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

Vancrest Health Care Center Of Eaton

1600 Park Avenue, Eaton, OH 45320 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 81 certified beds · (937) 456-3010 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (937) 456-3010 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Resident-funds citation (F0567)Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0758)
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (32% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0567)

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.

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★ 2/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
450-B Washington Jackson Rd #108 · (937) 456-8330 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
450 Washington Jackson Rd · (937) 456-8382 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Kroger0.6 mi
1707 N Barron St · (937) 300-4160 · Call to confirm hours
Park
1601 Park Ave · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
450 W Washington Jackson Rd · (937) 583-5205

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 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 fell from 5 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.

Overall rating3★
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 increased3.7%5.3%15.4%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight6.4%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 symptoms99.5%30.1%6.5%worse 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 injury5.4%3.2%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened2.9%6.1%16.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication10.6%25.5%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%94.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers0.0%3.4%4.7%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control21.1%21.4%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table2.5%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 vaccine93.4%75.6%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission31.7%24.9%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit21.2%12.9%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days3.321.731.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days3.591.801.80worse

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

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.

48.0% 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 122 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

48.0%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.5%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
65.0%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.56U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.31hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.21hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.04hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 65.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 80 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 0.56 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 86% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 14% 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 SNF48.0%CMS range 39.9–55.751.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.5%CMS range 7.4–15.210.7%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 discharge65.0%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 discharge52.5%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 discharge57.5%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 identified100.0%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 worsened0.0%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 hospitalization7.9%CMS range 3.7–12.27.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.891.02Oct 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

0.64
RN hours/ resident / day
0.85
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.59
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.09
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.37
RN hoursweekends
32.1%
Total nursing turnover
15.4%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 81 beds and averages 68.5 residents a day — about 85% occupied, or roughly 12 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 4.09 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.64 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.59 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 3.35 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.38 on weekdays — 23% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.76 to 0.37 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 32% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

7
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-02-26)
2
at the previous standard inspection (2023-01-12)

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.

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

  • Potential for harm · F2026-02-26 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to store food in a sanitary manner. This had the potential to affect all residents receiving meals from the facility kitchen. The facility census was 69 residents. Findings include: Observation on 02/23/26 at 10:10 A.M. of the walk-in freezer revealed it contained the following: a bag of ham in a zip lock bag with an expiration date of 05/29/24, two loaves of rye bread without expiration dates, a bag of opened and undated French fries. Observation on 02/23/26 at 10:20 A.M. of the reach in refrigerator revealed it contained a box of waffles opened and undated and a bag ravioli that was opened, undated, and had an expiration date of 08/03/25. Interview on 02/23/26 at 10:25 A.M. with Facility [NAME] (FC) # 202 verified the items in the walk-in freezer and the reach-in refrigerator should have been dated upon opening and discarded when expired. Review of the facility policy titled Storage of Staples dated January 2022 revealed frozen foods should not be stored in a frozen state for more than…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2026-02-26 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on review of facility documents and staff interview, the facility failed to conduct a complete assessment of the facility's risk for tuberculosis (TB.) This had the potential to affect all of the residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 69 residents.Findings include: Review of the facility's TB risk assessment worksheet revealed it was undated and unsigned, and many portions of the form were not completed. The following areas were not addressed: indication of the risk level for TB (low, moderate, or ongoing transmission), number of beds in the facility, indication if there was a high incidence of immunocompromised patients or healthcare workers in the facility. Interview on 02/25/26 at 11:40 A.M. with Registered Nurse (RN) #257, the designated Infection Preventionist (IP) for the facility, the Administrator, and the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed the facility was a low-risk setting and had no current or recent cases of TB. RN #257 stated when she assumed the IP role she did not complete the TB risk assessment form in its entirety. Review of 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2026-02-26 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to manage his or her financial affairs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to equitably credit interest earned from the shared resident trust account to individual resident trust accounts. This affected four (Residents #8, #39, #46 and #51) of 42 residents who had accounts with the facility. The facility census was 69 residents.Findings include: Review of resident trust account statements for Residents #8, #39, #46 and #51 revealed interest was added to the accounts randomly and was not calculated based on the balance of funds in the accounts. Interview on 02/26/26 at 3:07 P.M. with Social Services Director (SSD) #253 and Assisted Living Director (ALD) #227 confirmed the facility did not add interest to individual resident accounts based on the balance of funds in the account. Interest was awarded to accounts monthly by alphabetical lists. SSD #253 confirmed they broke up the accounts managed by the facility into fourths and rotated through each list quarterly applying interest. SSD #253 and ALD #227 confirmed there were no calculations made of account balances and interest was awarded based…

    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 · D2026-02-26 · 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

    Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure medications were secure. This affected one (Resident #40) and had the potential to affect three residents identified by the facility as being cognitively impaired and independently mobile. The facility census was 69 residents. Findings include:Review of the medical record of Resident #40 revealed an admission date of 01/06/26 with diagnoses including type two diabetes mellitus, spinal stenosis, anxiety disorder, and overactive bladder. Observation on 02/23/26 at 3:20 P.M. revealed Registered Nurse (RN) #262 entered Resident #40's room with a medication cup with various medications and a small tub of vanilla pudding. RN #262 placed the items on the overbed table and walked out of the room, closing the door behind her. Resident #40 began to take the medications, using pudding. RN #262 then returned to the room with a glass of water. Interview on 02/23/26 at 3:21 P.M. with RN #262 confirmed she had left the medications unattended on Resident #40's overbed…

    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 · D2026-02-26 · 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

    Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to perform proper incontinence care. This affected one (Resident #69) of one resident reviewed for incontinence care. The facility census was 69 residents. Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #69 revealed an admission date of 12/15/25 with diagnoses including end stage renal disease, chronic combined congestive heart failure, and hemiplegia and hemiparesis following a stroke. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #69 dated 12/22/25 revealed the resident was cognitively impaired, was dependent on staff for toileting, and had an indwelling urinary catheter. Observation on 02/26/26 at 10:20 A.M. of catheter care for Resident #69 per Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) #269 and #285 revealed the aides removed the incontinent brief and used a disposable wipe to cleanse the resident's peri area separating the labia and wiping from the front to back. CNA #269 then arranged the wipe to a different section before wiping again.…

    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 · D2026-02-26 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and resident interview, the facility failed to ensure only licensed staff administered oxygen to residents and that oxygen tubing was handled in a sanitary manner. This affected one (Resident #49) of 14 facility-identified residents receiving oxygen. The facility failed also failed to ensure oxygen tubing was dated. This affected two (Residents#13 and #22) of 14 facility-identified residents receiving oxygen. The facility census was 69 residents. Findings include: 1.Review of the medical record of Resident #49 revealed an admission date of 10/23/25 with diagnoses include acute and chronic respiratory failure, pulmonary fibrosis, and interstitial lung disease. Review of the physician's orders for Resident #49 revealed an order dated 10/31/25 for continuous oxygen at three liters per minute via nasal cannula. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #49 dated 12/28/25 revealed the resident cognitively impaired and received oxygen. Observation on 02/23/26 at 11:59 A.M. revealed Resident #49 was seated in…

    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 · D2026-02-26 · tag F0849 — isolated
    Arrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice services.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, review of hospice visit logs, facility staff interview, hospice staff interview, and review of hospice contracts, the facility failed to ensure hospice documentation was sufficient and available for review by facility staff to ensure assessments, treatments and care planning were provided per plan of care. Additionally, the facility failed to jointly collaborate with hospice to develop resident care plans. This affected two (Residents #23 and #58) of two residents reviewed for hospice services. The census was 69 residents.Findings include: 1.Review of the medical record for Resident #58 revealed an admission on [DATE] with diagnoses including non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and heart failure. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #58 dated 01/31/26 for the resident revealed the resident had impaired cognition, was dependent on staff for activities of daily living (ADLs), and received hospice services. Review of the hospice plan of care for Resident #58 dated 12/13/25…

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

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-07 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observations, staff interview, review of facility policy and review of Centers for Disease and Prevention (CDC) guidelines, the facility failed to ensure infection control procedures were followed during incontinence care. This affected one (#11) out of three residents reviewed for incontinence care. The facility census was 71. Findings include: Review of medical record for Resident #11 revealed admission date of 07/11/24. Diagnoses include dementia without behavior and type two diabetes mellitus. Review of Resident #11's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed she had a Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score of 11 indicating impaired cognition. Resident #11 required moderate assistance with toileting hygiene, was independent with eating moderate assistance for transfers, supervision for bed mobility. Resident #11 was always in urine and bowel. Observation of incontinence care for Resident #11 on 01/07/25 at 9:37 A.M. revealed Certified Nursing…

    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 · D2023-01-12 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure as needed (PRN) antipsychotic medications prescribed were limited to 14 days. Additionally, the facility failed to re-evaluate a resident for continued use of PRN antipsychotic medication. This affected one (Resident #14) of five residents reviewed for psychotropic medications. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure pharmacy recommendations were addressed by the physician in a timely manner. This affected one (Resident #15) of five residents reviewed for pharmacy recommendation response. The facility's census was 49. Findings include: 1. Medical record review for Resident #14 revealed an admission date of 07/15/22. Resident #14 was discharged on 08/04/22 and returned on 09/06/22 with diagnoses including but not limited to respiratory failure, interstitial pulmonary disease, pulmonary fibrosis, peripheral vascular disease, paroxysmal fibrillation, chronic diastolic congestive heart failure,…

    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 · D2023-01-12 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure 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 observations, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure medication carts were secured when unattended. This had the potential to affect four (Residents #4, #12, #26, and #42) identified by the facility as confused and independently mobile residing on the South unit. The facility census was 49. Findings included: Observation on 01/09/23 at 12:20 P.M. revealed the medication cart located on the South unit was unlocked and unattended. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #119 was in a resident's room. Interview on 01/09/23 at 12:30 P.M. with LPN #119 verified the medication cart was unlocked and unattended while she was in a resident's room. Observation on 01/11/23 at 11:21 A.M. revealed the medication cart located on the South unit was unlocked and unattended. Interview on 01/11/23 at 11:29 A.M. with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #119 verified the medication cart was unlocked and unattended in the unit hallway LPN #119 verified the medication cart should be locked when unattended. Review of the facility policy titled Storage of Medication 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2019-10-03 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — pattern
    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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, policy review, staff interview, review of center for disease control (CDC) guidance the facility failed to provide pneumonia vaccinations according to current CDC guidelines. This directly affected five Residents (#17, #19, #23, #26 and #117) of five reviewed for immunizations. This had the potential to affect any resident eligible to receive the pneumococcal vaccination series by the physician. The total facility census was 65. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #17 was admitted on [DATE] and received the PPSV23 on 10/22/15, prior to admission. 2. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #19 was admitted on [DATE] and had received a Pneumococcal Polysaccharide Vaccine (PPSV)23 vaccination on 08/09/17, prior to admission. 3. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #23 was admitted on [DATE] and had a historical Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine (PCV)13 vaccination on 02/20/18, prior to admission. 4. Review of the medical record 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-10-03 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
    Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on closed medical record review, hospital documentation review, physical therapy progress notes, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the physician was notified timely of the resident's hypotensive BP assessments. This affected one (Resident #66) of one resident reviewed for hospitalization. The census was 65. Findings include: Review of the closed medical record revealed Resident #66 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included disorder involving immune mechanism, hypertension, atrial fibrillation, congestive heart failure, peripheral vascular disease, kidney transplant status, chronic kidney disease, complete atrioventricular block, left bundle branch block, and presence of a cardiac pacemaker. The resident was discharged to the hospital on [DATE]. Review of hospital documentation dated 06/26/19, prior to Resident #66's admission to the facility revealed her BP was 104/59. Review of Resident #66's BP assessments revealed on 06/26/19 the residents BP was 110/60.…

    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

“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.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to VANCREST HEALTH CARE CENTERS — 13 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 3 of 54.0-1.0 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 53.6-0.6 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 52.7+0.3 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.8-0.8 vs chain
The other 12 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.0★, per CMS)

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
BAGLEY, JONIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR10%since 01/01/1998
WHITE, MARKIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR90%since 01/01/1998
DENNIS, ROSEMARYIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 11/27/2001
MCCLEERY, MARKIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 10/01/2005
VANCREST MANAGEMENT CORP.OrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 10/01/2005

CMS files one row per role, so the 7 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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.

$6.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+0.0%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$936K
Related-party expense14% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 38%Medicare 12%Other / private 50%

This home reported $936K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 14% 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

$319per resident / day
operating cost
$9,710per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$320per 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 366084. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-26, 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