Parkside Nursing And Rehabilitation Center
908 Symmes Road, Fairfield, OH 45014 · For profit - Corporation · 76 certified beds · (513) 868-6500 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has 2 actual-harm citations
- a high number of inspection citations overall (34) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $36,550 in federal fines (most recent 2025-07-31)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 4 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 3.2% | 5.3% | 15.4% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.2% | 6.2% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 0.4% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 9.9% | 30.1% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.0% | 3.2% | 3.3% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 2.3% | 6.1% | 16.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 30.4% | 25.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.7% | 94.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 9.5% | 3.4% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 12.5% | 21.4% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 3.7% | 8.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 5.6% | 1.2% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 87.5% | 75.6% | 79.4% | better |
* 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.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.18 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 17% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 9% 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
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.8%CMS range 8.1–15.6 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 4.8% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.02 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 76 beds and averages 70.9 residents a day — about 93% occupied, or roughly 5 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 4.52 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.53 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.53 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 3.78 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.82 on weekdays — 22% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.57 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 48% 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
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.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
34 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 22 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2025-07-31 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, review of the facility policy, and review of online guidelines per the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (NPUAP), the facility failed to implement treatment once the pressure ulcers were identified. This resulted in Actual Harm for Resident #34, who was admitted to the facility without pressure ulcers and developed pressure ulcers to her right antecubital and left antecubital space (inside of the elbows), which were not identified and treated until they had developed into stage IV ulcers with exposed tendon. This affected one (Resident #34) of five residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility census was 67 residents. Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #34 revealed an admission date of 04/25/24 with diagnoses including chronic respiratory failure, encephalopathy, and epilepsy. Review of the pressure ulcer risk assessment for Resident #34 dated 04/25/24 revealed the resident was at high risk for the development of pressure ulcers. Review of the physician’s orders for Resident #34…
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.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2023-08-01 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation, staff interview, review of facility policy, and review of guidelines from the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (NPUAP), the facility failed to thoroughly assess the resident's skin and failed to timely identify a resident's pressure ulcer until it reached an advanced stage which resulted in actual harm to Resident #44 who developed an unstageable pressure ulcer to the left flank which required sharp debridement. The facility also failed to develop and implement a care plan to prevent skin breakdown which placed the resident (#74) at risk for more than potential harm that was not actual harm. This affected two (Residents #44 and #74) of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility census was 73. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #44 revealed an admission date of 03/31/18 with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), diffuse traumatic brain injury (TBI), chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-07-31 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to store, prepare, and serve food in a sanitary manner and the facility failed to properly store potentially hazardous cleaning agents away from food preparation areas. This had the potential to affect all residents who receive food from the kitchen. The facility identified ten (Residents #1, #5, #15, #16, #35, #38, #46, #53, #64, #84) who do not receive food from the kitchen. The facility census was 67 residents. Findings include: 1.Observation during the initial tour of the kitchen on 07/21/25 at 8:50 A.M. with the Dietary Manager (DM) #102 revealed the refrigerator contained the following unlabeled and undated items: a large open metal container of cooked hamburgers, a large container of what appeared to be cooked sweet potatoes, a large metal container of chicken noodle soup, a large metal container of mashed potatoes, a container of cooked omelets, thirteen individual fruit cups in a paper containers, several…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2025-07-31 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, review of the facility's Legionella Water Management Plan, observation of hot water tank temperatures, staff interview, and review of the facility legionella mission statement, the facility failed to ensure implementation and maintenance of the legionella water management plan. This had the potential to affect all residents in the facility. The facility census was 67 residents.Findings include: Review of a facility document titled Legionella Water Management Plan undated revealed water entered the facility from the local public water supply and was stored in five holding tanks that were heated by natural gas and/or electricity. There was a tank in a storage room located adjacent to the kitchen that supplied hot water only to the kitchen. There were two tanks located in the dirty utility room of the 100 and 200-nursing units. One tank was designated to supply hot water to the 100-nursing unit, and one tank was designated to supply hot water to the 200-nursing unit. There were two tanks located in the dirty utility room of the 300 and 400-nursing units dirty…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2025-07-31 · tag F0947 — failed to train nurse aides adequately — widespreadEnsure nurse aides have the skills they need to care for residents, and give nurse aides education in dementia care and abuse prevention.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on review of personnel files, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) completed the required annual number of continuing education hours. This had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 67 residents. Findings include: 1.Review of the personnel file for CNA #8 revealed a hire date of 12/07/22 with five hours of continuing education for calendar year 2024.Interview on 07/28/25 at 10:03 A.M. with Human Resources Manager (HRM) #109 verified CNA #8 had only five hours of continuing education completed for calendar year 2024. 2. Review of the personnel file for CNA #15 revealed a hire date of 02/13/23 with five hours of continuing education for calendar year 2024.Interview on 07/28/25 at 10:05 A.M. with HRM #109 verified CNA #15 had only five hours of continuing education completed for calendar year 2024 and the requirement was 12 hours of continuing education annually for CNAs.
- Potential for harm · E2025-07-31 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to maintain a clean, safe, and sanitary environment. This affected two (Residents #3 and #62) and had the potential to affect all of the residents in the facility with the exception of seven facility-identified residents (#6, #18, #41, #45, #51, #67, #68) who did not utilize the shower rooms. The facility census was 67 residents.Findings include:1.Review of the medical record for Resident #3 revealed an admission date of 04/30/24 with diagnoses including atherosclerotic heart disease and osteoarthritis. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #3 dated 6/14/25 revealed the resident had impaired cognition and required staff assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs.) Review of the medical record for Resident #62 revealed an admission date of 5/29/25 with diagnoses including traumatic subdural hemorrhage, cerebral infarction, hypertension, heart failure, and spinal stenosis. Review of the MDS assessment for Resident #62 dated 7/09/25 revealed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-07-31 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, resident interview, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to hold resident care conferences on a regular basis. This affected five (Residents #4, #83, #20, #34, and #41) of five residents reviewed for care planning. The facility census was 67 residents. Findings include:1.Review of the medical record for Resident #4 revealed an admission date of 04/21/23 with diagnoses including chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, morbid obesity, and diabetes mellitus. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #4 revealed the resident had intact cognition and was dependent on staff with activities of daily living (ADLs.) Interview on 07/21/25 at 10:18 A.M. with Resident #4 confirmed no knowledge of when he or his wife last attended a care conference. Review of the care conference summary reports for Resident #4 revealed the facility did not conduct care conferences for the resident for the third quarter of 2024, the first quarter of 2025, and the second quarter of 2025. Interview on 07/23/25 at 3:39 P.M. with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-31 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, resident interview, staff interview, resident representative interview, review of Self-Reported Incidents (SRIs), and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to honor a resident's right to refuse a haircut. This affected one (Resident #71) of four residents reviewed for resident rights. The facility census was 67 residents.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #71 revealed an admission date of 09/15/22 with diagnoses including traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage, hydrocephalus, anoxic brain damage and epilepsy. Review of the shower sheet for Resident #71 dated 05/09/25 revealed the resident had a haircut. Interview on 07/21/25 at 1:19 P.M. with Resident #71 confirmed on 05/09/25 the facility staff cut her hair without her permission. Resident #71 stated the staff put her in a chair and held her down. Resident #71 stated she did not want the haircut, but they did it anyway. Interview on 07/22/2025 at 2:50 P.M. with Resident #71's power of attorney (POA) confirmed he felt the resident needed a haircut and he gave the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-31 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, staff interview, resident representative interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to notify residents in writing of room moves and failed to notify resident representatives of room moves. This affected one (Resident #5) of one resident reviewed for room moves. The facility census was 67 residents. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #5 revealed an admission date of 12/20/24 with diagnoses including hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy, cerebral infarction, congestive heart failure (CHF), hypertension, and schizoaffective disorder. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #5 dated 04/15/25 revealed the resident had impaired cognition and was dependent on staff for assistance with medication administration, transfers, eating, and personal care. Review of the progress notes for Resident #5 dated 06/17/25 60 06/19/25 revealed the notes did not include information regarding a room change on 06/17/25 through 06/19/25. Interview on 07/22/2025 at 10:22 A.M. with Resident #5's representative…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-31 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolatedKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
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 maintain privacy of the resident electronic medical record (EMR). This affected one (Resident #53) of three residents reviewed for privacy. The facility census was 67 residents.Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #53 revealed an admission date of 06/03/25 with diagnoses including chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, cerebrovascular accident, and diabetes mellitus type two. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #53 06/10/25 revealed the resident had severe cognitive impairment and was dependent on staff assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs.) Observation on 07/21/25 at 11:18 A.M. revealed the respiratory therapy treatment cart on the 400-nursing unit was unattended with an open computer monitor that displayed private health information from Resident #53's EMR. Interview on 07/21/25 at 11:18 A.M. with Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #56 verified the facility staff had failed to protect the privacy…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-31 · tag F0637 — isolatedAssess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
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 ensure comprehensive assessments were conducted within 14 days of a significant change in resident status. This affected one (Resident # 41) of three residents reviewed for comprehensive assessments. The facility census was 67 residents. Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #41 revealed an admission date of 08/23/24 with diagnoses including acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, dependence on mechanical ventilation, tracheostomy, and cerebral infarction. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #41 dated 06/28/25 revealed the resident had intact cognition and was dependent on staff for activities of daily living (ADLs). Review of the pulmonary progress note for Resident #41 dated 07/09/25 revealed the physician gave an order to decannulate (remove the breathing tube) for the resident. Review of the progress note for Resident #41 dated 07/09/25 revealed Respiratory Therapist (RT) #108 decannulated the resident. Review of the medical record for Resident #41 revealed it…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-31 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure baseline care plans were completed upon admission and a summary was provided to the resident and/or resident's representative within 48 hours of admission. This affected one (Resident #83) of three residents reviewed for admission rights. The facility census was 67 residents.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #83 revealed an admission date of 12/27/24 with diagnoses including anoxic brain damage, and post-traumatic seizures and a discharge date of 06/03/25.Review of the initial/admission care conference report for Resident #83 dated 12/27/24 revealed the facility did not provide a summary of the baseline care plan to the resident.Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #83 dated 06/03/25 revealed the resident had intact cognition and required staff assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs.)Phone interview on 07/24/25 at 9:16 A.M. with Resident #83 confirmed he could not remember a time when the facility ever met with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 22 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-31 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, observation, and staff interview, the facility failed to identify and initiate prompt treatment for non-pressure wounds. This affected one (Resident #5) of one resident reviewed for skin conditions. The facility census was 67 residents. Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #5 revealed an admission date of 12/20/24 with diagnoses including hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy, cerebral infarction, congestive heart failure (CHF), schizoaffective disorder, and hidradenitis suppurativa. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #5 dated 04/15/25 revealed the resident had impaired cognition and was dependent on staff assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs.) Review of the progress note for Resident #5 dated 07/14/25 at 1:50 P.M. revealed the nurse identified blood on the resident pillow and an open wound behind the resident's right ear. The nurse applied A&D ointment to the area.Review of the progress notes for Resident #5 dated 07/23/25 at 11:39 A.M. revealed there was an open area behind the resident's right…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-31 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, resident interview, staff interview, and review the facility policy, the failed to appropriately assess and treat resident pain. This affected one (Resident #62) of three residents reviewed for pain management. The facility census was 67 residents Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #62 revealed an admission date of on 5/29/25 with diagnoses including traumatic subdural hemorrhage, cerebral infarction, heart failure, and spinal stenosis. Resident #62 was transferred to the hospital on [DATE] and was readmitted to the facility on [DATE].Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #62 dated 7/09/25 revealed the resident was cognitively intact and required staff assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs.)Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for Resident #62 dated July 2025 for Resident #62 revealed there was an order for oxycodone 5 milligrams (mg) every six hours with a start date of 07/02/25 and a stop date of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-31 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, review of manufacturer's guidelines, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure insulin pens were properly labeled and stored. This affected two (Residents #15 and #65) of four residents who received insulin stored in the 200-medication cart. The facility census was 67 residents. Findings include:1. Review of the medical record for Resident #15 revealed an admission date of 1/07/24 with diagnoses of diabetes mellitus type and acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #15 dated 05/16/25 revealed the resident had severe cognitive impairment and was dependent on staff for assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs.) Review of the physician's orders for Resident #15 revealed an order dated 07/02/25 for insulin Glargine inject seven units subcutaneously at bedtime for diabetes mellitus. Observation on 07/23/25 at 9:21 A.M. of the 200-hall medication cart with Licensed Practical Nurse #66 revealed Resident #15's insulin Glargine…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-31 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — isolatedEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, observation, resident interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to provide residents with food that was appealing and palatable. This affected Resident #26 and#62 and had the potential to affect all residents at the facility. The facility identified ten (Residents #1, #5, #15, #16, #35, #38, #46, #53, #64, #84) who did not receive food from the kitchen. The facility census was 67 residents. Findings include: 1.Review of the medical record for Resident #26 revealed an admission date of 12/18/24 with diagnoses including chronic atrial fibrillation, major depressive disorder, hypothyroidism, vascular dementia, heart failure, anorexia. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #26 dated 06/27/25 revealed the resident had impaired cognition and required set up assistance from staff with her meals. Review of the physician's orders for Resident #26 revealed an order dated 01/09/25 for a regular diet, mechanical soft texture.Observation on 07/23/25 at 12:30 P.M. revealed Resident #26 was propped up in her bed and her meal was in a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-31 · tag F0914 — isolatedProvide bedrooms that don't allow residents to see each other when privacy is needed.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to provide privacy curtains in resident rooms. This affected four (Residents #26, #28, #59, #62) four residents reviewed for privacy. The facility census was 67 residents.Findings include: Observation on 07/24/25 at 8:42 A.M. with Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #56 revealed there were no privacy curtains in the rooms of Residents #26, #28, #59, and #62.Interview 07/24/25 at 8:46 A.M. with ADON #56 confirmed the facility had not provided proper privacy curtains to ensure full visual privacy in the rooms of Residents #26, #28, #59, and #62.Review of the facility policy titled Resident Rights dated 06/01/24 revealed residents had the right to be treated with dignity and respect and had a right to privacy during personal care.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-31 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — isolatedMake sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, resident interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to provide an effective pest control program. This affected three (Residents #3, #26, #44) of three residents reviewed for pest control. The facility census was 67 residents.Findings include: 1.Review of the medical record for Resident #3 revealed an 04/30/24 with diagnoses including atherosclerotic heart disease, osteoarthritis, and asthma.Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #3 dated 6/14/25 revealed the resident had impaired cognition.Observation on 07/21/25 at 11:04 A.M. revealed there were multiple large black flying insects in Resident #3's room. Interview on 07/21/25 at 11:19 A.M. with Unit Manager (UM) #140 confirmed there were multiple large black flying insects in Resident # 3's room.2. Review of the medical record for Resident #26 revealed an admission date of 12/18/24 with diagnoses including chronic atrial fibrillation, major depressive disorder, vascular dementia, and anorexia. Review of the MDS assessment for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-08 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure all residents were treated with respect and dignity. This affected one (#77) out of three residents reviewed for respect and dignity. The facility census was 69. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #77 revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 01/12/24. Diagnoses included dependence on respirator, congenital malformation of brain, acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, other seizures, fusion of spine, arthropathy, acute infarction of spinal cord, disorder of central nervous system, scoliosis, vitamin d deficiency, anxiety disorder, chronic pain syndrome, and cortical blindness. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 12/11/23, revealed Resident #77 was in a persistent vegetative state and was unable to be assessed for cognitive status. Resident #77 was dependent on staff for oral hygiene, toileting, bathing, dressing, personal hygiene, bed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-08 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
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 facility self-reported incidents (SRI's), review of staff timesheets, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to report an allegation of staff to resident abuse to the state surveying agency as required. This affected one (#77) out of three residents reviewed for abuse. The census was 69. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #77 revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 01/12/24. Diagnoses included dependence on respirator, congenital malformation of brain, acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, other seizures, fusion of spine, arthropathy, acute infarction of spinal cord, disorder of central nervous system, scoliosis, vitamin d deficiency, anxiety disorder, chronic pain syndrome, and cortical blindness. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 12/11/23, revealed Resident #77 was in a persistent vegetative state and was unable to be assessed for cognitive status. Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-08 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, review of facility self-reported incidents (SRI's), review of staff timesheets, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to conduct a thorough investigation following an allegation of staff to resident abuse. This affected one (#77) out of three residents reviewed for abuse. The census was 69. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #77 revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 01/12/24. Diagnoses included dependence on respirator, congenital malformation of brain, acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, other seizures, fusion of spine, arthropathy, acute infarction of spinal cord, disorder of central nervous system, scoliosis, vitamin d deficiency, anxiety disorder, chronic pain syndrome, and cortical blindness. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 12/11/23, revealed Resident #77 was in a persistent vegetative state and was unable to be assessed for cognitive status. Resident #77…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-08-01 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview, review of the facility policy, and review of medication information from Medscape (online resources), the facility failed to ensure a resident was free from unnecessary medications by failing to implement adequate blood sugar monitoring in conjunction with insulin administration. This affected one resident (#57) of three residents reviewed for diabetes management. The census was 73. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #57 revealed an admission date of 03/03/22 with a diagnosis of diabetes mellitus (DM.) Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #57, revealed the resident was cognitively impaired and was totally dependent on the assistance of one to two with activities of daily living (ADL's). Review of the care plan dated 03/03/22 for Resident #57, revealed the resident was at risk for hyper/hypoglycemia due to diagnosis of DM. Interventions included the following: administer medications as ordered, be alert for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-06-27 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to complete quarterly care conferences. This affected four residents (#07, #16, #43, and #57) out of 24 residents sampled for care conferences. The facility census was 73. Findings include: 1. Resident #57 admitted to the facility on [DATE], was readmitted [DATE], with diagnoses that included but were not limited to dependence on respirator, type II diabetes, chronic diastolic congestive heart failure, morbid obesity, unspecified anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder - single episode, and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia. Review of the most recent annual Minimum Dat Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #57 was cognitively intact, had no behaviors, did not wander, and frequently refused care. Resident #57 was a two-person assist and required extensive assistance with bed mobility, dressing, and personal hygiene, total assistance with transfers, toileting, and bathing, and was independent with eating and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-06-27 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review and staff interview the facility failed to fill out the Notice to Medicare Provider Non-coverage (NOMNC-form CMS-10123), for two residents (#70 and #373) out of three residents reviewed and complete the Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice (SNFABN) for all three residents reviewed. This affected three residents (#68, #70, and #373) out of three residents reviewed for Beneficiary Notification. The facility census was 73. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #68 revealed an admission date of 05/18/22 and a discharge date of 06/02/22. Diagnoses included chronic respiratory failure, pneumonia, type 2 diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, Insomnia, chronic kidney disease, and constipation. Further review of the medical record for Resident #68 revealed a NOMNC was issued and signed by the resident with the appropriate time period. There was no SNFABN issued and presented to the resident. 2. Review of the medical record for Resident #70 revealed an admission date of 03/9/22 and a discharge date of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-06-27 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to complete a significant change pre-admission screening and resident review (PASARR) after identifying new mental health diagnoses. This affected one (Resident #33) of three residents reviewed for PASARR program. The facility census was 73. Findings include: Review of medical record revealed Resident #33 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included hemiplegia/hemiparesis following cerebral infarction, unspecified seizures, and hypertensive heart disease without heart failure, and major depressive disorder. Additional diagnoses identified on 04/13/19 included unspecified anxiety and unspecified psychosis. Review of the most recent quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment completed on 04/13/22 revealed Resident #33 was severely cognitively impaired, had physical and verbal behaviors, did not wander, and occasionally rejected care. Resident #33 was a two-person assist and required extensive assistance with bed mobility, total…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-06-27 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observations, and staff interview the facility failed to obtain treatment orders for Resident #02 and failed to continue medication orders for Resident #56. This affected two residents (#02 and #56) out of three residents reviewed for continuity of care. The facility census was 73. Findings included: 1. Review of medical record for Resident #02 revealed readmission date of 5/24/22 with a no cognitive deficits. The resident was admitted with diagnoses of chronic small [NAME] obstruction status post decompressive gastrostomy continue with decompression to gravity, rectal cancer, and type two diabetic. Review of Resident #02's care plan last updated on 11/22/21 revealed no instructions of taking care of the decompressive gastrostomy. Review of Resident #02's physician orders last updated on 5/24/22 revealed no care instructions for the decompressive gastrostomy. Review of the physician progress notes for 05/04/22, 05/07/22, 05/27/22, and 05/27/22 revealed no care instructions for the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-06-27 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interviews and policy and procedure review the facility failed to obtain weights for residents as per physician orders . This had the potential to affect three residents (#07, #42 and #58) out of three residents who were reviewed for possible weight loss. The facility census was 73. Findings include: 1. Review of medical record for Resident #42 revealed admission date of 12/03/21 with mild cognitive deficits . He was admitted with a diagnoses of arteriovenous fistula, repeated falls, diabetic and chronic kidney disease. A review of Resident #42 physician orders from 05/1/22 to 06/23/22 revealed on 05/22/22 an order for weights to be done for three days and then weekly on Sunday for three weeks. A review of Resident #42 weights for 04/01/22 to 06/30/22 revealed weights were not recorded on 05/23/22, 05/24/22, 05/25/22 or on Sunday 06/03/22. On 06/23/22 at 1:00 P.M. interview with the DON confirmed weights for Resident #42 were not done on 5/23/22, 5/24/22, 5/25/22 , or on Sunday 06/03/22.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-06-27 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to pass medications as ordered resulting in significant medication errors. This affected two residents (#56 and #71) out of three residents reviewed for medications. The facility census was 73. Findings included: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #56 revealed an original admission date of 01/12/22. The resident had hospital stays from 01/13/22-01/20/22, 01/22/22-02/02/22, 02/11/22-02/15/22, and 06/07/22-06/09/22. Diagnoses included dependence on respirator, viral pneumonia, type 2 diabetes mellitus, muscle weakness, urinary tract infection, and schizoaffective disorder. Review of the quarterly minimum data set (MDS) assessment for Resident #56 dated 06/10/22 revealed the resident had an intact cognition. No hallucinations, delusions, or rejections of care were noted by the assessment. Resident #56 required total dependence from at least one staff member for hygiene, toileting, dressing, locomotion on/off unit, and transfers. The resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2019-11-14 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and review of refrigerator rules, the facility failed to ensure food being held in a snack refrigerator used for residents were not past its specified expiration date. This had the potential to affect 49 of 54 residents who consumed food from the refrigerator. The facility identified five residents (#25, #10, #21, #13, and #15) who received nothing by mouth. Findings include: Review of the posting on the resident refrigerator in the Activity Room titled, Resident Refrigerator Rules revealed the refrigerator was for resident use only, staff items should not be stored inside; any items put in the refrigerator need to be labeled and dated with the resident's name and date; any food/drink item that is not labeled (name and date) or is more than 3 days old will be thrown away immediately. On 11/13/19 at 11:10 A.M. observation the resident snack refrigerator in the Activity Room with the Dietary Manager (#45) revealed the following spoiled and/or outdated food items: a) There was a 1/2 gallon plastic carton of chocolate milk which was visibly curdled…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-11-14 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, and staff interview, the facility failed to provide feeding assistance in a manner that preserved a resident's dignity. This affected one (Resident #104) 24 observed during meal time. The facility census was 54. Findings include: Medical record review revealed Resident #104 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of dementia with behavioral disturbance. Review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #104 dated 10/04/19 revealed was cognitively impaired and required supervision with eating. Observation of the lunch meal on 11/12/19 at 12:00 P.M. revealed Resident #104 was up in a chair in his room with the door open. He was being assisted with his lunch by State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #65. STNA #65 remained standing through the entire lunch meal as she assisted Resident #104. Interview on 11/12/19 at 12:08 P.M. with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #440 confirmed STNA #65 was standing over Resident #104 during the entire lunch meal…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-11-14 · tag F0638 — isolatedAssure that each resident’s assessment is updated at least once every 3 months.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual, the facility failed to complete quarterly assessments for residents in a timely manner. This affected two (Residents #2 and #8) of 24 residents reviewed for assessments. The facility census was 54. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #2 revealed an admission date of 09/19/17 with diagnosis of cerebral infarction (stroke). Review of the comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment revealed it was completed on 07/08/19. Review of the quarterly MDS for Resident #2 had been started with an assessment reference date of 10/08/19, however the MDS had not been completed, or submitted. 2. Review of the medical record for Resident #8 revealed an admission date of 08/02/18 with a diagnosis of hemiplegia following cerebral infarction. Review of the comprehensive MDS assessment revealed it was completed on 07/24/19. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment revealed it had been started on 10/24/19, however had not been completed or submitted. Interview on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-11-14 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
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 a resident with a gastrostomy tube (g-tube) had orders and treatments in place to potentially prevent complications related to the g-tube. This affected one (Resident #12) of one reviewed for tube feeding. The facility census was 54. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #12 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of quadriplegia. Review of the care plan for Resident #12 dated 08/20/12 revealed the resident had a g-tube used for medication administration. Interventions included to flush the g-tube per physician's order, dressing change to the g-tube per physician's order, and to check placement of the g-tube per physician's order. Review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #12 dated 08/13/19 revealed resident was cognitively intact, was totally dependent on staff with activities of daily living, and had a g-tube. Review of November 2019 physician…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-11-14 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure an as needed anti-anxiety medication order included a duration for the medication. This affected one (Resident #2) of six residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 54. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #2 revealed an admission date of 09/19/17 with a diagnosis of cerebral infarction (stroke). Review of Resident #2's physician order dated 06/14/19 revealed an order for Ativan (anti-anxiety) every four hours, as needed for shortness of breath and agitation. There was no stop date for the medication. Review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #2 was cognitively impaired. Interview on 11/13/19 at 4:37 P.M. with Registered Nurse (RN) #270 confirmed the as needed Ativan ordered for Resident #2 on 06/14/19 did not have a stop date or duration for the order. Interview with Physician #55 on 11/14/19 at 2:58 P.M. confirmed when he wrote the order for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-11-14 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolatedProvide or obtain dental services for each 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, resident and staff interview, the facility failed to arrange for timely dental services for one resident (#22) of two reviewed for dental care. The facility census was 54. Findings include: Medical record review revealed Resident # 22 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including diabetes mellitus, schizoaffective disorder, and history of respiratory failure. Review of Resident #22's nurse's note dated 08/30/19 at 3:47 P.M., revealed Resident #22 had been out to a Dental Clinic and returned with a molar removed. Resident #22 was scheduled to return to the clinic on 09/25/19 at 8:45 A.M., for a consultation. Review of Resident #22's nurse's note dated 09/25/19 revealed Resident #22 returned from the Dental Clinic with a plan to be scheduled for a surgery procedure. The Dental Clinic note revealed the clinic would call the facility no later than 10/02/19 to schedule the appointment. However, if they had not, the facilty should follow up with them to schedule 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.
“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.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$36,550 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $36,550 — penalty dated 2025-07-31
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to EMBASSY HEALTHCARE — 33 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 3 of 5 | 2.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.1 | -0.1 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 1.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
The other 32 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.4★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| HANDLER, AARON | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2020 |
| REPCHICK, GEORGE | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2020 |
| EMBASSY HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2020 |
| HERITAGE EMPLOYMENT SERVICES, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2020 |
| JOHNSON, MICHAEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2025 |
| KURANGA, ABRAHAM | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 6 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.
2 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 $506K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in OH
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Ohio Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 365363. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-31, 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.