Life Care Center Of Elyria

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

60.5% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 311 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 89.9% 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 159 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 0.66 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 90% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 99 beds and averages 91.7 residents a day — about 93% occupied, or roughly 7 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.84 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.68 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.17 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.35 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.04 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.78 to 0.45 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 35% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 3 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

22 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 12 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · D2023-04-20 · tag F0644 — isolated
  Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to coordinate a level II assessment for a resident with a diagnosis of intellectual disabilities as required. This affected one (#316) of two residents reviewed for pre-admission screening and resident review (PASARR) status. The census was 92. Findings include: Review of Resident #316's medical record revealed an admission date of 04/07/23 with diagnoses that included unspecified intellectual disabilities, impulse disorder, major depressive disorder, and anxiety disorder. Review of the PASARR form completed prior to admission revealed the form did not address any of Resident #316's mental illnesses or intellectual disability which would have required a referral for a level II evaluation to the state agency. Further review of the medical for Resident #316 revealed no evidence of a corrected PASARR assessment or referral to the state agency as required. Interview on 04/18/23 at 4:44 P.M., with Social Worker #638 verified the facility did not address the incorrect PASARR or coordinate referral to the state agency…

  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 · D2023-04-20 · tag F0646 — isolated
  Notify the appropriate authorities when residents with MD or ID services has a significant change in condition.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to timely notify the appropriate state mental health authority when a resident with a level II mental illness had a significant change in condition. This affected one (#51) of four residents reviewed for Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR). The census was 92. Findings include: Review of Resident #51's medical record revealed an admission to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, impulse disorder, vascular dementia with agitation and mood disturbance, Moyamoya disease, and psychosis. Review of the Medicare Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #51 had moderate cognitive impairment. The assessment indicated Resident #51 had physical and verbal behaviors directed towards others and rejected care. Review of social services progress note dated 01/15/23 revealed Resident #51 was sent to the hospital for evaluation. Review of nursing progress note…

  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 · D2023-04-20 · tag F0685 — isolated
  Assist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and medical record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had ophthalmologist recommendations followed up in a timely manner. This affected one (#54) of two reviewed for ancillary services. The census was 92. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #54 revealed an admission date of 06/16/22 and diagnoses including chronic kidney disease, congestive heart failure, dementia, and polyneuropathy. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #54 had intact cognition and had adequate vision with corrective lenses. Review of progress note dated 01/17/23 revealed Resident #54 had a vision appointment. Review of an eye care provider note dated 01/17/23 revealed Resident #54 complained of blurry vision. The assessment indicated Resident #54 was provided a prescription for new glasses and would be ordered pending insurance or payer approval. Review of a progress note dated 02/27/23 revealed Resident #54's daughter requested information on the…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-04-20 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
  Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of a facility policy, the facility failed to provide timely nutritional supplements as ordered. This affected one (#305) of two resident reviewed for nutrition. The census was 92. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #305 revealed an admission date of 04/04/23. Diagnoses included chronic kidney disease, moderate protein calorie malnutrition, psychosis, dementia, depression, bradycardia, anxiety disorder, and hypotension. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #305 was cognitively intact, required supervision for eating, and had an active diagnosis of malnutrition. Review of the comprehensive care plan dated 04/10/23 revealed Resident #305 had nutritional problems of moderate malnutrition and a revision to the care plan on 04/19/23 revealed Resident #305 had weight loss. Goals identified within the care plan revealed Resident #305 would maintain adequate nutritional status as…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-04-20 · tag F0699 — isolated
  Provide care or services that was trauma informed and/or culturally competent.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, resident and staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure residents who were survivors of trauma were assessed and care planned appropriately to address such trauma to maintain the residents highest practical well being. This affected one (#4) of one resident reviewed for trauma informed care. The census was 92. Findings include: Review of Resident #4's medical record revealed and admission dare of 08/06/17 with diagnoses that included multiple sclerosis, bipolar disorder, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #4 was cognitively intact and required extensive assistance of two staff persons for completing her activities of daily living. Review of the psychiatric progress note dated 02/08/23 revealed Resident #4 was abused sexually by her cousin, babysitter, and her step father's father. The progress note also revealed Resident #4 was hospitalized in a psychiatric setting three…

  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 · F2019-09-19 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on observation, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure food was stored properly when staff failed to cover foods stored in the freezer. This had the potential to affect all 95 residents that resided in the facility who consumed food from the kitchen. Findings include: Observation on 09/16/19 at 10:36 A.M. revealed a metal cart sitting in the walk-in freezer. On the shelf of the cart there were five baking sheet trays with breaded fish and one baking sheet tray with hushpuppies. None of the baking sheet trays were covered to protect the food. Interview on 09/16/19 at 10:37 A.M., with the Executive Chef (EC) #172 revealed all foods stored in the walk-in freezer were to be covered to protect the food. EC #172 confirmed there were five trays of breaded fish and one tray of hushpuppies stored on a metal cart, in the walk-in freezer, uncovered. Review of a facility policy titled, Food Safety, most recent revision date 11/28/17, revealed staff were to store food in a clean, safe and sanitary manner.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-09-19 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of a facility policy, the facility failed to ensure residents were given an opportunity to formulate advanced directives on admission. The facility further failed to ensure resident's advanced directive wishes were consistent throughout the medical record. This affected two residents (#249 and #55) of 21 residents reviewed for advanced directives. The facility census was 95. Findings include: 1. Medical record review revealed Resident #249 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included congestive heart failure and urine retention. Review of the resident's electronic health record (EHR) revealed the resident's advanced directive wish was to be a Do Not Resuscitate Comfort Care (DNR-CC), which meant no resuscitative actions to maintain life would be attempted. The EHR further revealed staff were directed to see the resident's living will for instructions. Further review of the resident's EHR revealed no documented evidence the resident requested…

  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 · D2019-09-19 · 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 medical record review, staff interview and review of a facility policy, the facility failed to notify a resident's physician, responsible party and Hospice provider of a change in a wound status and to timely notify a resident's family of a fall. This affected two residents (#13 and #94) of 21 residents reviewed for notification. The facility census was 95. Findings include: 1. Medical record review revealed Resident #13 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, dementia and hypertension. Review of the resident's comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed the resident's cognition was severely impaired. Review of a nursing progress note dated 09/07/19 at 3:04 P.M., revealed the resident's dressing on her right leg was completed. A large amount of greenish, brown drainage was noted on the old dressing with a foul odor. There was no evidence in the medical record the physician, responsible party or the Hospice provider were notified. Interview…

  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 · D2019-09-19 · tag F0625 — isolated
  Notify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on medical record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure written notification of the facilities bed hold policy was provided to the resident and representative, at the time of transfer. This affected two residents (#75 and #94) of two reviewed for hospitalizations. The facility census was 95. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #75's medical record identified admission to the facility occurred on 04/19/19 and he was paying privately for services at the facility. The record identified on 07/21/19 and 08/05/19 Resident #75 required hospitalizations. Further review of the medical record identified a lack of written notification of the bed hold policy to Resident #75 and his representative, at the time of transfer/discharge. Interview with Business office Manager (BOM) #128 on 09/18/19 at 10:50 A.M. confirmed she had no written notification of the bed hold policy being provided to Resident #75 or his representative. 2. Review of Resident #94's medical record identified admission to the facility occurred on 07/28/19, with medical diagnosis including; Chronic…

  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 · D2019-09-19 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observations, staff interview, resident interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure two residents (#13 and #75) of three reviewed for pressure ulcers had treatments and services to promote healing and prevent new ulcers from development. The facility identified nine residents with pressure ulcers. The facility census was 95. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #75's medical record identified admission to the facility occurred on 04/19/19 with medical diagnosis including; B cell lymphoma, feeding tube, pressure ulcer stage 4 (Full-thickness skin and tissue loss with exposed or directly palpable fascia, muscle, tendon, ligament, cartilage or bone in the ulcer) to sacrum with sepsis, anemia and multiple strokes. The readmission assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #75 was cognitively intact. Review of the wound clinic notes dated 09/13/19 revealed Resident #75 returned from the appointment with new physician orders to hold the wound vacuum for one…

  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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to LIFE CARE CENTERS OF AMERICA — 194 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

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

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 28 rows in the source record cover these 16 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.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

This home reported $2.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 19% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

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

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in OH