New Albany Care Center

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

66.7% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 343 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 89.0% 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 91 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 0.53 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 84% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 12% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 67 beds and averages 60.0 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 7 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.01 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.92 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.16 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 3.38 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.26 on weekdays — 21% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.05 to 0.57 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 unchanged from the previous inspection. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

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.

32 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 20 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · Gcited before2024-12-17 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on closed medical record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide timely, adequate and necessary care, monitoring and treatment for Resident #62 who exhibited an acute change in condition. Actual harm occurred on 12/10/24 when Resident #62, who had an order for continuous use of oxygen, was noted to have an acute change in condition (decreased oxygen saturation levels and increased confusion) throughout the night that was not timely monitored or treated. In addition, there was no evidence the change in condition was reported timely to the physician. Per a facility fall investigation, on 12/10/24 at 5:45 A.M. the resident sustained an unwitnessed fall out of bed with low documented oxygen saturation levels. The resident was subsequently transported to the emergency room with a critically low oxygen saturation level of 64%. This affected one resident (#62) of three residents reviewed for change in condition. The census was 57. Findings Include: Review of Resident…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Actual harm · Gcited before2024-11-20 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, facility investigation review, staff interview, and review of the facility fall management guide the facility failed to ensure Resident #25 was provided adequate assistance and supervision during the provision of personal care to prevent a fall with injury. Actual harm occurred on 10/23/24 when Resident #25, who had cognitive impairment and required staff assistance for personal care including toileting sustained a fall in the bathroom after being left on the toilet unattended. The resident was assessed to have a laceration to the head (as a result of the fall) and was transported to the hospital where she was admitted and received 15 sutures to the area. The resident was hospitalized from [DATE] until 10/28/24. This affected one resident (#25) of three residents reviewed for accidents. The census was 59. Findings Include: Record review revealed Resident #25 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including laceration to scalp, muscle weakness, hyperlipidemia,…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2025-02-06 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to properly store and date food items in the kitchen. This had the potential to affect 60 of 61 residents who resided in the facility who received foods prepared in the facility kitchen. The facility identified (Resident #45) who had an ordered was ordered a nothing by mouth diet. Findings include: Observation on 02/03/25 at 11:38 A.M. revealed there was an opened undated package of cherry gelatin powder wrapped in clear cellophane and placed in a plastic bag in the dry storage area. Observation on 02/03/25 at 11:44 A.M. revealed the following items were being stored in the refrigerator: a large metal tray of cooked roast beef uncovered and exposed to the air, a large metal tray of chicken with another metal tray that did not fully cover the kitchen and left it exposed to the air, a plastic bucket of scrambled eggs uncovered and exposed to the air. Observation on 02/03/25 at 11:52 A.M. revealed there was a large bag of opened undated onion rings in the freezer. Interview on 02/03/25 at…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-02-06 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolated
  Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on medical record review, resident interview, staff interview and review of the facility the facility failed to arrange transportation for scheduled medical appointments. This affected one (Resident #112) of 25 sampled residents. The facility census was 61 residents. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #112 revealed an admission date of 01/27/25 with diagnoses including cerebral infarction, atrial fibrillation, chronic kidney disease stage four, type two diabetes mellitus, morbid obesity, hypertension, and depression. Review of the after-visit summary for Resident #112 dated 01/27/25 revealed discharge instructions that included a scheduled appointment at the wound care center on 01/28/25 at 8:00 A.M. Interview on 02/06/25 at 9:42 A.M. with Resident #112 confirmed he was upset he missed his follow up appointment with the wound care center scheduled for 01/28/25 because the facility did not provide him with transportation to the appointment. Interview on 02/06/25 at 10:50 A.M. with the Administrator confirmed the facility had a transport van and a driver…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-02-06 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to manage his or her financial affairs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on review of resident funds accounts, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to obtain written authorizations to manage resident funds accounts. (Residents #123 and #124). This affected two (Residents #123 and #124) of five residents reviewed for resident funds accounts. The facility census was 61 residents. Findings include: Review of the banking records dated 02/06/25 revealed Resident #123 had a balance of $50.04 and Resident #124 had a balance of $67.03 in the resident trust accounts. Further review of the banking records for Resident #123 and #124 revealed they did not include written authorizations for the facility to manage the residents' funds. Interview on 02/06/24 at 5:15 P.M. with the Administrator confirmed the facility had not obtained written authorizations to manage resident fund accounts for Resident #123 or Resident #124. Review of the facility policy titled Resident Trust Account-Personal Needs Allowance dated 06/28/21 revealed the facility staff would ensure all resident fund accounts would have a written authorization 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-02-06 · tag F0569 — isolated
  Notify 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

  Based on review of resident funds accounts, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to provide written notification for the need to spend down resident funds to residents and/or resident representatives. This affected one (Resident #22) of five residents reviewed for resident fund accounts. The facility census was 61 residents. Findings include: Review of the banking records dated 02/06/25 revealed Resident #22 had a balance of $2,482.60 in the resident fund account. Further review of the account for Resident #22 revealed there was no notification to the resident and/or resident's representative the account balance had exceeded the asset limit set by Medicaid. Interview on 02/06/25 at 5:15 P.M. with the Administrator confirmed the asset limit for Medicaid recipients was $2000 and residents and/or resident representatives should be notified in writing when the balance in the resident fund account was within $200 of the asset limit. The Administrator further confirmed the facility had not notified Resident #22 of the need to spend down the resident fund…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-06 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide 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, observation, resident interview, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to provide assistance with bathing and shaving to dependent residents. This affected one (Resident #2) of 41 facility-identified residents (#2, #4, #6, #11, #14, #20, #21, #22, #23, #24, #26, #27, #28, #29, #31, #32, #33, #34, #36, #41, #42, #43, #44, #45, #47, #48, #50, #53, #57, #61, #112, #114, #116, #119, #161, #165, #168, #170, #171, #174, #175) who required assistance with shaving. The facility census was 61 residents. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #2 revealed an admission date of 11/25/15 with diagnoses including acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, acute kidney failure, chronic diastolic heart failure, hypertension, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic pain syndrome, insomnia, polyosteoarthritis and major depressive disorder. Review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #2 dated 11/11/24 revealed the resident had moderate cognitive impairment and required partial/moderate staff…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-02-06 · tag F0685 — isolated
  Assist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on medical record review, observation, resident interview, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility staff failed to ensure residents received the proper treatment and assistive devices to maintain hearing. This affected two (Residents #15 and #48) of two residents reviewed for hearing. The facility census was 61 residents. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #15 revealed an admission date of 12/19/23 with diagnoses including depression, endometrial hyperplasia, anxiety disorder, dysphagia, anemia, pulmonary embolism, type two diabetes mellitus, disorders of the pituitary gland, and unspecified hearing loss. Observation on 02/03/25 at 12:57 P.M. revealed Resident #15 was unable to adequately hear conversations unless parties who were speaking spoke close to her ears. Interview on 02/03/25 at 12:57 P.M. with Resident #15 confirmed her hearing aids had been lost from her bedside table approximately two years ago. The facility staff was notified, but the hearing aids were never found. Observation on 02/03/25 at 1:26 P.M. revealed…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-02-06 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, resident representative interview, resident interview, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to pressure ulcer interventions were implmented for residents with pressure ulcers. This affected one (Residents #25 ) of five residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility census was 61 residents. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #25 revealed an initial admission date on 01/03/25 and a readmission date on 02/02/25 with diagnoses including type two diabetes mellitus without complications, acute on chronic diastolic (congestive) heart failure, neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder, and morbid obesity. Resident #25 was hospitalized from [DATE] to 02/02/25. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #25 dated 01/10/25 revealed the resident had intact cognition, required staff assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs), and had no pressure ulcers. Review of the care plan for Resident #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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-02-06 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide 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 medical record review, observation, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure oxygen was administered according to physician orders. This affected one resident (Resident #45) of two residents reviewed for oxygen administration. The facility identified 13 residents (#2, #28, #34, #41, #44, #45, #121, #122, #162, #165, #170, #173, #174) who were receiving oxygen. The facility census was 61 residents. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #45 revealed an admission date of 2/6/24 with diagnoses including chronic idiopathic constipation, hypertension, type two diabetes mellitus, dementia, osteomyelitis, occlusion and stenosis of bilateral carotid arteries, and respiratory failure. Review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #45 dated 01/20/25 revealed the resident was severely cognitively impaired and received oxygen therapy. Review of physician's orders for Resident #45 revealed an order dated 01/31/24 for humidified oxygen via nasal cannula at three liters per minute (LPM). Review of the care plan for Resident #45 dated 09/13/24…

  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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-02-06 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
  Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on medical records review staff interview the facility failed to respond in a timely manner to consultant pharmacist recommendations. This affected one (Resident #42) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 61 residents. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #42 revealed an admission date of 12/09/22 with diagnoses including paraplegia, congestive heart failure, type two diabetes mellitus, hypothyroidism, bipolar disorder, depression, and sleep apnea. Review of the drug regimen review per the consultant pharmacist for Resident #42 dated 12/19/24 revealed a recommendation to reduce the anticoagulant, Eliquis, for the resident from 5 milligrams (mg) two times a day to 2.5 mg two times a day. The recommendation was not addressed until 02/06/25. Interview on 02/06/25 at 1:22 P.M. with the Regional Clinical Services Director (RCSD) confirmed that the facility missed the recommendation in December 2024 and had not addressed the recommendation for Resident #42 with the nurse practitioner until 02/06/25.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-02-06 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolated
  Ensure 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 medical record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility staff failed to ensure residents were free from significant medication errors. This affected one (Residents #48) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 61 residents. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #10 revealed an admission date on 11/18/24 with diagnoses including type two diabetes mellitus, diastolic (congestive) heart failure, chronic kidney disease stage three, anxiety disorder, and essential primary hypertension. Resident #10 was discharged [DATE] and readmitted [DATE]. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #10 dated 11/25/24 revealed the resident had intact cognition and required staff assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs). Review of the physician's orders for Resident #10 revealed an order dated 11/19/24 for clonidine 0.1 milligrams (mg) one tablet by mouth daily for a systolic blood pressure greater than…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Fines & penalties

$12,149 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $12,149 — penalty dated 2024-12-17

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to OPTALIS HEALTH & REHABILITATION — 36 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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 30 rows in the source record cover these 20 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

This home reported $535K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 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