Maria Joseph Living Care Center
4830 Salem Avenue, Dayton, OH 45416 · For profit - Individual · 266 certified beds · (937) 278-2692 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0569)
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (34) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 to 3 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 | 3.9% | 5.3% | 15.4% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 7.9% | 6.2% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.1% | 0.2% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.1% | 0.4% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 60.9% | 30.1% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 1.0% | 3.2% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 4.4% | 6.1% | 16.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 38.5% | 25.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 94.1% | 94.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.6% | 3.4% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 15.2% | 21.4% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 12.3% | 8.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 3.3% | 1.2% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 68.1% | 75.6% | 79.4% | 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.
41.3% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 47 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.11 therapist hours per resident per day in 2025Q4 — more than 7% of the 13,714 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 18% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 14% — 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 | 41.3%CMS range 28.6–53.4 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.7%CMS range 7.3–16.6 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 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 — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 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 | 6.9%CMS range 4.1–13.6 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.88 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 266 beds and averages 232.8 residents a day — about 88% occupied, or roughly 33 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.56 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.71 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.07 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.46 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.84 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.83 to 0.49 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 41% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
34 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 23 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gdisputed · IDR2026-07-16 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation, staff interviews, policy review and review of the guidelines from the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (NPUAP), the facility failed to thoroughly assess a resident's skin and failed to timely identify the resident's pressure ulcers (injuries to skin and underlying tissue caused by prolonged pressure, friction, or shear, usually over bony areas like the hips, heels, or tailbone) until they had reached an advanced stage. Actual Harm occurred on 01/09/26 when Resident #209, who was risk for developing pressure ulcers, developed a facility acquired stage III pressure ulcer (full-thickness skin loss in which adipose [fat] is visible and granulation tissue [new tissue] and epibole [rolled wound edges] are often present. Slough [a soft, moist, yellow or white devitalized tissue comprised of dead cells, fibrin, and bacteria that forms in the wound bed, acting as a significant barrier to healing by stalling the inflammatory phase] and/or eschar [a thick, dry, black or brown…
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 beforedisputed · IDR2026-07-16 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, observation, and interviews, the facility failed to provide safe labeling and storage for medication administered to residents by the facility. This affected five residents (#12, #30, #102, #161, and #178). The facility census was 237. Findings include: 1) Review of the medical record for Resident #161 revealed an admission date of 01/27/26. Diagnoses included chronic respiratory failure, anxiety and asthma. Review of physician order for Resident #161, revealed an order dated 03/06/26 for fluticasone propionate suspension 50 microgram (mcg) two sprays in each nostril one time a day for allergies. 2) Review of the medical record for Resident #30 revealed an admission date of 12/22/21. Diagnoses included major depressive disorder, dementia, psychotic disorder, schizoaffective disorder, and mood disorder. Review of physician order for Resident #30. revealed an order dated 07/09/26 for Risperdal solution one milligram (mg) per milliliter (ml) and take 0.5 ml by mouth one time a day. Also, an order for Risperdal solution oral one mg per ml take one ml by mouth at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Edisputed · IDR2026-07-16 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident interview and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure food served was palatable. This affected one (#12) but had the potential to affect 12 residents (#2, #3, #7, #9, #17, #50, #53, #152, #153, #169, #180, and #213) who the facility identified as being ordered a pureed diet. The facility census was 237. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #180 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of cerebral infarction with left (non-dominant) side hemiparesis and hemiplegia and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #180 was cognitively impaired and required supervision for eating. Observation on 07/06/2026 at 12:39 P.M. revealed Resident #180 was served a pureed diet, and the resident did not eat her meal. Interview with the resident at the same time revealed she did not like the pureed diet and referred to the food as slop. Interview on 07/06/2026 at 12:45 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 · E2026-07-16 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — patternEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents ordered a pureed diet were served food in a form that met their needs. This affected all 12 residents (#2, #3, #7, #9, #17, #50, #53, #152, #153, #169, #180, and #213) who the facility identified as being ordered a pureed diet. The facility census was 237. Findings include: Observation on 07/09/2026 at 6:55 A.M. with Dietary Supervisor (DS) #407, revealed donuts had been pureed for the breakfast meal. A taste test of the pureed donuts revealed that the texture was sticky and with a pasty consistency that was difficult to clear from the mouth. Interview on 07/09/2026 at 6:57 A.M., DS #407 verified that the pureed donuts had a sticky texture and pasty consistency. Interview on 07/09/2026 at 7:05 A.M., Registered Dietician (RD) #965 verified that the pureed donuts had a sticky texture. RD #965 stated that ideally you would not want pureed food to have a sticky texture. Interview on 07/09/2026 at 7:08 A.M., RD #965 stated that grits were being served to the residents with a pureed diet order as a hot…
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 before2026-07-16 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of temperature logs, and staff interviews, the facility failed to store, serve, and prepare food in a safe and sanitary manner to prevent a foodborne illness. This had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility except for three Residents (#11, #26, and #29) who had orders for nothing by mouth (NPO) and did not receive food from the kitchen. The facility census was 237. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #02 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of end-stage renal disease (ESRD), diabetes mellitus type two, coronary artery disease and hypertension. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Annual assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #02 had intact cognition and required moderate assistance for eating, maximal assistance for oral and personal hygiene, and was dependent for toileting, bathing, dressing, bed mobility and transfers. Observation of the kitchen on 07/06/26 at 9:47 A.M. with Maintenance Director #511, 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 · Edisputed · IDR2026-07-16 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — patternMake sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program. This had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility with the exception of the three Residents (#11, #26, and #29) identified as having orders for nothing by mouth (NPO). The facility census was 237.Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #02 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of end-stage renal disease (ESRD), diabetes mellitus type two, coronary artery disease and hypertension. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Annual assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #02 had intact cognition and required moderate assistance for eating, maximal assistance for oral and personal hygiene, and was dependent for toileting, bathing, dressing, bed mobility and transfers. Observation of the kitchen on 07/06/2026 at 9:55 A.M., with Dietary Supervisor (DS) #407, revealed gnats near the dry storage area in the main kitchen. Interview with DS #407 at the same…
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 before2026-07-16 · 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, resident interview and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure resident rights were maintained. This affected three Residents (#220, #62, and #75) of the three residents reviewed for resident rights. The facility census was 237. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #244 had an admissions date of 08/24/18 with diagnoses of bipolar disorder, schizoaffective disorder, mood disorder, and dementia. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #244 was cognitively intact. Resident #244 had delusions and verbal behavior symptoms occurring one to three days during the assessment period. During an interview with Resident #220 on 07/06/26 at 11:20 A.M. revealed the surveyor and Resident #220 were in the hallway when Resident #244 exited his room and began yelling at Resident #220. Resident #244 was observed making comments about Resident #220 playing a guitar and it needing to be taken away from him. Resident #220 did not have a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-07-16 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
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 staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure Beneficiary Notifications - Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) were issued in a timely manner. This affected one (#11) out of the six residents reviewed for Beneficiary Notifications. The facility census was 237.Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #11 was admitted on [DATE] with medical diagnoses of hypertensive heart disease without failure, aphasia following cerebral infarction, essential hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and Type II Diabetes. Review of Resident #11's NOMNC revealed Medicare coverage of skilled services ended on 06/05/26. Resident #11's guardian was informed on 06/05/26. Review of Resident #11's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #11 had severe cognitive impairment as evidenced by a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 2. Resident #11 required maximal assistance with oral hygiene and was dependent on staff for all other Activities of Daily Living…
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 · D2026-07-16 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure care plans were accurate and interventions were implemented. This affected two Residents (Resident #75 and #50) of 35 the residents reviewed. The facility census was 237. Findings include: 1) Review of the medical record for Resident #75 revealed an admissions date of 03/06/26 with a diagnosis that included binocular dysfunction. Review of the physician order dated 05/16/26 revealed Resident #75 had an order for an eye patch to right eye while awake. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #75 was cognitively impaired. Interview on 07/06/2026 at 12:12 P.M. with Resident #75 stated her left eye was a lazy eye and would be corrected when she covered the right eye. Resident #75 stated that her left eye caused her discomfort. Observations throughout the survey on 07/06/26 and 07/07/26 revealed Resident #75 was not wearing an eye patch. Interview on 07/07/2026 at 4:14 P.M. with Registered Nurse…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-07-16 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, and review of facility policy, revealed the facility failed to provide timely incontinence care for one (#50) out of the three residents reviewed for incontinence. The facility census was 237. Findings include: Review of medical records for Resident #50 revealed an admission date of 06/09/23. Diagnoses included hypertension, dementia, peripheral vascular diseases, benign prostatic hyperplasia and bilateral cataracts. Review of Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #50 had Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) of 04 which indicated he was severely cognitively impaired. Resident #50 was dependent on staff for activities of daily living (ADL). Review of plan of care dated 05/06/26 revealed Resident #50 had an alteration in elimination and was occasionally incontinent of bowel and bladder. Interventions included monitoring for signs and symptoms of urinary tract infection (UTI), assessing bowel sounds, monitoring and recording bowel movements…
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 before2026-07-16 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure staff followed appropriate infection control practices. The affected one (#17) of two residents reviewed for infection control precautions. The facility census was 237 residents.Findings include: Review of medical record for Resident #17 revealed an admission dated 10/04/24 . Diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, and anxiety. Review of physician order dated 03/21/26, revealed Resident #17 had an order to be housed in enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) related to having a gastric tube. Observation of Resident #17's room on 07/06/26 at 11:41 A.M. revealed the resident was in EBP by the signage near the resident's room. Speech Therapist #980 was in the resident's room providing treatment wearing a gown and a mask. Speech Therapist #980 left Resident #17's room with her gown and mask still in place and walked down to the next hall. Interview on 07/06/26 at 11:48 A.M., Speech Therapist #980 verified she never took her gown off, nor completed any hand hygiene…
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 23 citations
- Potential for harm · D2026-07-16 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident who consented to the influenza (flu) vaccine received the influenza vaccine. This affected one (#02) of the five residents reviewed for vaccines The facility census was 237 residentsFindings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #02 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of end-stage renal disease (ESRD), diabetes mellitus type two, coronary artery disease and hypertension. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Annual assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #02 had intact cognition and required moderate assistance for eating, maximal assistance for oral and personal hygiene, and was dependent for toileting, bathing, dressing, bed mobility and transfers. Review of the flu Vaccine Informed Consent Form for Resident #02 dated 09/18/25, revealed Resident #02 's representative specified consent for Resident #02 to receive an annual flu vaccine. Review of the Immunization Record 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 · D2025-09-11 · 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 record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure accurate documentation of medication administration. This affected one (#10) out of three residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 245. Findings include: Review of medical record for Resident #10 revealed admission date of 05/22/25. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including end stage renal disease, type two diabetes mellitus, depression and hypertension. The resident was hospitalized on [DATE] and did not return. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed he had a Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating intact cognition. He required supervision for eating, extensive two-person assistance for bed mobility, toileting and dependence for transfers. Review of the physician orders revealed an order for Coreg (blood pressure) 6.25 milligrams (mg) one tablet twice daily. Hold for Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) less than 110 millimeters of mercury (mm Hg). Review 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 · Dcited before2025-09-11 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure infection control measures were followed during incontinence care. This affected (#11) out of three residents reviewed for infection control. The facility census was 245. Findings include:Review of medical record for Resident #11 revealed admission date of 04/08/25. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including end stage renal disease, diabetes mellitus, depression, gout, and anxiety. The significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed he had a Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13 indicating intact cognition. He required supervision with eating, maximum assistance with dependent for toileting hygiene, bed mobility and transfers. Observation on 09/08/25 at 3:52 P.M. revealed Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #31 was assisted by CNA #10 in providing incontinence care for Resident #11. Both CNA's donned Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) for enhanced barrier precautions without concern. CNA #31…
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 before2025-03-20 · 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 observations, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure appropriate infection control measures were completed during incontinence care. This affected one (#47) resident of three residents reviewed for incontinence care. The facility census was 234. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #47 revealed an admission date of 02/12/25. Diagnoses included anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Review of the Annual Minim Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #47 had intact cognition as evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14. This resident was assessed to require setup with eating, dependent with toileting and dressing, and substantial assistance with bathing and transfers. Observation on 03/20/25 at 11:10 A.M. revealed Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #13 performed incontinence care to Resident #47. Hand hygiene was performed, and gloves were applied prior to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-06-08 · 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 personal funds account review and staff interview, the facility failed to notify residents or their representatives of the need to spend down personal funds once the account reached $200 less than the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) resource limit of one person. This affected 19 (#3, #15, #20, #37, #41, #43, #44, #45, #54, #101, #111, #124, #127, #158, #183, #195, #198, #227, and #448) of 19 residents reviewed for personal funds. The census was 235. Findings included: 1. Review of Resident #3's personal funds account revealed a balance as of 06/07/23 of $20,424.70. 2. Review of Resident #15's personal funds account revealed a balance as of 06/08/23 of $2,534.72. 3. Review of Resident #20's personal funds account revealed a balance as of 06/01/23 of $2,366.34. 4. Review of Resident #37's personal funds account revealed a balance as of 06/05/23 of $22,686.10. 5. Review of Resident #41's personal funds account revealed a balance as of 06/02/23 of $4,664.31. 6. Review of Resident #43's personal funds account revealed a balance as of 06/08/23 of $5,835.42. 7. Review 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 · E2023-06-08 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — patternEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, menu review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the planned menu was followed. This affected 32 (#22, #35, #38, #52, #78, #88, #94, #96, #102, #111, #118, #119, #136, #137, #141, #142, #149, #152, #161, #162, #170, #174, #181, #182, #186, #193, #204, #205, #206, #208, #225, and #450) of 32 residents who resided on the [NAME] Four unit. All 32 residents on the [NAME] Four unit were identified by the facility to received food by mouth. The census was 235. Findings included: Review of the planned breakfast menu for 06/06/23 revealed items consisting of a choice of juices, sausage links, choice of cereal, pancakes, hash browns, water, margarine, and syrup. Observation of the breakfast tray line on 06/06/23 at 9:00 A.M. on the [NAME] Four unit revealed there were no hash brown potatoes being served as indicated on the menu. Interview with Dietary Aide (DA) #158 on 06/06/23 at 9:03 A.M. stated she did not notice there were no hash browns to serve to the residents, and confirmed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-06-08 · 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 medical record review, observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were treated with dignity and respect. This affected one (#348) of three residents reviewed for dignity and respect. The census was 235. Findings included: Medical record review for Resident #348 revealed an admission date of 09/23/20. Diagnoses included peripheral vascular disease, heart failure, and non-Alzheimer's dementia. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #348 was assessed with severely impaired cognition. Observation and interview on 06/06/23 at 9:05 A.M. revealed Resident #348 was sitting in the dining room at the table with his breakfast meal in front of him that State Tested Nurse Aide (STNA) #154 delivered to him. STNA #154 was asked if the resident was given a choice of cereal, and STNA #154 replied in front of Resident #348, He (Resident #348) was not asked if he wanted cereal and he got what he got. Further interview with STNA…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-06-08 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, medical record review, menu review, and staff and resident interview, the facility failed to ensure food choices were provided for resident meals. This affected one (#348) of one residents reviewed for choices. The census was 235. Findings included: Medical record review for Resident #348 revealed an admission date of 09/23/20. Medical diagnoses included peripheral vascular disease, heart failure, and non-Alzheimer's dementia. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #348 was severely cognitively impaired and his functional status was extensive assistance for bed mobility, transfers, and toileting. The resident required limited assistance for eating. Review of the breakfast menu on 06/06/23 revealed there was choice of juices, sausage links, choice of cereal, pancakes, hash browns, water, margarine, and syrup. Review of the breakfast menu on 06/07/23 revealed choice of juices, ham and cheese pocket, hash browns, choice of cereal, choice 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 · D2023-06-08 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, medical record review, and resident and staff interview, the facility failed to assist dependent residents with activities of daily living (ADLs). This affected two (#103 and #110) of six residents reviewed for ADLs. The facility census was 235. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #103's medical record revealed admission to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of cerebral infarction, need for assistance with personal care, diabetes mellitus type II, dysphagia, repeated falls, and aphasia. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #103 had moderate cognitive impairment. Resident #103's functional status was assessed as one to two person extensive assist with ADLs. The MDS assessment also revealed Resident #103 was frequently incontinent of urine and always incontinent of bowel. Review of the care plan dated 04/04/23 revealed Resident #103 may require assistance with ADLs and may be at risk for developing complications associated with decreased ADL…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-06-08 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure physician orders for a referral to a gynecologist were processed timely. This affected one (#184) of one residents reviewed for referrals to outside providers. The facility census was 235. Findings include: Medical record review for Resident #184 revealed an admission of 01/24/23 with diagnoses including but not limited to bipolar disorder with severe psychotic features, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, anemia, morbid obesity, heart failure, mastitis without abscess, chronic pain syndrome, pulmonary embolism, major depressive disorder, and hypertension. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #184 had an intact cognition. Review of the physicians order for Resident #184 revealed an order for a referral to a gynecologist dated 05/07/23. Review of a progress note dated 05/07/23 at 4:27 P.M. revealed a new order given by the nurse practitioner to obtain a urinalysis 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 · D2023-06-08 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, and resident and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a physician order was in place for use of a continuous glucose monitoring device. This affected one (#28) of one residents reviewed for the provision of glucose monitoring devices. The facility census was 235. Findings include: Medical record review for Resident #28 revealed and admission date of 06/06/22 with diagnoses including but not limited to hypertensive heart, chronic kidney disease, fluid overload, morbid obesity, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, major depressive disorder, hypertension, congestive heart failure, edema, diabetes mellitus, and interstitial pulmonary diseases. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #28 was assessed with intact cognition. Resident #28 required extensive assistance for bed mobility, transfers, and toileting with two staff members. Resident #28 received insulin daily during the assessment period. Review 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 · Dcited before2023-06-08 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, observation, resident and staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to medications were stored in a safe and secure manner. This affected one (#55) of three residents reviewed for medication storage. The facility census was 235. Findings include: Medical record review for Resident #55 revealed an admission date on 08/23/16 with diagnoses including but not limited to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hypothyroidism, neuralgia and neuritis, pain in shoulder, diabetes mellitus, and chronic pain. Review of a physician order dated 05/25/23 revealed Resident #55 was ordered the topical pain medication Voltaren gel one (1) percent (%) applied to the back daily. Observation on 06/06/23 at 10:31 A.M. of Resident #55's bathroom shelf revealed an open, half used, labeled tube of Voltaren gel 1%. Interview on 06/06/23 at 10:31 A.M. with Resident #55 stated he used the Voltaren gel on his shoulder and back, and the staff would apply it for him. Resident #55 stated a nurse gave it to him to use on his shoulder a while ago and told him to keep it.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2020-01-30 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and review of the facility's Legionella documentation the facility failed to have an adequate implemented Legionella program. This had the potential to affect all of the residents of the facility. The facility also failed to obtain an order for isolation precautions. This affected one Resident (#116) of two reviewed for infections. The facility census was 265. Findings include: 1. Review of documentation titled Monitoring Control Measures to Prevent Growth and Spread of Legionella revealed that a control limit be be checked was chlorine > (greater than) .3. Further review revealed that levels documented were 8.1 on 01/02/19, 7.4 on 02/03/19, 7.4 on 03/04/19, 7.3 on 04/02/19, 7.3 on 05/18/19, 7.3 on 06/20/19, 7.3 on 07/02/19, 7.6 on 08/01/19, 7.4 on 09/05/19, 7.4 on 10/10/19, 7.4 on 11/01/19, 7.3 on 12/05/19, and 7.3 on 01/20/20. The facility was unable to provide a completed Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) toolkit for water management to prevent Legionella growth. Interview on 01/30/20 at 1:06 P.M. with the Maintenance Director (MD)…
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 · E2020-01-30 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, resident interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to conducted quarterly care conferences for residents. This affected four Residents (#39, #46, #78, and #110) of eight resident reviewed for care conferences. The facility census was 265. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #46 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including respiratory failure, malignant neoplasm (cancer) of the lung, and unspecified hearing loss bilaterally. Further review of the medical record revealed no documentation Resident #46 had, or ever been invited to a care conference since her admission conference on 09/23/19. Interview on 01/28/20 at 9:18 A.M., Resident #46 revealed she had not been invited to attend a care conference since initial review of her care. Interview on 01/28/20 at 2:38 P.M., Social Services (SS) #51 revealed residents were offered care conferences quarterly and by request. SS #51 verified Resident #46…
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 before2020-01-30 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to properly date and label food storage items in the kitchen to avoid contamination and spoilage. This had the potential to affect 264 out of 265 residents. The facility identified one resident (#521) as nothing by mouth (NPO). Findings include: Observation of the kitchen on 01/27/20 at 8:17 A.M. with Dietary Supervisor #196 revealed a bag of sausage links in the freezer which were opened to air and undated, a pouch of opened whipped topping in the refrigerator was undated, a bag of gravy mix open and undated in the dry food section, a bag of buns that were open to air and undated in the bread storage area, a pouch of grits open and undated in the dry food storage, and a bag of shredded lettuce in plastic wrap that was open and undated inside the refrigerator. Interview with Dietary Supervisor #196 on 0/27/20 at 9:00 A.M. confirmed the above food items were opened and undated but should have been dated when opened. Review of the facility policy titled Food Storage- Labeling and Dating, dated…
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 · D2020-01-30 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, resident and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain resident wheelchairs in good repair. This affected three Residents (#44, #218, and #231) of three reviewed for wheelchairs. The facility census was 265. Findings include: Observation on 01/30/20 at 11:19 A.M. with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #230 revealed Resident's #44, #218, and #231's wheelchairs had torn and missing fabric on the armrests and seats. The LPN verified at the time of the observation the resident's wheelchairs were not in good condition. LPN #230 stated the night shift staff were responsible for cleaning wheelchairs and should have reported the condition of the wheelchair to maintenance for repairs.
- Potential for harm · D2020-01-30 · 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 medical record review, observation, and staff interview, the facility failed to accurately complete Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments for residents. This affected three Residents (#46, #78, and #110) of 33 reviewed for MDS assessments. The facility census was 265. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #46 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including respiratory failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and unspecified hearing loss bilateral. Review of the the quarterly modification MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was cognitively intact with no noted behaviors. The MDS revealed the resident had adequate hearing with no hearing aids. Observation and interview on 01/28/20 09:05 A.M. with Resident #47 revealed during the interview the resident was noted to be significantly hard of hearing, holding her hand up to her ear in attempt to better hear. Resident #47 revealed she was waiting to get hearing aids. Interview on 01/29/20 at 3:54…
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 · D2020-01-30 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, and staff interview; the facility failed to follow up with therapy recommendations for a splint device. This affected one Resident (#195) of one reviewed for range of motion (ROM). The facility census was 265. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #195 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses include left hand contractures, digits three through five, Parkinson's disease, and dementia without behavioral disturbances. Review of Resident #195's Occupational Therapy (OT) Discharge summary dated [DATE], revealed the resident's therapy goals were to increase left hand, digits three through five, extension to increase functional use of left hand, to prevent decline in ROM. Prognoses was good with consistent staff follow-through. Splint/orthotic recommendations were posey palm protector to left hand as tolerated. Discharge recommendations were bilateral orthotic with staff assistance and continued ROM. Review of the plan of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2020-01-30 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation,staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to follow physician's oxygen administration orders for two Residents (#90 and #227) of three reviewed of oxygen administration. The facility census was 265. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #90's medical record revealed an admission date of 04/18/19 with diagnoses including non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Review of Resident #90's physician orders revealed an order dated 08/18/19 to administer oxygen at four liters per minute (LPM) via nasal cannula to maintain the resident's oxygen saturation level above 90%. Review of Resident #90's Minimum Data Set (MDS) quarterly assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was cognitively intact. The MDS further revealed the resident utilized oxygen. Observation of Resident #90 on 01/27/20 at 11:25 A.M. revealed the resident had an oxygen concentrator set to deliver oxygen at the rate of 2 LPM via a nasal cannula.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2020-01-30 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to timely report medication irregularities to the physician. This affected one Resident (#6) of five reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 265. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including dementia without behavioral disturbance, heart disease, psychosis, and obsessive-compulsive disorder. Review of physician orders dated 05/05/19 revealed Resident #6 was ordered Prozac (antidepressant/psychotropic) 20 milligrams (mg) daily for obsessive-compulsive disorder. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #6 was severely cognitively impaired. The MDS revealed the resident received both antipsychotic and antidepressant medications seven of the seven day look back period. There had been no gradual dose reduction (GDR) attempted and the physician had not documented a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2020-01-30 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and staff interview; the facility failed to hold Coumadin (blood thinner) as ordered for one Resident (#415) of six reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 265. Finding include: Review of the medical record for Resident #415 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses include disorder of kidney and ureter, malignant neoplasm (cancer) of endometrium, and atrial fibrillation (irregular heartbeat). Review of laboratory test results dated 01/27/20 revealed Resident #415's international normalized ratio (INR) (a test that measures the time for the blood to clot) was 3.6. The reference range for INR was documented as standard anticoagulant 2.0-3.0, and aggressive anticoagulant 2.5-3.5. The Certified Nurse Practitioner (CNP) ordered to hold two doses of Coumadin and restart on 01/29/20. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) dated 01/20 revealed Resident #415 was administered Coumadin on 01/27/20 and 01/28/20. Interview on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2020-01-30 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to properly store medications. This affected one of four medication rooms, and one medication cart of seven observed. The facility census was 93. Findings include: 1. Observation of the Brunner 3 medication room refrigerator on 01/30/20 art 10:32 A.M. revealed a open bottle of influenza vaccine (Afluria) dated opened 10/08/19. Review of an informational insert included in the Afluria medication box revealed that after the stopper of the vial was pierced it should be discarded after 28 days. Registered Nurse (RN) #36 confirmed during an interview on 01/16/20 at 10:32 A.M. that the opened Afluria bottle was outdated and should have been discarded. 2. A medication cart on the Brunner 2 was observed with RN #136 on 01/30/20 at 10:44 A.M. The medication cart was sitting in the hallway between rooms [ROOM NUMBERS]. Further observation revealed that the medication cart was unlocked and a nurse was not in direct view. RN #136…
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 · D2020-01-30 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolatedProvide timely, quality laboratory services/tests to meet the needs of residents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to complete resident labs as ordered by the physician. This affected one Resident (#6) of five reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 265. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses psychosis, hyperlipidemia, Alzheimer's Disease, and hypertension. Review of physician orders dated 05/05/19 revealed Resident #6 was ordered laboratory draws for the comprehensive metabolic panel (CMP), lipid panel, and hemoglobin A1C (blood sugar) blood test in one week and every six months. Review of the facility laboratory results sheets dated 05/13/19 reveled all three labs were noted completed as ordered. Review of the six month draw dated 11/01/19 revealed Resident #6's CMP was completed however the lipid panel and A1C were not. Interview on 01/30/20 at 9:18 A.M., with Corporate Registered Nurse (CRN) #350 verified the facility…
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 FOUNDATIONS HEALTH SOLUTIONS — 64 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 4 of 5 | 4.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 4.1 | -1.1 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.3 | +0.7 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.3 | +0.7 vs chain |
The other 63 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.2★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 63; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| COLLERAN, BRIAN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2019 |
| KRYSTOWSKI, JOHN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/01/2018 |
| FOUNDATIONS HEALTH SOLUTIONS, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2019 |
| PRICE, AUSTIN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/24/2020 |
| FERGUSON, HAROLD | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/01/2018 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 11 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $3.7M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 15% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in OH
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Ohio Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-09-01 — CMS provider number 365322. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-07-16, 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.