review of the facility infection control monthly surveillance log on 03/13/24 revealed the facility failed to document the results of cultures for residents with suspected or actual infections from May 2023 through February 2024. On 03/13/24 at 10:20 A.M., interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) and the Regional Nurse #200 verified the infection control log was not tracking the bacteria being treated for community acquired and facility acquired infections. Review of the facility policy titled, Infection Surveillance, last revised 11/28/17, revealed data to be used in the surveillance activities may include but are not limited to 24-hour shift reports, laboratory (lab) reports, antibiograms obtained from lab, antibiotic use reports from pharmacy, and documentation of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-13 · 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 medical record review, review of investigations, review of self-reported incidents, staff interview, and review of a facility policy, the facility failed to timely report an injury of unknown origin to the State Survey Agency. This affected one (#6) of one residents reviewed for skin conditions. The facility census was 86. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #6 revealed an admission date of 01/16/23 with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease, depression, gastroesophageal reflux disease, and senile degeneration of the brain. Review of Resident #6's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was rarely or never understood. Review of Resident #6's progress notes dated 10/01/23 through 10/19/23 revealed no concerns related to a fall or injury. Review of Resident #6's progress note dated 10/21/23 at 12:16 P.M. revealed Resident #6 was noted to have edema to the left elbow. Hospice was updated and they advised the facility to monitor for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-13 · 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 medical record review, review of investigations, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate an injury of unknown origin. This affected one (#6) of one resident reviewed for skin conditions. The facility census was 86. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #6 revealed an admission date of 01/16/23 with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease, depression, gastro-esophageal reflux disease, and senile degeneration of the brain. Review of Resident #6's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was rarely or never understood. Review of Resident #6's progress notes dated 10/01/23 through 10/19/23 revealed no concerns related to a fall or injury. Review of Resident #6's progress note dated 10/21/23 at 12:16 P.M. revealed Resident #6 was noted to have edema to the left elbow. Hospice was updated and they advised the facility to monitor for changes. Review of Resident #6's incident investigation dated 10/21/23…
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 · D2024-03-13 · 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, medical record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure adequate nail care was provided for dependent residents. This affected two (#22 and #42) of seven residents reviewed for activities of daily living. The facility census was 86. Findings Include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #22 revealed an initial admission date of 06/01/19 with the latest readmission date of 12/02/22. Diagnoses included acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, cerebrovascular accident (CVA) with right sided hemiplegia, aphasia, hypothyroidism, hypertension, gastro-esophageal reflux disease, anemia, and anxiety disorder. Review of the plan of care dated 06/02/19 revealed Resident #22 required assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs) and may be at risk for developing complications associated with decreased ADL self-performance and indicated the resident used an electric wheelchair. Interventions included the resident wore incontinence briefs, required assistance…
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 · D2024-03-13 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolatedProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, review of activity calendars, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure activities were offered to residents throughout the week based on assessment, care plan, and resident preference to promote resident well-being. This affected two (#6 and #55) of two residents reviewed for activities. The facility census was 86. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #6 revealed an admission date of 01/16/23 with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease, depression, gastro-esophageal reflux disease, and senile degeneration of the brain. Review of Resident #6's activity assessment dated [DATE] revealed she preferred activities in a one-on-one setting. Resident #6's preferred activities included watching television and listening to music or the radio. The assessment did not indicate what type of music or television she preferred. Review of Resident #6's comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 dated 10/18/23 revealed the resident was rarely or never…
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 before2024-03-13 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure fall interventions were in place and resident transfers were performed in a manner to prevent falls. This affected two (#12 and #50) of seven residents reviewed for falls. The census was 86. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #50 revealed an admission date of 05/02/23 with diagnoses including type two diabetes mellitus, Parkinsonism, anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, and combined systolic and diastolic heart failure. Review of Resident #50's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #50 had severely impaired cognition. Review of Resident #50's plan of care dated 05/11/23 revealed the resident was at risk for falls due to debilitation, weakness, disease process, and use of psychotropic medications. Interventions included encouraging and reminding the resident to ask for assistance, ensuring the call light was within reach, keeping commonly used…
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 · D2024-03-13 · 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 observation, medical record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure adequate fluids were available and provided throughout the day to promote hydration. This affected one (#6) of seven residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility census was 86. Findings Include: Review of the medical record for Resident #6 revealed an admission date of 01/16/23 with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease, depression, gastro-esophageal reflux disease, and senile degeneration of the brain. Review of Resident #6's nutrition assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident required 2190 milliliters (ml) of fluid a day. Review of Resident #6's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was rarely or never understood. The resident was on a mechanically altered and therapeutic diet. Review of Resident #6's fluid intake from 02/12/24 to 03/10/24 revealed fluid intake was only documented on six days. Fluid intake included 120 ml on 02/12/24, 360 ml on 02/13/24, 240 ml on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-13 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, medical record review, staff interview, and review of a facility policy, the facility failed to administer supplemental oxygen as ordered. This affected one (#339) of one residents reviewed for oxygen administration. The facility census was 86. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #339 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including emphysema, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and fracture of lumbosacral spine and pelvis. Review of the care plan dated 03/08/24 revealed Resident #339 had a history of respiratory deficiencies and staff interventions include administering oxygen as ordered. Review of current physician orders for Resident #339 revealed an order for continuous oxygen at three liters per nasal cannula with a start date of 03/08/24. Observation on 03/11/24 at 1:34 P.M., on 03/12/24 at 9:36 A.M., and on 03/12/24 at 11:41 A.M. revealed Resident #339 was observed wearing supplemental oxygen set at 4.5 liters via nasal cannula.…
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 · D2024-03-13 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure dialysis services were completed thoroughly including obtaining resident weights before and after dialysis services. This affected one (#8) of one residents reviewed for dialysis. The census was 86. Findings Include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #8 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, type II diabetes, unspecified hemorrhoids, lack of coordination, weakness, dysphagia, end stage renal disease, atrial fibrillation, and dependence on renal dialysis. Review of Resident #8's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 01/11/24, revealed the resident was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #8's current physician orders revealed the resident had scheduled dialysis services three days a week, on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. Review of Resident #8 dialysis notes, dated 12/01/23 to 03/11/24, revealed there were no…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-13 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure adequate monitoring was completed for a medication as ordered. This affected one (#35) of six residents reviewed for medications. The facility census was 86. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #35 revealed an admission date of 09/14/22 with diagnoses including cerebral infarction, hemiplegia and hemiparesis affecting an unspecified side, atherosclerotic heart disease, and vascular dementia. Review of Resident #35's plan of care dated 09/26/22 revealed the resident had altered health maintenance related diagnoses including hypertension and coronary artery disease. Interventions included administering medications as ordered, monitoring for signs of cardiac distress, monitoring for signs of infection, and monitoring for signs of bleeding. Review of Resident #35's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #35 had impaired cognition. Review of Resident #35's physician order…
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 · D2024-03-13 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to identify and monitor target behaviors for the use of psychotropic medications. This affected one (#73) of six residents reviewed for medications. The facility census was 86. Findings Include: Review of Resident #73's plan of care dated 11/07/22 revealed the resident had trauma related to unwanted sexual contact. Resident #73 had triggers of hearing other people screaming at each other/other people becoming physical with each other. Interventions included consistent staff members, consult with psychiatry/psychology, and include the resident in decision making process. Review of the plan of care dated 02/08/22 revealed Resident #73 was at risk for adverse effects related to psychoactive medication use, dementia with behaviors, depression, and mood disorder. Interventions included give medications as ordered, laboratory values per order, update the physician as indicated, monitor for medication side effects, monitor…
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 · D2024-03-13 · tag F0773 — isolatedProvide or obtain laboratory tests/services when ordered and promptly tell the ordering practitioner of the results.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, review of an email correspondence document, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to timely complete an order for laboratory values and failed to notify the physician of abnormal laboratory results. This affected one (#78) of two residents reviewed for infections. The facility census was 86. Findings include: Review of Resident #78's medical record revealed an admission date of 01/01/24. Diagnoses included type two diabetes mellitus, chronic heart failure, and stroke. Review of the Minimum Data Set assessment completed on 03/05/24 revealed Resident #78 was severely cognitively impaired and was dependent on personal care. Review of Resident #78's medication administration record for Resident #78 revealed an entry dated 01/14/24 at 6:00 A.M. for collection of a urine analysis with a refusal documented. Review of an order audit report for Resident #78 dated 01/17/24 at 4:25 P.M. revealed an order summary to obtain urine for analysis. Review of an order audit report…
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 · D2024-03-13 · tag F0808 — failed to follow doctor-ordered diets — isolatedEnsure therapeutic diets are prescribed by the attending physician and may be delegated to a registered or licensed dietitian, to the extent allowed by State law.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, medical record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to serve residents therapeutic diets as ordered. This affected one (#42) of seven residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility census was 86. Findings Include: Review of the medical record for Resident #42 revealed an initial admission date of 01/12/24 with diagnoses including senile degeneration of the brain, diabetes mellitus, obstructive sleep apnea, chronic kidney disease, anemia, hyperlipidemia, atrial fibrillation, hypertension, benign prostatic hyperplasia, and altered mental status. Review of the admission assessment and baseline care plan dated 01/12/24 revealed Resident #42's admission weight was 193.4 pounds. The assessment indicated the resident was alert and confused. The assessment indicated the resident was edentulous and was dependent on staff for eating. Review of the significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #42 had a severe cognitive deficit. Review of the plan of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-13 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — isolatedMake 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 and sanitary environment. This affected two (#6 and #42) of five residents reviewed for environment. The facility census was 86. Findings include: 1. Observation on 03/10/24 at 10:33 A.M., 11:40 A.M., and 12:33 P.M., and on 03/11/24 at 12:15 P.M. revealed Resident #6 was in her bed which was observed against the wall. Further observation revealed the wall surface from the middle to the head of the Resident #6's bed had brown and red splatters of an unidentifiable substance, and in some areas, the splatters appeared to be dripping down behind the bed. Interview on 03/11/24 at 12:15 P.M. with State Tested Nurse Aide (STNA) #145 verified the brown and red splatter on the wall in Resident #6's room. STNA #145 indicated the wall needed to be cleaned.2. On 03/11/24 at 8:53 A.M., observation of Resident #42's room revealed the room had a strong odor of urine. Further observation revealed there was urine under the fall mattress on the floor and under the resident's bed. Interview with Licensed Practical Nurse…
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 · D2024-03-13 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — isolatedMake sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
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, review of facility pest control records, resident family and staff interview, and review of the facility pest control policy, the facility failed to maintain a pest free environment. This affected one (#13) of 24 resident's rooms observed. The census was 86. Findings Include: Review of Resident #13's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included chronic respiratory failure, emphysema, type II diabetes, unspecified protein-calorie malnutrition, complete traumatic amputation of one lesser toe, muscle weakness, dysphagia, bipolar disorder, and congestive heart failure. Review of Resident #13's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 02/20/24, revealed the resident had a mild cognitive impairment. Interview with Resident #13's family member on 03/10/24 at 2:05 P.M. stated there were ants that crawled all over Resident #13's sink. Resident #13's family member stated the facility was aware of it, but she was not certain…
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 · D2023-10-14 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, resident record review, video and audio footage review, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure a resident was not verbally abused by staff. This affected one resident (#65) of three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 87. Findings included: Review of Resident #65's medical record revealed an admission date of 10/15/21 with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, morbid obesity due to excess calories, essential hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and hemiplegia and hemiparesis following a cerebral infarction affecting the left non-dominant side. Review of Resident #65's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 09/01/23, revealed the resident was cognitively impaired. The resident was totally dependent on two people for bed mobility, transfers, and toileting. The assessment revealed the resident did not exhibit physical behaviors, verbal behaviors, or other symptoms not directed towards others. Review of Resident #65's plan of care, dated 03/14/23, revealed she had a history or diagnosis of depression and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2021-08-31 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure food was prepared and served in a sanitary manner. This had the potential to affect all 80 residents who received food from the kitchen. Findings Include: 1. Observation of dining in the locked dementia unit on 08/23/21 at 12:27 P.M. during the lunch meal revealed Activities Aide (AA) #101 washed her hands at the sink and donned clean gloves. AA #101 was observed touching the handle of the serving cart with her gloved hands to wheel the resident's food around to the tables and serve the residents. AA #101 was observed serving ravioli to each resident and then reached into a plastic bag of dinner rolls and removed one roll for each resident and placed it on each resident's place without changing her gloves or washing her hands after touching the serving cart. There were 16 residents eating in the dining room and each was served a roll. After serving all the residents, AA #101 removed her gloves and washed her hands at the sink. Interview on 08/23/21 at 1:05 P.M. with AA #101 confirmed…
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 before2021-08-31 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interviews, record review, review of the Center for Disease Control (CDC) guidelines and COVID-19 Nursing Home data, and facility policy review, the facility failed to follow infection control protocols when they did not maintain transmission-based precautions (TBP) for two residents (Residents #334 and #337), failed to use appropriate signs to inform visitors and staff of isolation precautions for one resident (Resident #39), and failed to ensure staff were wearing appropriate eye protection while administering medications. This affected four residents (#12, #39, #334, and #337) reviewed for infection control. The facility census was 80. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #334 revealed an admission date of 08/21/21 with diagnoses including malignant neoplasm of stomach and major depressive disorder. Review of the admission assessment and baseline care plan, dated 08/21/21, revealed the resident was on droplet precautions. Review of the physician's orders,…
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 · D2021-08-31 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide a bed hold notification to a resident who was discharged to the hospital. This affected one (Resident #84) of two residents reviewed for hospitalization. The facility census was 80. Findings include: Review of Resident #84's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included end stage renal disease. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 05/18/21, revealed the resident was cognitively intact. Review of the progress notes revealed Resident #84 was discharged from the facility on 06/02/21. The progress notes stated the wound on her left foot was not healing as the nurse practitioner wanted, so the order was made to send Resident #84 to the hospital for assessment/treatment after she was done with dialysis. There was no documentation in the resident's medical record the facility provided a bed hold notification to the resident or her family at 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 · D2021-08-31 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
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, resident and staff interview, and record review, the facility failed to apply a physician ordered palm guard device for Resident #55. This affected one resident (#55) of one resident reviewed for range of motion. The facility identified 22 residents with contractures. The facility census was 80. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #55 revealed he was admitted on [DATE]. Diagnoses included a history cerebral infarction (stroke) and hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebrovascular disease affecting right dominant side. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 08/06/21, revealed the resident had impaired cognition. The resident required supervision assistance for bed mobility, and limited assistance of one staff for dressing. Review of the physician orders, dated 10/14/19, revealed an order to apply a palm guard to the right hand in the afternoon as tolerated, remove for skin care and hygiene. The orders stated Resident #55 was to wear 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 · D2021-08-31 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of the facility's policy, staff interview and record review, the facility failed to administer a physician ordered medication for Resident #12. This affected one (Resident #12) of six residents reviewed for physician ordered medications. The facility census was 80. Findings include: Review of Resident #12's medical record revealed the resident had a readmission date on 01/06/21. Diagnoses included hypothyroidism. Review of the significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 05/24/21, revealed Resident #12 had severely impaired cognition. Review of the physician's orders, dated 01/06/21, revealed Resident #12 had an order for Levothyroxine Sodium (Synthroid) Tablet 25 micrograms (mcg.) orally daily for hypothyroidism. The resident did not have a routine physician order for the thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) lab draw. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for March 2021 revealed Levothyroxine Sodium Tablet 25 mcg was scheduled for administration at 5:00 A.M. Resident #12 did not receive the medication on 03/02/21, 03/04/21, 03/05/21,…
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 · D2021-08-31 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the facility's policy, observation, staff interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure their medication error rate was less than five percent. There were 26 medications administered with four errors made, resulting in a medication error rate of 14.8%. This affected three residents (Residents #22, #33, and #44) of four residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 80. Findings include: Observation of medication administration on 08/25/21 and 08/26/21 for four residents (#19, #22, #33, and #44) by three nurses revealed 26 medications to be administered and four errors to be made, resulting in a medication error rate of 14.8%. 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #44 revealed the resident to be admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses include diabetes, schizophrenia, bipolar and hypertension. Review of the physician orders, dated 11/11/20, revealed an order for insulin isophane and regular suspension pen injector (70-30) 100 unit per…
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 · D2021-08-31 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from significant medication errors when one resident (#44) was administered the wrong doses of insulin. This affected one resident (#44) of four residents observed for medication administration. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #44 revealed the resident to be admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses include diabetes, schizophrenia, bipolar and hypertension. Review of the physician orders, dated 11/11/20, revealed an order for insulin isophane and regular suspension pen injector (70-30) 100 unit per milliliter (ml) (long acting insulin), inject 14 units subcutaneously two times per day. The physician order, dated 06/09/21, revealed orders for Novolog solution 100 units per ml (short acting insulin), inject subcutaneously before meals for type two diabetes, per sliding scale: if 151-200 = two; 201-250 = four; 251-300 = six; 301-350 = eight; 351-400 =…
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 · D2021-08-31 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolatedEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of resident diets, review of dietary spreadsheets, observation, and staff interview, the facility failed to follow the dietary spreadsheet for residents on a pureed diet. This affected four (Residents #1, #7, #40, and #47) of four residents who were prescribed a pureed diet. The facility census was 80. Findings Include: Review of the Diet Type Report, dated 08/23/21, revealed Residents #1, #7, #40, and #47 were prescribed a pureed diet. Review of the dietary spreadsheet for the lunch meal on 08/25/21 revealed residents on a pureed diet were to receive eight ounces of pureed tortilla casserole, one pureed corn shape, six ounces of tomato juice, two ounces of pureed cornmeal muffin, 2.67 ounce of pureed snickerdoodle cookie, four ounces of milk, eight ounces of water, one packet of margarine, and two tablespoons of sour cream. Observation on 08/25/21 from 12:00 P.M. to 12:45 P.M. of preparation for the lunch meal showed the kitchen staff provided two ounces of salsa in small plastic container cups with lids on every resident's lunch tray. None of the plastic cups…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · C2025-07-28 · tag F0577 — widespreadAllow residents to easily view the nursing home's survey results and communicate with advocate agencies.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure State Agency survey results were maintained, updated, and available for viewing. This had the potential to affect all 89 residents in the facility. Findings include:Observation on 07/24/25 at 2:45 P.M. revealed the survey results binder, located at the front of the building, next to the Administrator's office, revealed the most recent survey results were dated 04/20/24.Review of Enhanced Information Dissemination Collection (EIDC) revealed the facility had surveys completed on 07/31/24 and 10/10/24. Interview on 07/24/25 at 2:48 P.M., the Administrator verified survey results dated 07/31/24 and 10/10/24 were not contained in the survey results binder. The Administrator verified survey results should be placed in the survey results binder following each survey.
“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 FOUNDATIONS HEALTH SOLUTIONS — 64 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 | 4 of 5 | 4.1 | ≈ chain avg |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 3.9 | -0.9 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.3 | -0.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.3 | +0.7 vs chain |
The other 63 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.1★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 63; lowest-rated first.
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 | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| COLLERAN, BRIAN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2019 |
| KRYSTOWSKI, JOHN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/01/2018 |
| FOUNDATIONS HEALTH SOLUTIONS, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2019 |
| HIRSEL, VICTORIA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/04/2024 |
| RATNARAJAH, GOKULAN | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/29/2001 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 12 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
1 organizational owner 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 $1.5M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 17% 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.
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 365929. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-28, 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.