No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Cherith Care Center At Willow Brook

100 Willow Brook Way, South, Delaware, OH 43015 · Non profit - Church related · 34 certified beds · (740) 369-0048 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (740) 369-0048 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 14 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)

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.

5/5
CMS overall
5 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
104 W William St · (740) 273-6226 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1760 Columbus Pike · (740) 369-0422 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Kroger0.6 mi
1840 Columbus Pike · (740) 363-4398 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 3 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 4 to 5 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.

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased3.4%5.3%15.4%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight9.4%6.2%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.2%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%0.4%2.0%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms5.3%30.1%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury1.0%3.2%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened11.7%6.1%16.1%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication21.9%25.5%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%94.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers0.9%3.4%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control29.2%21.4%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table8.8%8.8%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.2%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.5%75.6%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission20.8%24.9%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit13.4%12.9%12.0%worse

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

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

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

50.2% 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 77 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

50.2%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
8.9%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
54.2%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.26U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.16hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.08hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.02hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 54.2% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 48 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.26 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 38% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 19% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF50.2%CMS range 39.4–59.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF8.9%CMS range 6.0–13.510.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge54.2%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge50.0%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge41.7%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified93.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot 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 stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened3.5%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.0%CMS range 3.7–11.87.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.741.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

0.66
RN hours/ resident / day
0.94
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.74
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.34
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.52
RN hoursweekends
49.0%
Total nursing turnover
44.4%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 34 beds and averages 31.5 residents a day — about 93% occupied, or roughly 2 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.34 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.66 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.74 is at or above 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 4.06 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.46 on weekdays — 9% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.72 to 0.52 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 49% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

8
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-05-28)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2023-05-04)

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. 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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

14 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · F2025-05-28 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespread
    Have a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on review of the payroll based journal (PBJ), staff interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure a Registered Nurse (RN) worked at least eight consecutive hours, seven days a week. This had the potential to affect all facility residents. Facility census 30. Findings include Review of the PBJ report from the review period of 10/01/24 to 12/31/24 revealed the facility triggered for no RN for at least eight hours a day, seven days per week. Review of the registered nurse schedule for October 2024 revealed on 10/05/24, 10/06/24, 10/19/24, and 10/20/24 the facility had no RN working in the nursing home. Review of the registered nurse schedule for November 2024 revealed on 11/02/24, 11/03/24, 11/16/24, 11/17/24 and 11/30/24 had no RN working in the nursing home. Review of the registered nurse schedule for December 2024 revealed on 12/01/24, 12/14/24, 12/15/24, and 12/29/24 the facility had no RN working in the nursing home. Interviews on 05/22/25 from 1:00 P.M. to 3:30 P.M. with the Administrator and Minimum Data Set (MDS) Nurse #389 confirmed the information provided…

    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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-28 · tag F0582 — isolated
    Give 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

    Based on record review, interview and policy review the facility failed to include all required information on the skilled nursing advanced beneficiary notice (ABN). This deficient practice affected two (Resident #14 and Resident #238) of three residents reviewed for cut letters. The facility census was 40. Finding include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #238 revealed an admission date of 02/16/2025. Diagnoses included dementia, difficulty walking, chronic kidney disease, adult failure to thrive, dementia, pressure ulcer of the sacral region, abnormal weight loss, encephalopathy, cognitive communication deficit, and Parkinson's disease. Review of the Skilled Nursing Facility ABN for Resident #238 revealed Beginning on (no date written), you may have to pay out of pocket for this care if you do not have other insurance that may cover these costs. Interview on 05/22/2025 at 2:25 P.M. with Social Worker (SW) #360 confirmed the missing date on the ABN form for Resident #238. SW#360 confirmed that the ABN form should be filled out completely when providing them to 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-28 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, interview, observation and policy review the facility failed to ensure physician ordered wound treatments were in place to promote wound healing This affected one (Resident #9) of one residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility census was 40. Finding include: Review of the medical record for Resident #9 revealed an admission date of 02/10/2018. Diagnoses included dementia, chronic kidney disease stage 2, cirrhosis of the liver, malignant neoplasm of the breast, urinary incontinence, Alzheimer's disease, anorexia, pressure ulcer of the sacral region, protein calorie malnutrition, and abnormal weight loss. Review of wound- weekly observation tool for Resident #9 dated 04/16/2025 revealed a suspected deep tissue injury (SDTI) (a localized area of discolored, intact skin or a blood-filled blister caused by damage to the underlying soft tissue, typically from pressure or sheer) on the resident's sacrum. Review of wound- weekly observation tool for Resident #9 dated 05/19/2025 revealed the continued presence of SDTI on the resident's sacrum. 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-28 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interview, policy and facility assessment review the facility failed to prevent Resident #88 from exiting the facility unsupervised and failed to complete a comprehensive assessment and thorough investigation following the incident. This affected one resident (Resident #88) of three residents reviewed for accidents. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #88 was admitted on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Parkinson's disease, type 2 diabetes, atherosclerotic heart disease, hyperlipidemia, mood disorder, benign prostatic hyperplasia, history of transient ischemic accident, and traumatic subdural hemorrhage. Review of hospital records (prior to admission) dated 04/21/25 revealed the resident had Parkinson's Disease with increased forgetfulness which was concerning with dementia. The resident had been placed on delirium precautions in the hospital. The wandering risk assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #88 was at low risk 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-28 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, review of standing orders, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the facility bowel protocol for constipation was followed for Resident #14 and Resident #24. This affected two (Resident #14 and #24) three reviewed for bowel and bladder. Facility census was 30. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #14 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis that included osteoarthritis, spinal stenosis, anxiety, major depressive disorder, type 2 diabetes, and chronic pain. A plan of care dated 03/18/25 revealed Resident #14 was a risk for constipation due to decreased mobility and medication use. Interventions included to follow facility bowel protocol for bowel management, milk of magnesia (laxative) as needed if no bowel movement in three days, monitor bowel movements every shift, and record bowel movement pattern each day. A significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #14 had cognitive impairment and was frequently incontinent of bowel 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-28 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    What the surveyor found here — 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 policy review, the facility failed to ensure a rationale was provided when a gradual dose reduction for psychotropic medications was contraindicated for Resident #24. This affected one (Resident #24) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Facility census was 30. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #24 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included major depressive disorder, chronic kidney disease, urinary retention, and anxiety disorder. Pharmacy recommendations dated 09/23/24 revealed Resident #24 had been receiving Zoloft (antidepressant) 100 milligram (mg) daily, mirtazapine (antidepressant) 7.5 mg daily, and hydroxyzine (antihistamine also used for anxiety) 25 mg daily without a gradual dose reduction (GDR). Pharmacy asked if a GDR could be attempted in order to be sure Resident #24 was using the minimum effective dose. If a GDR was not warranted, a statement needed to be included explaining why a GDR would be…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-28 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
    Safeguard 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, review of the incident and accident log, interview and policy review the facility failed to maintain complete and accurate medical records related to resident incidents. This affected one resident (Resident #14) of three residents reviewed for accidents. The facility census was 30. Findings include: Review of the medical revealed Resident #14 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis that included osteoarthritis, spinal stenosis, anxiety, major depressive disorder, type 2 diabetes, and chronic pain. Review of the incident and accident log revealed on 04/02/25 at 12:00 A.M. a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) reported Resident #14 was on the floor. Resident #14 was found sitting on the floor in front of her recliner. The CNA stated Resident #14 was sliding out of the recliner when the CNA attempted to reposition Resident #14 but Resident #14 slid out of the chair onto the floor. A new intervention for a non-slip material was to be placed in the recliner. The Committee Review of Incidents 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-28 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolated
    Develop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, interview, and policy review the facility failed to obtain resident or resident representative consent and provide education prior to administration of the influenza vaccination. This affected three resident residents (Resident #9, #10 and #20) of five residents reviewed for vaccinations. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #9 revealed an admission date of 02/10/2018. Diagnoses included dementia, atherosclerotic hear disease of native coronary artery, chronic kidney disease stage 2, cirrhosis of the liver, malignant neoplasm of the breast, Alzheimer's disease, anorexia, dysphagia, pressure ulcer of the sacral region, protein calorie malnutrition, and abnormal weight loss. Review of Resident #9's influenza vaccination 2024 records revealed an inoculation date of 09/17/2024. Further review of the medical record revealed no influenza consent or vaccine information/education was provided Interview on 05/22/2025 at 11:50 A.M. with Minimum Data Set (MDS) Coordinator #389 confirmed the facility gave Resident #9 an influenza vaccination 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2023-05-04 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, staff interview and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure safe and sanitary food storage in the refrigerator and freezer in the main kitchen area. This had the potential to affect all 31 residents residing in the facility who received food from the kitchen. Findings include: Observations on 05/01/23 at 9:56 A.M. of the kitchen revealed a cup of creamer or milk left uncovered and had spilled on a tray in the refrigerator; a pre-made plate of sausage with peppers and onions was left undated in the refrigerator; coconut shrimp was in an individually sized portioned zip lock bag and was left open to air in the freezer; a pack of veggie burgers were left open to air in the freezer; a bag of rice was on top of a container with rice bags inside of it. The individual bag was undated; a metal container of hot dogs were left uncovered and open to air in the freezer; a bag of fries was undated and had a hole with food coming out of the hole in the freezer; two pies were left on a rack in the walkway of the kitchen undated and uncovered open to air;…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-05-04 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interviews, review of the facility policy, and record review, the facility failed to ensure pharmacy recommendations were followed up and implemented timely. This affected three (Residents #14, #20 and #25) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 31. Findings include 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #20 revealed an admission date of 12/20/21. Diagnoses included gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #20 had moderate cognitive impairment. Review of the physician orders for Famotidine (treats GERD) revealed from 01/14/222 to 04/28/23, Famotidine was to be administered at 40 milligrams (mg) tablet daily. On 04/28/23, the order for Famotidine was changed to 20 mg tablet daily. Review of the monthly pharmacy recommendation dated 03/21/22 revealed it was reviewed by the physician on 03/24/22. The recommendation was for Famotidine 40 mg once daily to be decreased to 20 mg…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-05-04 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
    Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to have a medication error rate less than five percent. There were two medication errors out of 26 opportunities resulting an a 7.69 percent (%) medication error rate. This affected two (Resident #14 and #19) of four residents observed for medication administration. The facility census was 31. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #19's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included supraventricular tachycardia, age related osteoporosis, and dementia with severe agitation. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #19 was severely cognitively impaired, had no delusions, hallucinations, or behaviors documented. Review of Resident #19's physician orders revealed an order for Oyster Shell Calcium (supplement) 500 milligram (mg) - five micrograms (mcg) with Vitamin D twice daily. Observation of medications…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-05-04 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolated
    Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to administer insulin correctly to a resident, resulting in a resulting in a significant medication error. This affected one (Resident #14) of four residents observed for medication administration. The facility census was 31. Findings include: Review of Resident #14's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included depression, atrial fibrillation, and diabetes mellitus (DM). Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #14 was cognitively intact, had a diagnosis of DM, and received insulin. Observation of Resident #14 receiving medications from Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #601 on 05/02/23 at 11:48 A.M. revealed the resident received Novolog insulin five units via a delivery pen, and Oxybutynin (anticholinergic) five milligrams (mg) orally. LPN #601 was observed to dial the Novolog pen to five units and administer…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-10-17 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on medical record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure code status's in the electronic medical record were accurate. This affected two (#2 and #14) of 16 residents reviewed during the survey. The census was 31. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #2 revealed an admission date of 11/19/18 with diagnoses including irritable bowel syndrome, depression, and diabetes mellitus type two. Review of the electronic medical record revealed a physician's order dated 02/05/19 for Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) comfort care arrest. Review of the medical record for Resident #2 revealed a signed DNR Form dated 03/19/19 for Resident #2's code status to be DNR comfort care. Interview with Director of Nursing on 10/16/19 at 3:05 P.M. verified Resident #2's code status in the electronic medical record did not match the signed DNR form dated 03/19/19. 2. Review of the medical record for Resident #14 revealed an admission date of 10/16/18 with diagnoses including Parkinson's disease, depression, and hypertension. Review of the electronic…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-10-17 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop 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 and policy review, the facility failed to update care plan interventions following a resident fall. This affected two (#9 and #79) of two residents reviewed for accidents. Facility census was 31. Findings include 1. Review of medical record revealed Resident #79 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included vertebral fracture of thoracic vertebrae 11 and 12, brain cancer, hypertension, and history of falling. Review of the comprehensive assessment dated revealed 10/02/19 revealed the resident had moderate cognitive impairment. Resident #79 required partial to moderate assistance for sit to stand, toilet transfers, and bed to chair transfers. Review of the comprehensive assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #79 had a history of falls prior to admission, one of which resulted in a fracture. The resident had fallen since admission and received an injury (not a major injury). Review of progress notes revealed on 09/23/19 Resident #79 was washing…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
BARTH, PHILIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2005
DAVIS, BRANDIIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/11/2024
DULGAR, JASONIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 11/13/2023
IRWIN, TERRYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2005
JOHNSON, KIMIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 11/14/2019
JOHNSON, WILLIAMIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 11/14/2019
LONGO, SCOTTIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 03/10/2007
MARCH, JUDYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 08/10/2017
MCKENNA, BLYTHEIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/23/2025
PICKENS, ROGERIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 11/08/2012
SARKEL, EDIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 05/09/2019
SLINGLUFF, DANAIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 03/18/2023
SUSENNA, KARENIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 11/09/2017
TIDWELL, PEGGYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 03/16/2013
MCKNIGHT, MATTHEWIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/09/2023
POULSON, THOMASIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/28/2010
KETRON, NICOLEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2005
HUCEK, PETERIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 06/13/2018

CMS files one row per role, so the 37 rows in the source record cover these 18 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.

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.

$3.4M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-22.3%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 4%Medicare 9%Other / private 87%

A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$381per resident / day
operating cost
$11,586per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$312per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in Ohio
$9,186/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$10,389/mo
Nursing home (private)
$6,103/mo
Assisted living

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 366246. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-05-28, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next