Scioto Pointe
740 Canonby Place, Columbus, OH 43223 · For profit - Corporation · 99 certified beds · (614) 224-5738 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (20% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has citations for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0567, F0569)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (43) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 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, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 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 held steady at 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 | 7.1% | 5.3% | 15.4% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.9% | 6.2% | 5.4% | typical |
| 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 | 0.8% | 0.4% | 2.0% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 1.7% | 30.1% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 1.6% | 0.1% | 0.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 3.1% | 3.2% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 7.8% | 6.1% | 16.1% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 34.2% | 25.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 94.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 1.0% | 3.4% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 10.3% | 21.4% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 25.0% | 8.8% | 17.1% | worse |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.18 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 17% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 3% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | not reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 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 next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — Newly certified nursing home with less than 12-15 months of data available or the nursing home opened less than 6 months ago, and there were no data to submit or claims for this measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 99 beds and averages 96.1 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 3 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. 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 2.84 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.84 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.54 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.49 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 2.98 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.92 to 0.66 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 20% is below the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
43 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 33 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-15 · tag F0563 — failed to protect the right to visitors — isolatedHonor the resident's right to receive visitors of his or her choosing, at the time of his or her choosing.
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, interviews and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure visitation rights for Resident #33 were honored. This affected one of three residents reviewed for visitations. The facility census was 96.Findings include: Review of Resident #33's record revealed an admission date of 04/28/20 with diagnoses that included but were not limited to schizoaffective disorder, cerebral infarction and Parkinson's disease Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12. The resident was assessed to require supervision assistance from staff with toileting, transfers and personal hygiene. Review of Progress notes revealed an activity preference note dated 03/26/26 stating resident enjoys visits form her family and going on outside family visits. Interview with Resident #33 on 06/10/26 at 2:30 P.M. revealed she enjoyed it when her sister visited and wanted her to visit. Interview on 06/10/26 at 2:50 P.M.…
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 beforedisputed · IDR2026-06-15 · 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
Based on observation, interviews and facility policy review, the facility failed to maintain an environment free from pests. This affected five (Residents # 77, # 82, # 83, # 89 and # 90) of 22 residents residing on the 400 hall. The facility census was 96.Findings include:Observation of resident rooms on 06/10/26 from 9:00 A.M. to 10:00 A.M. revealed live cockroaches in Residents # 77, # 82, # 83, # 89 and # 90's bathrooms. Interviews during room observations on 06/10/26 from 9:00 A.M. to 10:00 A.M. with Maintenance Director # 423 and Housekeeping Director # 515 confirmed live cockroaches in the residents' rooms.Review of pest control service reports for May 2026 to June 2026 revealed no resident rooms on the 400 hall were treated for cockroaches. Review of facility policy titled Pest Control last revised May 2008 revealed the facility shall maintain an effective pest control program and the facility shall maintains an ongoing pest control program to continuously eliminate any insects and rodents. This deficiency represents non-compliance investigated under Complaint Number 3039203…
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 before2026-04-02 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, review of infection control log, review of personnel files, review of tuberculosis (TB) risk assessment and review of facility policy the facility failed to ensure comprehensive surveillance of facility infections and failed to ensure staff had completed initial and annual TB screening. This affected 12 of 12 residents (#6, #18, #20, #24, #27, #37, #38, #44, #48, #54, #61, #96) reviewed on the infection control log for the months of February 2026 and March 2026. This had the potential to affect 95 residents of 95 residents residing in the facility.Findings include:1.Review of the infection control log for January 2026, February 2026, and March 2026 revealed it did not contain sufficient information. The log indicated the resident name, the room number, the date, the type of infection, the antibiotic, and whether or not the infection was facility acquired. The log did not indicate the type of bacteria, whether symptoms were present, or whether or not infections met McGeer's Criteria.…
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 before2026-04-02 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — widespreadMake 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
Based on observation, interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure the common areas, resident rooms, and kitchen were free from pests. This had the potential to affect all 95 residents residing in the facility. Facility census was 95. 1.Observation on 03/30/26 at 10:10 A.M. of live cockroaches in Resident #24's room. Upon opening the bathroom door observation of live cockroaches on toilet seat. Interview on 03/30/26 at 10:10 A.M. with Resident #24 revealed she sees them all the time, she has seen them on her bed and crawling from under her bed. Observation on 03/30/26 at 10:45 A.M. of live cockroaches in Resident #12's room. Upon entering resident #12's room a live cockroach was observed crawling across the floor. Interview on 03/30/26 at 10:45 A.M. with Resident #12 revealed he sees them all the time. He stated they spray and try to get rid of them. Interview on 03/30/26 at 10:46 A.M. with LPN #102 verified the live cockroaches and stated the facility has had an ongoing issue but it is difficult to get rid of them. Interview on 03/30/26 at 11:00 A.M.…
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 before2026-04-02 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and review of facility policy the facility failed to maintain a clean, sanitary and pest free living environment for the residents. This affected six residents (Resident #9, #12, #18, #22, #24, and #84) of 95 residents reviewed for environment. The facility census was 95. Findings include:Findings include:Observation 03/30/26 at 9:16 A.M. of Resident #22's room revealed several holes on the top of the mattress and one bigger hole on the side of the mattress facing the doorway. The bathroom vanity was observed with rotted wood at the bottom. Observation on 03/30/26 at 10:10 A.M. of Resident #18's room revealed the floor was very dirty, his bed frame was coated with dust and food particles and the shower doors in the bathroom were removed from the tracks and sitting inside the shower.Observation on 03/30/26 at 10:53 A.M. of Resident #84's room revealed dried feces on the floor and bed and the shower doors in the bathroom were removed from the tracks and sitting inside the shower.Observation on 03/30/26 at 12:06 P.M. of Resident #24's room revealed 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 · E2026-04-02 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews with nursing staff, and review of the facility provided glucometer policy, the facility failed to ensure glucometers (blood sugar measuring devices) were properly calibrated with control solutions that were not expired on two separate resident halls (200 and 400 halls) of the facility. This had the potential to affect 10 residents (#23, #60, #90, #2, #71, #41, #32, #24, #39, and #26) on the two affected halls out of a total of 18 facility identified residents that require blood sugar checks. The facility census was 95.Findings include: Based on observations, interviews with nursing staff, and review of the facility provided glucometer policy, the facility failed to ensure glucometers (blood sugar measuring devices) were properly calibrated with control solutions that were not expired on two separate resident halls of the facility. This had the potential to affect 10 residents (#23, #60, #90, #2, #71, #41, #32, #24, #39, and #26) on the two affected halls out of a total of 18…
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 · E2026-04-02 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — patternImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
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 interview, medical record review, review of facility infection control log, review of facility policy, and review of National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN)'s report, the facility failed to ensure antibiotic stewardship was followed. This affected one resident (#84) of one resident reviewed for urinary tract infection (UTI) and 12 of 12 residents (#6, #18, #20, #24, #27, #37, #38, #44, #48, #54, #61, #96) reviewed on the infection control log for the months of February 2026 and March 2026. The facility census was 95.Findings include: 1.Review of the infection control log for February 2026 revealed the facility tracked the residents who received antibiotics during the month. It included the residents name, room number, date, type of infection, antibiotic, nosocomial, and community acquired. McGeer's criteria was not included, but was provided separately by the facility for some residents. However, review of the these forms revealed it did not match current McGeer's Criteria. The following residents…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-02 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate 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 interview and medical record review the facility failed to ensure Resident #6's Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment accurately reflected their wound status. This affected one resident (#6) of one resident reviewed for skin conditions. The facility census was 95. Review of Resident #6's medical record revealed an admission date of 12/06/24 with diagnoses including adult failure to thrive, unspecified open wound of the right lower leg, unspecified dementia, type two diabetes mellitus, schizoaffective disorder, unspecified psychosis, antisocial personality disorder, delusional disorder, and conduct disorder. Review of Resident #6's comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessments dated 08/12/25, 11/03/25, and 02/03/26 revealed the resident had intact cognition. No skin issues were marked in the MDS assessment.Review of Resident #6's wound assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had cellulitis to her right leg that had been present since 12/08/24.Interview on 04/02/26 at 12:45 P.M. with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-02 · 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 observation, interview, medical record review, review of activity documentation, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to complete activities according to preference for Resident #18. This affected one (Resident #18) of one residents resident reviewed for activities. The facility census was 95. Findings include:Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #18 revealed an admission date of 03/21/24 with diagnosis including dementia, without behavioral disturbance, psychotic disturbance, mood disturbance and anxiety, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type, high risk sexual behavior, obsessive compulsive personality disorder, and auditory hallucinations. Review of the care plan for Resident #18 dated 03/28/24 revealed resident presents with altered mood state which may adversely affect participation in activities of interest related to confusion, auditory hallucinations, and schizoaffective disorder-bipolar type. Interventions included: diversional activities that stimulate…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-02 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interview and review of facility policy the facility failed to ensure nutritional recommendations were addressed and meal intakes were adequately monitored. This affected one resident (#88) of three residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility census was 95.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #88 revealed an admission date of 03/17/21 with diagnoses including metabolic encephalopathy, unspecified dementia, severe, with other behavioral disturbance, extrapyramidal and movement disorder, paranoid schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, dysphagia, muscle wasting and atrophy, and vitamin D deficiency. Review of the care plan dated initiated 03/29/21 revealed altered nutritional status as evidenced by obesity, history of dysphagia, paranoid schizophrenia, gastroesophageal reflux disease, depression, recent and history of weight loss, recent and history of poor intake, history of weight fluctuations and mechanically altered diet. Interventions included monitor 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.
Show the remaining 33 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-02 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on resident record reviews and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure Residents #5 and #13's falls were accurately documented in the medical record and failed to ensure Resident #6's wound notes were accurate, and treatment documentation was complete. This affected three residents of 24 residents reviewed for accuracy of medical records and documentation. The facility census was 95.Findings include:1. Review of Resident #5's medical record revealed an admission date of 05/22/17. She had diagnoses that included undifferentiated schizophrenia, vascular dementia with behaviors, and history of cerebral infarction. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set 3.0 (MDS) assessment completed on 03/17/26 revealed Resident #5 was cognitively intact and displayed no signs or symptoms of depression, delirium, psychosis, or rejection of care during the review period. Further review of the MDS assessment revealed Resident #5 was independent moving from a sitting to standing position and required supervision or…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-10-21 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, review of hospital documents, observation, Local Health Department (LHD) interview, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to have an effective water management and legionella prevention plan and further failed to implement recommended legionella mitigation strategies to prevent the potential spread of Legionella pneumonia. This had the potential to affect all 94 residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 94. Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #88 (SR) revealed an admission date of 09/23/21. Diagnoses included cerebral infarct (stroke), diabetes, hemiplegia and hemiparesis, anxiety, cardiac arrhythmia, dysphagia, and weakness. Further review of the medical record revealed the resident was treated for pneumonia at the facility and sent to the hospital on [DATE] for further evaluation and treatment.Review of the hospital lab results, dated 10/03/25, revealed Resident #88 tested positive from a urinalysis test 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 · F2025-07-07 · tag F0802 — failed to prepare enough nourishing food — widespreadProvide sufficient support personnel to safely and effectively carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interviews, the facility failed to ensure sufficient support personnel to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition services. This had the potential to affect all 96 residents residing in the facility. Findings Include: On 06/30/25 observations during the breakfast meal on the 100 hallway revealed the resident's breakfast was served in disposable Styrofoam takeout containers and disposable Styrofoam cups. On 06/30/25 at 12:06 P.M., observation of the lunch meal in the dining room revealed the resident's drinks were served in Styrofoam cups. On 06/30/25 at 12:19 P.M., interview with the Dietary Manager (DM) #111 revealed when the dietary department was short staffed disposable containers and cups are used due to the cooks inability to assist with washing dishes. DM #111 verified the facility did not have sufficient staff for the food and nutrition services. On 06/30/25 at 12:21 P.M., observation of the lunch meal on the 400 hallway revealed the residents were served fluids in Styrofoam cups. On 06/30/25 at 12:23 P.M., an interview with Resident #20…
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 before2025-07-07 · tag F0810 — widespreadProvide special eating equipment and utensils for residents who need them and appropriate assistance.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure an adequate supply of dishes to serve the residents of the facility. This had the potential to affect all 96 residents residing in the facility. Findings Include: On 06/30/25 observations during the breakfast meal on the 100 hallway revealed the resident's breakfast was served in disposable Styrofoam takeout containers and disposable Styrofoam cups. On 06/30/25 at 12:06 P.M., observation of the lunch meal in the dining room revealed the resident's drinks were served in Styrofoam cups. On 06/30/25 at 12:19 P.M., interview with the Dietary Manager (DM) #111 verified the facility does not have enough dishes to serve the residents and Styrofoam disposable containers/cups are utilized. On 06/30/25 at 12:21 P.M., observation of the lunch meal on the 400 hallway revealed the residents were served fluids in Styrofoam cups. On 06/30/25 at 12:23 P.M., an interview with Resident #20 revealed the dietary department always serves on disposable products. She said she prefers to eat/drink from dishes. She stated once in a while they…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2025-07-07 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — widespreadMake 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 provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment for resident in the resident rooms, hallways and bathrooms. This had the potential to affect all 96 residents residing in the facility. Findings include: 1. Review of the Resident Council Minutes from 04/22/25 revealed the residents requested more deep cleaning in their rooms. Also, Resident #32 had requested repairs to bed, blinds and her sink and toilet leaked. 2. Review of the Resident Council Minutes from 05/27/25 revealed Resident #82 reported a hole under her sink in the bathroom and Resident #32 reported again her sink and toilet were leaking leaking as well as Resident #7's sink was leaking. 3. Review of the Resident Council Minutes form 06/24/25 revealed Resident #82 again reported a hole under her bathroom sink. 4. On 06/30/25 at 10:53 A.M., observation of Resident #89's room revealed multiple areas of dry wall patches on the bathroom door and the room door handle was loose making the door difficult to close. 5. On 06/30/25 at 11:30 A.M., observation of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-07 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation, policy review, resident interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were treated with dignity when indwelling urinary catheter collection bags were not covered when the residents were in bed and left visible from the hallway. Additionally, the facility also failed to ensure residents received non-disposable dishes during scheduled meals. This affected one resident (#31) of one resident reviewed for indwelling urinary catheters and one resident (#20) of five residents interviewed during the lunch meal. The facility census was 96. Findings Include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #31 revealed an initial admission date of 07/19/16 with the latest readmission of 05/10/25 with the diagnoses including but not limited to Parkinson's disease with dyskinesia, polyneuropathies, constipation, obstructive and reflux uropathy, hypertension, chronic kidney disease, chronic pain syndrome, hydrocele, psychotic disorder, restless leg syndrome, mood…
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 before2025-07-07 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive plan of care in the area of elopement risk and activities of daily living (ADL). This affected two residents (#48 and #98) of 15 sampled residents. The facility census was 96. Findings Include: 1. Review of the closed medical record for Resident #98 revealed an initial admission date of 06/18/24 with the latest readmission of 04/25/25 with the diagnoses including but not limited to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart failure, diabetes mellitus, asthma, senile degeneration of brain, acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, hypertensive heart disease with heart failure, chronic pain, bipolar disorder, chronic pain syndrome, pure hypercholesterolemia, disorganized schizophrenia, morbid obesity, osteoarthritis, psychosis, hypertension, mood disorder, gastro-esophageal reflux disease, other symbolic dysfunction, depressive episodes and epilepsy. Review of the resident's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE]…
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 before2025-07-07 · 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, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure those residents who were at risk for elopement were assessed and/or physician ordered interventions were implemented to prevent possible elopement from the facility. This affected three residents (#48, #53 and #68) of three residents reviewed for elopement. The facility census was 96. Findings Include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #53 revealed an initial admission date of 12/13/24 with the latest readmission of 05/28/25 with the diagnoses including but not limited to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hypertension, obstructive sleep apnea, chronic respiratory failure, congestive heart failure, diaphragmatic hernia, delusional disorder, sepsis, dependence on supplemental oxygen, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type, psychosis, and urinary incontinence. Review of the plan of care, not dated revealed the resident was independently mobile, resident expresses a desire to leave facility unattended and at risk…
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 before2025-07-07 · 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, record review, interviews and facility policy review, the facility failed to maintain appropriate infection control practices to prevent potential infection. Additionally, the facility also failed to implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) during a dressing change. This affected one resident (#31) of one resident reviewed for indwelling urinary catheter care and one resident (#11) of two residents reviewed for wounds. The facility census was 96. Findings Include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #31 revealed an initial admission date of 07/19/16 with the latest readmission of 05/10/25 with the diagnoses including but not limited to Parkinson's disease with dyskinesia, polyneuropathies, constipation, obstructive and reflux uropathy, hypertension, chronic kidney disease, chronic pain syndrome, hydrocele, psychotic disorder, restless leg syndrome, mood disorder, tachycardia, psychosis, developmental disability, gout, anemia, mood disorder, benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH),…
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 · D2024-09-03 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff, resident, and Guardian interviews, Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner (SANE) interview, record review, review of a facility Self-Reported Incident (SRI), review of facility investigation, and policy review, the facility failed to initiate a timely investigation of alleged staff to resident sexual abuse. This affected one (Resident #80) of three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 91. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #80 revealed an admission date of 04/26/22. Medical diagnoses included paranoid schizophrenia, anxiety, depression, type II diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease, insomnia, chronic pain, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Review of Resident #80's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 06/26/24, revealed the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating intact cognition. Resident #80 had no signs or symptoms of depression, no hallucinations, and no delusions. Review of Resident #80's interdisciplinary progress notes, dated 08/01/24 to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-03 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff and resident interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to document an allegation of staff-to-resident sexual abuse and record follow-up action taken in Resident #80's medical record. This affected one (Resident #80) of three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 91. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #80 revealed an admission date of 04/26/22. Medical diagnoses included paranoid schizophrenia, anxiety, depression, type II diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease, insomnia, chronic pain, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Review of Resident #80's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 06/26/24, revealed the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating intact cognition. Resident #80 had no signs or symptoms of depression, no hallucinations, and no delusions. Review of Resident #80's interdisciplinary progress notes, dated 08/01/24 to 09/03/24, revealed no mention or description of an alleged staff-to resident sexual abuse incident…
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 · E2024-06-27 · tag F0569 — patternNotify 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 medical record review, financial record review, staff interview, facility policy review, and review of online resources, the facility failed to implement a plan to spend down resident funds when they exceeded the Medicaid allowable limit. This affected 15 (Residents #7, #83, #15, #63, #67, #95, #20, #45, #66, #3, #41, #13, #21, #29, and #26) of 18 residents reviewed for finances. The facility also failed to convey resident personal funds to the resident's authorized representative within 30 days of the resident's discharge from the facility or death. This affected three (Residents #93, #94, and #95) of four discharge resident financial records reviewed. The facility census was 94 residents. Findings Include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #7 revealed an admission date of 09/25/15 with diagnoses including type two diabetes, major depressive disorder, and peripheral vascular disease. Review of the monthly financial statements for Resident #7 dated 10/06/23 to 03/31/24 revealed the balance ranged from $2,826.27 to $3,188.11. Review of the resident trust account…
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 · E2024-06-27 · tag F0740 — failed to provide behavioral / mental-health care — patternEnsure each resident must receive and the facility must provide necessary behavioral health care and services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to appropriately assess and monitor resident behaviors. This affected four (Residents #31, #69, #10, and #16) of five residents reviewed for behavior management. The census was 94. Findings Include: Review of the medical record for Resident #31 revealed an admission date of 01/30/24 with diagnoses including epilepsy, psychosis, major depressive disorder, schizoaffective disorder, suicidal ideations, borderline personality disorder, bipolar disorder, and anxiety disorder. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #31 dated 05/10/24 revealed the resident was cognitively intact. Review of the care plan for Resident #31 revealed resident had the following behaviors: suicidal ideations, malingering, socially inappropriate/disruptive behaviors. Resident #31 also had a care plan related to cognitive impairments related to the resident's mental health diagnoses which included the following: psychotic disturbance, mood disturbance, anxiety, schizoaffective disorder bipolar…
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 · D2024-06-27 · 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
Based on medical record review, resident interview, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to notify the attending physician of a change in condition. This affected one (Resident #76) of 26 sampled residents. The facility census was 94 residents. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #76 revealed an admission date of 11/21/22 with diagnoses including peripheral vascular disease, neuralgia, schizoaffective disorder, and bipolar disorder. Review of the nurse progress note for Resident #76 dated 06/10/24 timed at 9:30 A.M. revealed the Director of Nursing (DON) spoke with the resident regarding frequent leaves of absence (LOA) from the facility in which he returned in a state of alcohol intoxication. Further review of the note revealed Resident #76 admitted that he did regularly consume alcohol while on LOA but had agreed not to come back to the facility intoxicated going forward. The DON also discussed concerns with Resident #76 regarding missing medications while on LOA which potentially led to recent seizure activity. Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-27 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure that a resident footboards were repaired as needed and in a timely manner. This affected one resident (Resident #91) of three residents reviewed for their environment. The facility census was 94. Findings include: Observation on 06/24/24 at 9:39 A.M., on 06/25/24 at 8:48 A.M. and 06/26/24 at 3:37 P.M. revealed footboard to Resident #91's bed was broken at approximately two-thirds of its length. The sharp, jagged edge of the footboard was approximately three feet from the resident's window. Interview on 06/24/24 at 9:39 A.M. with Resident #91 confirmed the footboard to his bed had been broken for at least a week and a half. Resident #91 further confirmed he told the Director of Nursing (DON) he wanted his footboard to be replaced because he was worried about cutting himself on the jagged edge of the footboard as he passed by his bed. Interview on 06/26/24 at 3:39 P.M. with the DON confirmed Resident #91 had informed him of the broken footboard soon after…
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 before2024-06-27 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, resident interview, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to develop a care plan for residents regarding unsupervised leaves of absence (LOA) from the facility. This affected one (Resident #76) of 26 sampled residents. The facility census was 94 residents. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #76 revealed an admission date of 11/21/22 with diagnoses including peripheral vascular disease, neuralgia, schizoaffective disorder, and bipolar disorder. Review of the care plan for Resident #76 updated 05/23/24 revealed it did not include documentation of the resident's frequent LOAs from the facility with guidelines to ensure the safety of the resident while out of the building. Review of the nurse progress note for Resident #76 dated 06/10/24 timed at 9:30 A.M. revealed the Director of Nursing (DON) spoke with the resident regarding frequent leaves of absence (LOA) from the facility in which he returned in a state of alcohol intoxication. Further review of the note revealed Resident #76 admitted that…
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 before2024-06-27 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, observation, resident interview, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to assist dependent residents with activities of daily living (ADL) care. This affected one (Resident #53) of two residents reviewed for ADL care. The facility census was 94 residents. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #53 revealed an admission date of 07/28/22 with diagnoses including schizoaffective disorder bipolar type, polyosteoarthritis, and chronic pain syndrome. Review of the comprehensive care plan for Resident #53 revealed the resident had the potential for a self-care deficit in grooming related to impaired ability to groom self and a lack of fine motor skills. The goad on Resident #53's care plan was that the resident would be well groomed. The intervention listed was that Resident #53 would be cued and prompted to participate in grooming and that the resident would be assisted to complete the task. Observation on 06/24/24 at 7:59 A.M. and 06/25/24 at 7:50 A.M. revealed Resident #53's chin hairs were…
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 before2024-06-27 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, staff interview and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to monitor residents who had fallen. This affected two (Residents #10 and #63) of four residents reviewed for falls. The facility census was 94 residents. Findings include: 1.Review of the medical record for Resident #10 revealed an admission date of 10/15/18 with diagnoses including cerebrovascular disease, major depressive disorder, weakness, panic disorder, dementia, personality disorder, and disorganized schizophrenia. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #10 dated 04/30/24 revealed the resident had moderate cognitive impairment and required substantial/maximal assistance with toilet hygiene, bathing, bed mobility and transfers. Review of the progress note for Resident #10 dated 05/11/24 revealed the resident had a fall without injuries. Further review of the progress notes revealed there was no post-fall monitoring documented for the resident on 05/12/24 and 05/13/24. Review of the progress note for Resident #10 dated 06/16/24 revealed the resident had…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-27 · 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
Based on medical record review, observation, and staff interviews the facility failed to ensure residents received oral fluids between meals. This affected one (Resident #13) of 26 residents sampled. The facility census was 94 residents. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #13 revealed an admission date of 04/17/23 with diagnoses including multiple sclerosis, mood disorder, and Parkinson's disease. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #13 dated 06/07/24 revealed the resident was cognitively intact and required partial/moderate assistance with eating and substantial/maximal assistance with bed mobility and was dependent on staff with oral and toilet hygiene. Review of the active care plan for Resident #13 revealed an intervention to encourage good fluid intake at meals and between meals due to at risk for decreased cardiac output and alternated nutritional status. Review of the nutritional assessments for Resident #13 dated 04/01/24 and 06/10/24 completed by the Dietician revealed the resident required 1600-1700 milliliters (ml) 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 · D2024-06-27 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of facility policy the facility failed to adequately assess pain for residents who received pain medications. This affected one (Resident #52) of three residents reviewed for pain management. The facility census was 94. Findings: 1.Review of medical record for Resident #52 revealed admission date of 01/26/24 with diagnoses including peripheral vascular disease, major depression, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, type two diabetes, and acute kidney failure. Review of the care plan for Resident #52 dated 02/13/24 revealed the resident had pain or alteration in comfort related to immobility, non-pressure ulcers. Interventions included the following: administer pain medications as per medical doctor orders and note the effectiveness, assess for nonverbal signs of pain, offer non-pharmacological interventions to manage pain such as massage reposition, gentle exercise, breathing and relaxation techniques distraction redirection music therapies or comfort foods. Review of the Minimum…
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 · D2024-06-27 · 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
Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to monitor resident blood pressure prior as ordered by the physician in conjunction with administration of a diuretic medication. This affected one (Resident #55) of six residents reviewed for medications. The facility census was 94 residents. Findings Include: Review of the medical record for Resident #55 revealed an admission date of 03/28/22 with diagnoses including obsessive compulsive personality disorder, paranoid schizophrenia, polydipsia, and hypoosmolality and hyponatremia. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #55 dated 04/05/24 revealed the resident had intact cognition. Review of the physician's orders for Resident #55 revealed an order dated 06/22/24 for Lasix 20 milligrams (mg), hold for systolic blood pressure less than 100. Review of the care plan for Resident #55's revealed the resident was at risk for decreased cardiac output and abnormal lab values related to polydipsia, sodium deficit hyponatremia, with a goal to take Lasix as…
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 · E2021-10-15 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — patternHonor the resident's right to manage his or her financial affairs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, staff and resident interview, review of the resident's funds account, and review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to ensure the residents were able to get cash from their funds accounts held by the facility. This affected six (#9, #24, #36, #59, #62, and #74) of six residents reviewed for personal funds accounts. The facility identified 80 residents who have personal funds account with the facility. The facility census was 81. Finding include: 1. Medical record review for Resident #9 revealed an admission date of 02/21/20. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 07/01/21, revealed she was cognitively intact. 2. Medical record review for Resident #24 revealed an admission date of 03/09/19. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment, dated 07/14/21, revealed he was cognitively intact. Interview with Resident #24 on 10/04/21 at 10:42 A.M. revealed he wasn't able to get cash because the facility denied he could take out cash for any transactions. 3. Medical record review for Resident #36 revealed an admission of 08/04/16.…
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 before2021-10-15 · tag F0810 — patternProvide special eating equipment and utensils for residents who need them and appropriate assistance.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, observation, and staff interview, the facility failed to provide residents with physician ordered adaptive equipment during meal time. This affected four (Resident #10, #19, #21, and #22) of four residents reviewed for adaptive equipment. The facility identified 13 residents who utilize adaptive equipment. The facility census was 81. Findings include: 1.) Review of the medical record for Resident #19 revealed an admission date of 10/15/18. Diagnoses included squeal cardiovascular disease, altered mental status, and muscle spasms. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 10/01/21, revealed the resident with a moderately impaired cognition for daily decision making ability. Resident #19 was noted to require extensive assistance from one staff member for eating. Resident #19 was noted to have impairment to one of her upper and one of the her lower extremities. Review of Resident #19's physician orders for October 2021 revealed for the resident to have a dycem (a non-slip material) to be placed under the resident plate and to have…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-10-15 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, staff interview, and observations, the facility failed to provide a resident with adequate assistance with dressing. This affected one (#40) of three residents reviewed for activities of daily living. The facility identified 42 residents who require assistance from staff or were dependent on staff for assistance with dressing. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #40 revealed an admission date of 12/29/16. Diagnoses included schizoaffective disorder, anxiety disorder, obsessive-compulsive behavior, and bipolar disorder. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 08/03/21, revealed the resident had moderately impaired cognition for daily decision making ability. Resident #40 required extensive assistance from one staff member for dressing. Review of the nursing progress notes for Resident #40 from 10/04/21 thorough 10/07/21 revealed no documentation related to the resident refusing to change her clothing or complete daily personal hygiene. Observation of Resident #40 from 10/04/21 through 10/07/21 revealed the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-10-15 · 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
Based on observation, medical record review, resident and staff interview, and review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to provide meaningful activities to the residents. This affected two (#38 and #44) of five residents reviewed for activities. The facility census was 81. Findings include: 1.) Review of the medical record for Resident #38 revealed an admission date of 10/27/15. Diagnoses included nicotine dependence, mood disorder, COVID-19, schizophrenia, mood disorder, epilepsy, major depressive disorder, restless leg syndrome, and bipolar disorder. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 07/20/21, revealed the resident had intact cognition. She was independent on bed mobility, transfers, eating, toileting, personal hygiene, and bathing. She required supervision for dressing. Review of the care plan, dated 11/24/19, revealed Resident #38 was at risk for decreased participation in activities related to resident refusal. Interventions included to perform activity assessment quarterly and as needed, promote the following activities for Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-10-15 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, resident and staff interview, observation, and review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to ensure treatment orders were completed per physician orders. This affected one (#45) of one resident reviewed for non-pressure related skin issues. The facility identified one resident with treatment orders for skin tears. The facility census was 81. Findings include: Review of medical record for Resident #45 revealed an admission date of 02/15/17. Diagnoses included Diabetes Mellitus (DM) Type II, dementia without behavioral disturbances, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar disorder, and anxiety disorder. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 08/17/21, revealed the resident had impaired cognition. Review of the care plan, dated 02/16/17, revealed Resident #45 was at risk for actual/potential alteration in skin integrity related to DM, fragile skin, dry itchy scalp, and right elbow skin tear. Interventions included to provide treatments per physician order, weekly skin assessment for skin irritation, redness, bruises, scratches, open…
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 · D2021-10-15 · tag F0687 — failed to care for feet properly — isolatedProvide appropriate foot care.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, resident and staff interview, and observation, the facility failed to ensure the resident received proper treatment to maintain good foot health. This affected one (#1) of one resident reviewed for foot care. The facility census was 81. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #1 revealed an admission date of 05/29/13. Diagnoses included Diabetes Mellitus (DM) Type Two. Review of the care plan, dated 05/30/21, revealed Resident #1 had potential for alteration in skin integrity related to DM, history of tinea unguium (superficial fungal infection), resistant to care/skin interventions, incontinence of urine, and resident was non-complaint with showers and personal hygiene at times. Interventions included to assess the condition of the resident's feet weekly and report abnormal findings to the physician. Keep nails trimmed short and filed smooth. Refer to podiatry for routine and as needed foot care. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 06/16/21, revealed the resident had impaired cognition. She required…
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 before2021-10-15 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview, and review of the faciliy's policy, the facility failed to ensure a resident's fall was investigated in a timely manner to determine the root cause and to identify any patterns of repeated falls and to evaluate, revise and/or add individualized interventions to the resident's care plan. This affected one (#73) of three residents reviewed for falls. The facility census was 81. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #73 revealed an admission date of 04/08/15. Diagnoses included secondary Parkinsonism, mood disorder, depressive disorder, dementia without behavioral disturbance, schizophrenia, psychosis, and creutzfeldt-[NAME] disease. Review of the resident's undated care plan revealed the resident was at risk for falls as evidence by history of falls with injury, multiple risk factors related to use of psychotropic medications, pain in bilateral knees, weakness, lack of coordination, tremors, dorsalgia, and secondary Parkinsonism. The goal was for 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 · D2021-10-15 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide 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
Based on record review, resident and staff interview, and review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to ensure bowel movements and toileting program were monitored per physician orders and the resident's plan of care. This affected one (#21) of one resident reviewed for bowel incontinence. The facility identified 29 residents who required assistance from staff or dependent on staff for toileting. The facility census was 81. Findings include: Review of medical record for Resident #21 revealed a re-admission date of 12/01/19. Diagnoses included sequelae of cerebral infarction, schizoaffective disorder, constipation, bipolar disorder, and dementia without behavioral disturbances. Review of the care plan, dated 02/22/13, revealed Resident #21 was at risk for alteration in bowel elimination related to medications and potential for occasional bowel incontinence. Interventions included to record bowel movements daily and note the size and consistency and report any abnormalities to the charge nurse. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 04/14/21,…
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 · Dcited before2021-10-15 · 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 medical record review, facility record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure Resident #22's weights were performed as recommended and per facility policy and failed to monitor and intervene appropriately for a resident who was at a nutritional risk for weight loss. This affected one (#22) of three residents reviewed for weight loss. The facility identified two current residents with significant weight loss. The facility census was 81. Findings include: Review of the medical record of Resident #22 revealed an admission date of 02/02/18. The resident was hospitalized from [DATE] to 06/24/21 and 07/02/21 to 07/07/21. Diagnoses included diffuse traumatic brain injury with loss of consciousness, dementia with behavioral disturbance, Type II diabetes mellitus (DM), history of COVID-19, cerebral infarction, chronic pain syndrome, abnormal weight loss, major depressive disorder, schizoaffective disorder, oropharyngeal dysphagia, anxiety disorder, epilepsy, 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 · D2021-10-15 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, observations, staff interview, and review of the facility's Medication Regimen Review policy, the facility failed to ensure residents receiving psychotropic medication were monitored accurately for adverse reactions. This affected one (Resident #40) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 81. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #40 revealed an admission date of 12/29/16. Diagnoses included schizoaffective disorder, anxiety disorder, obsessive-compulsive behavior, and bipolar disorder. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 08/03/21, revealed the resident had a moderately impaired cognition for daily decision making ability. Resident #40 was noted to display verbal behaviors director towards others. Review of the physician orders for Resident #40 revealed the follow orders related to mood and/or behaviors: on 03/10/21, Buspirone (antianxiety) 10 mg tablet, give two tablets, three times a day for anxiety. On 08/17/21, Invega Sustenna (antipsychotic) suspension…
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 · D2021-10-15 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, observation, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were provided food which met the resident's preference such as not being served pork. This affected one (Resident #54) of four residents reviewed for food preferences. The facility census was 81. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #54 revealed a admission date of 03/02/20. Diagnoses included post-traumatic stress disorder, and dementia with behavioral disturbances. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 08/20/21, revealed the resident had a moderately impaired cognition for daily decision making ability, and was noted to express verbal behaviors directed towards others. Review of the meal slip, dated 10/05/21 and 10/06/21, stated the resident did not like pork. Review of the facility's monthly menu for October 2021 revealed for lunch on 10/05/21, the facility was serving tacos made with pork meat. On 10/06/21 for dinner, the facility was serving baked pork. Observation on 10/05/21 at 1:20 P.M. of Resident #54's lunch tray revealed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-10-15 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure falls were documented in the medical record. This affected one (#73) of three residents reviewed for falls. The facility census was 81. Findings include: Review of Resident #73's medical record revealed an admission date of 04/08/15. Diagnoses included secondary parkinsonism, mood disorder, depressive disorder, dementia without behavioral disturbance, schizophrenia, and psychosis. Review of the comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 09/03/21, revealed the resident had severely impaired cognition. The resident required extensive assistance of one staff for bed mobility, transfers, and toileting. Review of the facility's incident logs from 04/01/21 through 09/30/21 revealed the resident had falls on 04/30/21, 05/02/21, 05/19/21, 07/09/21, 09/02/21, and 09/27/21. Review of the progress notes, dated 04/29/21 through 09/30/21, revealed there was documentation of falls which occurred on 05/19/21, 09/02/21, and 09/28/21. There was no documentation of the resident's falls occurring 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.
“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.
“Disputed” is CMS’s own flag, not our reading: the CMS deficiency file records whether the home has formally contested a citation, and we reproduce that. IDR is Informal Dispute Resolution, run by the state survey agency that wrote the citation; IIDR is Independent Informal Dispute Resolution, a separate process before an outside entity, available when CMS has proposed a civil money penalty. They are different processes and we mark them differently. Two things to hold at once. A disputed citation is still a citation — it was written by a surveyor, it stands on the record unless and until it is changed, and we neither hide it nor discount it. And we cannot tell you how the dispute came out: CMS publishes that a citation is under dispute, not the outcome, so a tag marked here may since have been upheld, reduced, or deleted, and an unmarked tag may have been disputed and resolved before this file was cut. Ask the home what it disputed and why — it is entitled to tell you, and the answer is often the most informative thing on this page.
- 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 JAG HEALTHCARE — 9 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 | 2 of 5 | 3.3 | -1.3 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.9 | -0.9 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 2.4 | +1.6 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.6 | -0.6 vs chain |
The other 8 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.3★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| GRIFFITHS, JAMES | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF; ADP OF THE SNF | since 08/01/2013 |
| JAG HEALTHCARE INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 08/01/2013 |
| BRATTON, GREG | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/15/2018 |
| JUSCHKA, DIRK | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/01/2018 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 11 rows in the source record cover these 4 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 $403K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
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 366313. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-02, 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.