Bethesda Care Center
600 N Brush St, Fremont, OH 43420 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 89 certified beds · (419) 334-9521 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0602), cited Apr 2026
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (40) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $64,604 in federal fines (most recent 2024-12-13)
- 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)
- nursing-staff turnover (60%) runs well above the national median (45%)
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 | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 3 to 2 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 | 3.7% | 5.3% | 15.4% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.2% | 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 | 80.6% | 30.1% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 3.8% | 3.2% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 1.9% | 6.1% | 16.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 26.8% | 25.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 87.3% | 94.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 0.0% | 3.4% | 4.7% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 26.4% | 21.4% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 6.2% | 8.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 90.9% | 75.6% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 23.3% | 24.9% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 18.6% | 12.9% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.88 | 1.73 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 3.85 | 1.80 | 1.80 | worse |
* 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.
53.2% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 42 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 50.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 54 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: not reported. This home filed no therapist hours at all in its payroll data for this quarter. That is a gap in what it reported, and we do not read it as an absence of therapy — the homes that file nothing here include ones that discharged hundreds of Medicare rehab patients in the very same period, who plainly received therapy from someone. Because we cannot tell a home that under-reports from one that genuinely provides little, this home is left out of the comparison above rather than scored at zero. Ask it directly how many therapist hours a rehab resident gets, and on which days.
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 | 53.2%CMS range 41.9–64.0 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.4%CMS range 7.0–15.7 | 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 | 50.0% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 33.3% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 42.6% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 94.4% | 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 | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final 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 | 2.8% | 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 | 6.4%CMS range 4.0–14.6 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.11 | 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 89 beds and averages 81.6 residents a day — about 92% 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 4.05 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.14 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.23 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 3.49 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.27 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.25 to 0.87 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 60% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are 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.
40 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 29 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-12-13 · 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 review of electronic medical records, review of emergency medical squad report, review of hospital records, review of staff education, staff interviews, review of text message review of facility policies, and resident family interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident #76 received medications to prevent seizure activity and notify the physician of resident not receiving medications and having seizure activity. This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy and serious life-threatening harm on 11/14/24 when, as a result of not having his prescribed medications, Resident #76 subsequently experienced continual tonic-clonic seizures (also known as a grand mal seizure - a type of seizure characterized by a sudden stiffening of the body muscles [tonic phase] followed by rapid jerking movements [clonic phase], usually causing loss of consciousness and violent muscle contractions throughout the body), requiring emergency Intramuscular (IM) and Intravenous (IV) administration of Versed (a medication used to treat…
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 · Fdisputed · IDR2026-04-02 · tag F0572 — widespreadGive residents a notice of rights, rules, services and charges.
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 family interview, staff interview, and review of medical records, the facility failed to ensure the resident's representative was provided requested facility policies necessary to support participation in the person-centered care planning process for Resident #63. The facility census was 82. Findings Include: Review of the medical record for Resident #63 revealed an admission date of 08/12/24 with diagnoses including chronic kidney disease stage IIIA, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, polyneuropathy, osteoarthritis, dementia, hypothyroidism, chronic pain, generalized muscle weakness, cardiac murmur, amnesia, photokeratitis, and dermatitis.Review of the Resident #63's most recent quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of three, indicating severe cognitive impairment. Further review revealed Resident #63 required at least limited assistance with all activities of daily living, including eating, hygiene, toileting, dressing,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Edisputed · IDR2026-04-02 · tag F0641 — patternEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS) was accurately coded. This affected four residents (#25, #31, #36 and #15) and had the potential to affect 13 residents the facility identified as receiving respiratory services at the facility. The facility census was 82.Findings included:1 - Review of Resident #25 revealed an admission date of 08/02/24. Diagnosis included chronic kidney disease, obstructive sleep apnea, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and obesity. Review of Resident #25's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed she had an intact cognition. The resident was coded as requiring invasive mechanical ventilation. Review of Resident #25's medical record revealed a physician's order dated 12/04/25 for ventilator/volume targeted pressure support. VT-325 PEEP minute-5 PEEP max-15 PS max-15 auto I Time=auto rise-3. Oxygen (O2) may titrate to maintain saturation greater than or equal to 90% nightly and during…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Edisputed · IDR2026-04-02 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — patternProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to provide activities to meet the residents' needs and cognitive capabilities. This affected 24 residents who reside in the memory care unit. The facility census was 82.Findings include:Observation of the memory care unit activities calendar for March 2026 revealed the week of 03/01/26 the facility had juice and news, and table talk everyday of the week. The facility had one day a week on Wednesdays where the residents did an activity called morning stretch.Observation on 03/31/26 at 10:00 A.M. of the memory care unit revealed five residents sitting around the dining room table. There was nothing provided for the residents besides music on the television.Observation on 04/01/26 at 9:06 A.M. revealed seven residents sitting in the dining room, with only music playing on the television. Additional observation on 04/01/26 at 9:27 A.M. revealed Activity Aide #247 distributing word searches to the residents sitting around the dining room table. Resident #9, Resident #59, and Resident #32 were sitting in…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-04-02 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure hazardous chemicals and medications were properly stored. This had the potential to affect 10 residents (#9, #11, #22, #26, #32, #45, #54, #59, #63, and #73) who the facility identified to be cognitively impaired and independently mobile on the 200 hall. The facility census was 82. Findings include:Observation on 04/01/26 at 9:30 A.M. of the 200 Memory Care (MC) hall revealed the door to the soiled linen room did not require a code to enter the room and the door was unlocked. One Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) was observed to open the door without entering a code as the door was unlocked.Interview on 04/01/26 at 9:34 A.M. with Business Office Manager (BOM) #212 verified the door to the soiled linen room did not require a code to enter the room and was unlocked. Furthermore, BOM #212 verified inside of the soiled linen room in an unlocked cabinet above the sink contained antifungal powder - miconazole nitrate 2 percent (%), two tubes of antifungal cream - miconazole nitrate 2%, moisture barrier…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-04-02 · 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 policy review, the facility failed to ensure food that was opened was properly stored. This had the potential to affect 79 residents who the facility identified to receive food from the kitchen. The facility census was 82. Findings include:Observation and concurrent staff interview with the Dietary Director (DD) #156 on 03/30/26 at 6:39 A.M. of reach in freezer #1 revealed a bag of broccoli that was opened and undated, beef fritters that were opened, unlabeled, and undated, pizza crusts that were opened, unlabeled, and undated, and dinner rolls that were opened, unlabeled, and undated. Observation of the dry storage revealed a bag of croutons to be opened and undated. DD #156 confirmed the findings as listed above. Observation and concurrent staff interview with the Dietary Director (DD) #156 on 03/30/26 at 6:48 A.M. of reach in refrigerator #2 revealed shredded lettuce that was opened, undated, and unlabeled, and sliced ham that was opened, undated, and unlabeled. DD #156 confirmed the findings as listed above. DD #156 confirmed 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 · Ecited before2026-04-02 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, resident and staff interviews, and review of facility policies, the facility failed to ensure personal protective equipment was utilized for residents in contact precautions. This affected one (Resident #85) of one resident reviewed for contact precautions. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure hand hygiene was performed while delivering meal trays to resident rooms. This affected four (Residents #8, #14, #51, and #85) of 13 residents observed for meal tray delivery.Findings include:1. Review of the medical record for Resident #85 revealed she was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including Type Two Diabetes Mellitus, direct infection of left ankle and foot, unspecified psychosis, stage three chronic kidney disease, osteoarthritis, skin transplant status, and osteomyelitis.Review of the Minimum Data Set 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #85 revealed she was cognitively intact and did not display any behaviors nor refusals of care at the time of this…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited beforedisputed · IDR2026-04-02 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — patternMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
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, interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to provide a comfortable and homelike environment for residents on Memory Care (MC) unit. This had the potential to affect all 24 residents who reside on the MC unit. The facility census was 82. Findings Include: Observation of the MC unit on 03/30/26 at 12:06 P.M. revealed the wall carpet was peeling and unsightly, wallpaper between resident rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] was peeling, two air vents near the nurse's station were visibly soiled, and a ceiling tile near the nurse's station was missing. Interview on 03/30/26 at 12:07 P.M. with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #230 confirmed the wall carpet and wallpaper were peeling and unsightly. Interview on 03/30/26 at 12:08 P.M. with Registered Nurse (RN) #270 confirmed the air vents were dirty and the ceiling tile was missing. RN #270 further stated the ceiling tile had not been replaced following recent remodeling in the MC unit. Observation on 03/31/26 at 12:35 P.M. revealed peeling…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-02 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, resident interviews, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure residents completed bathing according to their preferences. This affected one (Resident #85) of one resident investigated for choices. The facility census was 82.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #85 revealed she was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including Type Two Diabetes Mellitus, direct infection of left ankle and foot, unspecified psychosis, stage three chronic kidney disease, osteoarthritis, skin transplant status, and osteomyelitis.Review of the Minimum Data Set 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #85 revealed she was cognitively intact and did not display any behaviors nor refusals of care at the time of this assessment. Resident #85 required moderate assistance with activities of daily living and ambulation. She had a central catheter and received intravenous antibiotics.Review of the care plan dated 03/22/26 for Resident #85 revealed focus…
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 · Ddisputed · IDR2026-04-02 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, family interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure the physician was notified timely when a resident had a change of condition. This affected one (Resident #91) of one reviewed for notification of change. The facility census was 82.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #91 revealed an admission on [DATE] and a discharge date of [DATE]. Diagnoses included Parkinson's Disease and essential hypertension.Review of the Occupational Therapy (OT) Treatment Encounter Notes dated [DATE] revealed Resident #91 had decreased alertness and lethargy during evaluation. Resident #91 was constantly falling asleep and required verbal cues to stay awake. There was no evidence the physician was notified of Resident #91's change in condition.Review of the nursing progress note dated [DATE] at 5:57 A.M. revealed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #311 held Resident #91's cyclobenzaprine (muscle relaxant) 10 milligrams (mg) tablet due to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-02 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolatedProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
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 review of Self-Reported Incident Investigation, facility investigation, medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure one (Resident #10) was free of misappropriation of narcotic medications. This affected one, Resident #10 of one reviewed for misappropriation. This had the ability to affect 18 Residents (#4, #5, #10, #25, #27, #29, #31, #36, #37, #41, #50, #56, #57, #58, #60, #65, #68, and #70) identified as receiving narcotic medication. The facility census was 82.Findings included:Review of Resident #10's medical record revealed an admission date of 06/21/25. Diagnosis included congestive heart failure, end stage heart failure, Diabetes Mellitus Type II, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Review of Resident #10's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed the resident had an intact cognitionReview of Resident #10's most recent care plan revealed she had a potential for alteration in comfort related to the disease process. Interventions…
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 29 citations
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-02 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolatedPrevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
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 Gradual Dose Reduction (GDR) document, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a GDR was acknowledged and signed by the physician for one resident (#72) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 82.Findings include:Review of Resident #72's medical record revealed an admission date of 04/26/24. Diagnoses included schizoaffective disorder, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), history of pulmonary embolism, hypertension, depression, anxiety, and hyperlipidemia.Review of Resident #72's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #72 had severely impaired cognition with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of zero. Further review revealed Resident #72 was on an antipsychotic, antianxiety, antidepressant, anticoagulant, and anticonvulsant medication.Review of Resident #72's care plan dated 02/02/26 revealed Resident #72 utilized psychotropic medications related to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-02 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a compreshensive care plan was completed including the use of oxygen therapy for one resident (#15) of three residents reviewed for oxygen. The facility census was 82. Findings include:Review of Resident #15's medical record revealed an admission date of 11/14/24. Diagnoses included acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), heart failure, hypertension, Type Two Diabetes Mellitus, and generalized anxiety disorder. Review of Resident #15's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #15 had severely impaired cognition with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of seven. Further review of the MDS assessment revealed Resident #15 did not require the use of oxygen therapy. Review of Resident #15's care plans dated 03/26/26, 01/02/26, 10/09/25, and 09/29/25 revealed oxygen therapy was not included in the care plan. Review of Resident #15's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-02 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, family interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care was provided for dependent residents. This affected two residents, (#54 and #63) of three residents reviewed for ADL care. The facility census was 82. Findings include: 1.Review of Resident #63's medical record revealed an admission date of 08/12/24. Diagnoses included hypertensive chronic kidney disease, hypertension, dementia without behavioral disturbance, muscle weakness, and aortic ectasia. Review of Resident #63's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #63 required supervision or touching assistance for personal hygiene and partial or moderate assistance for showering and bathing. Review of Resident #63's care plan dated 01/14/26 revealed Resident #63 had a self-care deficit related to weakness and cognitive impairment with interventions that included for staff to assist with ADL's as needed and to report…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-02 · 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 reviews, review of an Emergency Medical Service (EMS) run report, staff and resident interviews, and review of facility policies, the facility failed to ensure follow up care was provided when skin breakdown was noted, failed to document skilled assessments, vital signs, and failed to notify the physician regarding a change of condition. The facility also failed to implement physician orders following an office visit. This affected two (Residents #77 and #91) of two residents reviewed for quality of care. The facility census was 82.Findings include:1.Review of the closed medical record for Resident #91revealed an admission on [DATE] and a discharge date of [DATE]. Diagnoses included Parkinsons Disease, essential hypertension, and dorsalgia. Further review of the medical record revealed no care plan or Minimum Data Set (MDS) had been completed due to time of admission and discharge. Review of the nurse progress notes revealed Resident #91 arrived at the facility on [DATE] from the hospital…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-02 · 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 observation, resident interview, staff interview, record review, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure implementation of physician-ordered pressure ulcer prevention interventions for one (Resident #7) of two reviewed for pressure ulcer. The facility census was 82.Findings Include: Review of the medical record for Resident #7 revealed an admission date of 12/09/25 with multiple diagnoses, including peripheral vascular disease, congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and generalized weakness.Review of Resident #7's most recent quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 02/16/26, revealed a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. Further review revealed Resident #7 required assistance with all activities of daily living, including bed mobility and repositioning.Review of the care plan dated 02/25/26 revealed the resident was at risk for impaired skin integrity with an intervention to utilize offloading boots while in bed.Review of Resident #7's medical record revealed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-02 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, resident interview, medical record review, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure orders for supplemental oxygen were in place for one residents (#15). This affected one residents (#15) of four residents reviewed for respiratory care. The facility census was 82.Findings Include: Review of Resident #15's medical record revealed an admission date of 11/14/24. Diagnoses included acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), heart failure, hypertension, type two diabetes mellitus, and generalized anxiety disorder. Review of Resident #15's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #15 had severely impaired cognition with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of seven. Further review of the MDS assessment revealed Resident #15 did not require the use of oxygen therapy. Review of Resident #15's care plans dated 03/26/26, 01/02/26, 10/09/25, and 09/29/25 revealed oxygen therapy…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-02 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services 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, interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a dialysis port was monitored. This affected one (#4) of one resident reviewed for dialysis. The facility census was 82.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #4 revealed an admission on [DATE]. Diagnoses included chronic kidney disease, stage four, Type Two Diabetes Mellitus, and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #4 was cognitively impaired. Further review of the MDS revealed Resident #4 received dialysis. Review of the care plan dated 01/29/26 revealed Resident #4 needed resident care. Interventions included dialysis port in right chest. Further review of the care plan revealed Resident #4 received dialysis in-house. Interventions included monitor, documenting, and reporting any signs and symptoms to access site such as redness, swelling, warmth, or drainage. Review of the physicians' orders 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 · Dcited before2026-04-02 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on Self-Reported Incident review, medical record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure medications documentation was completed accurately for one (Resident #10). This had the potential to affect 18 residents (#4, #5, #10, #25, #27, #29, #31, #36, #37, #41, #50, #56, #57, #58, #60, #65, #68, #70) the facility identified as receiving opioid medication in the facility. The census was 82. Findings Include:Review of Resident #10's medical record revealed an admission date of 06/21/25. Diagnosis included congestive heart failure, end stage heart failure, Diabetes Mellitus Type II, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Review of Resident #10's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed the resident had an intact cognitionReview of Resident #10's most recent care plan revealed she had a potential for alteration in comfort related to the disease process. interventions included educating the resident to request pain medication before her pain became severe.Review of Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-09-25 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure resident code status orders accurately reflected their wishes as documented in their Advance Directives Form. This affected one resident (#40) of three residents (#33, #40, and #68) reviewed for code status. The facility census was 75.Findings Include:Review of the medical record for Resident #40 revealed an admission date of 07/23/25. Diagnoses included local infection of the skin and subcutaneous tissue, sepsis, bloodstream infection due to central venous catheter, cellulitis of left lower limb, morbid obesity, type two diabetes mellitus (DM2), disorder of vein, hypertension, tubulointerstitial nephritis, thrombocytopenia, streptococcus, non-pressure chronic ulcer of skin, disorder of arteries and arterioles, nonrheumatic mitral valve insufficiency, chronic lymphocytic leukemia of b-cell type, disorder of brain, chronic ischemic heart disease, pneumonia, viral hepatitis, stage three chronic kidney disease, dependence on renal dialysis, heart disease, glomerular disorders, anemia, lymphedema, acute…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-09-25 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure resident care plans accurately documented their code status. This affected one resident (#40) of three residents (#33, #40, and #68) reviewed for care planning. The facility census was 75.Findings Include:Review of the medical record for Resident #40 revealed an admission date of [DATE]. Diagnoses included local infection of the skin and subcutaneous tissue, sepsis, bloodstream infection due to central venous catheter, cellulitis of left lower limb, morbid obesity, type two diabetes mellitus (DM2), disorder of vein, hypertension, tubulointerstitial nephritis, thrombocytopenia, streptococcus, non-pressure chronic ulcer of skin, disorder of arteries and arterioles, nonrheumatic mitral valve insufficiency, chronic lymphocytic leukemia of b-cell type, disorder of brain, chronic ischemic heart disease, pneumonia, viral hepatitis, stage three chronic kidney disease, dependence on renal dialysis, heart disease, glomerular disorders,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-25 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, medical record review, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure routine medications were supplied to residents. This affected one resident (#40) of three residents (#33, #40, and #77) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility census was 75.Findings Include:Review of the medical record for Resident #40 revealed an admission date of 07/23/25. Diagnoses included local infection of the skin and subcutaneous tissue, sepsis, bloodstream infection due to central venous catheter, cellulitis of left lower limb, morbid obesity, type two diabetes mellitus (DM2), disorder of vein, hypertension, tubulointerstitial nephritis, thrombocytopenia, streptococcus, non-pressure chronic ulcer of skin, disorder of arteries and arterioles, nonrheumatic mitral valve insufficiency, chronic lymphocytic leukemia of b-cell type, disorder of brain, chronic ischemic heart disease, pneumonia, viral hepatitis, stage three chronic kidney disease, dependence on renal dialysis, heart disease, glomerular disorders, anemia, lymphedema, acute kidney failure,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-25 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure injectable medication was dated and labeled. This affected two residents (#23 and #42) identified by the facility as being prescribed injectable medication and residing on the 100-hall. The facility census was 75. Findings Include:Observation on [DATE] at 9:49 A.M. of the medication storage cart for the 100-hall with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #175 revealed a Lantus SoloStar Pen insulin glargine (a type of long-acting insulin), 100 units per milliliter (units/mL), with approximately 60 of 300 units remaining, with a manufacturers date of [DATE], that was unlabeled with the date it was opened or the date it expired.Interview at the time of observation with LPN #175 verified the Lantus SoloStar Pen was unlabeled with the date it was opened or the date it expired.Review of the medication supplier guidelines titled, Medications with Shortened Expiration Dates, dated [DATE], Lantus Insulin glargine SoloStar pens…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-25 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure an effective infection prevention program was followed. This affected one resident (#26) of three reviewed for infection control related to wound care. The facility census was 75.Findings Include:Review of the medical record for Resident #26 revealed and admission date of 04/15/25. Diagnoses included cerebral infarction, benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), Barrett's esophagus, diverticulosis of large intestine without perforation, gastric ulcer, gastrointestinal (GI) hemorrhage, diaphragmatic hernia without obstruction or gangrene, hyperlipidemia, atrial fibrillation (a. fib), sick sinus syndrome, vertebra-basilar artery syndrome, neoplasm of uncertain behavior of colon, unspecified dementia, major depressive disorder, atherosclerotic heart disease of native coronary artery, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), hemiplegia and hemiparesis, insomnia, depression, presence of cardiac pacemaker, presence of prosthetic heart valve, other nonspecific abnormal finding of lung…
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 · F2024-05-30 · tag F0730 — widespreadObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on employee file review, staff interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure State Tested Nursing Assistants (STNAs) had evaluations completed as required. This had the potential to affect all 68 residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 68. Findings Include: Review of the employee file for State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #555 revealed a hire date of 11/11/22. No annual performance evaluations were found. Review of the employee file for STNA #557 revealed a hire date of 12/18/23. A 90 day performance evaluation was not found. Interview on 05/30/24 at 8:57 A.M. with the Administrator verified State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #555 did not have an annual evaluation completed and STNA #557 did not have her 90 day evaluation completed. He stated he would have the Director of Nursing (DON) follow-up to make sure the evaluations were not somewhere else and not yet put into the file. Interview on 05/30/24 at 1:28 P.M. with the DON verified the evaluations for STNAs #555 and #557 were not completed. Review of the facility policy…
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 before2024-05-30 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — patternMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, census list review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the flooring was maintained in a clean and appropriate condition. This affected fifteen (#2, #6, #9, #15, #25, #43, #45, #49, #56, #58, #60, #61, #62, #69, and #70) residents in the memory care unit. The census was 68. Findings include: Observation on 05/28/24 at 8:50 A.M., of flooring the hallway near the nurses station through the dining room revealed irregular areas of sticky yellowish residue on the linoleum floor. The affected area was sticky and covered with dust and debris. Staff, residents, and visitors were observed walking through the affected areas. Interview on 05/28/24 at 10:55 A.M., with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #531 verified the floor was always sticky and does not come up. The dirt from the carpet or shoes gets stuck to the sticky areas of the floor, even with daily mopping. Interview on 05/28/24 at 11:21 A.M., with Housekeeping #524 verified the linoleum flooring had sticky areas that maybe from old wax residue. Housekeeping #524 reported the flooring…
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 before2024-05-30 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview medical record review and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure resident preferences of room temperatures were honored. This affected two (#39 and #40) of three residents reviewed for choices. The facility census was 68. Findings Include: 1. Review of Resident #39's medical record revealed an admission date of 05/09/24. Diagnoses included type II diabetes, emphysema, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, morbid obesity, and depression. Review of Resident #39's Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating Resident #39 was cognitively intact. Resident #39 required limited assistance for transfers and two person physical assistance with toilet use. Resident #39 displayed no behaviors during the review period. Review of Resident #39's care plan, revised 05/09/24, revealed support and interventions for self-care deficit, altered nutrition, discharge plan for a short term…
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 · D2024-05-30 · tag F0685 — isolatedAssist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, observation, resident interview, staff interview and review of the facility and review of facility policy the facility failed to ensure appropriate and timely care and services to assist with hearing. This affected one (#53) of three residents reviewed for hearing. The facility census was 68. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #53 revealed an admission date of 08/26/22. Diagnoses included dementia, type II diabetes mellitus, morbid obesity, depression and hypertension. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 04/11/24, revealed Resident #53 had moderate cognitive impairment, and had highly impaired hearing with no hearing aid use. Resident #53 was usually understood and usually understood others. Review of the care plan, dated 09/07/22, revealed Resident #53 had maximum hearing difficulty. Interventions included to ask yes and no questions, decrease background noise, face resident when speaking, repeat phrases resident misunderstood, allow time for the resident to respond, and to refer for audiology…
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 before2024-05-30 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to complete neurology checks on a resident with an unwitnessed fall per facility policy. This affected one (#29) of one resident reviewed for falls. The facility census was 68. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #29 revealed an admission date of 09/16/22. Diagnoses included right femur fracture. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], revealed Resident #29 was cognitively intact. Resident #29 had one fall since the last comprehensive assessment, resulting in no injury. Review of a nursing progress note, dated 05/23/24 at 7:15 A.M., revealed Resident #29 had an unwitnessed fall. Review of the current care plan revealed, following Resident #29's fall on 05/23/24, a new intervention was initiated to have the resident in the common area after she gets up for more supervision. Further review of the medical record revealed no evidence neurology checks were completed…
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 before2024-05-30 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure portable oxygen tanks were sufficiently supplied with available oxygen for resident use. This affected one resident (#267) reviewed for oxygen use. The facility identified 12 residents who were on oxygen therapy. The facility census was 68. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #267 revealed an admission date of 05/06/24 with diagnoses of chronic respiratory failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 05/10/24, revealed Resident #267 was cognitively impaired and required the use of oxygen. Review of the current physician orders revealed Resident #267 was ordered oxygen two to four liters per nasal cannula to maintain an oxygen reading of 90% or above. Review of the care plan, dated 05/06/24, revealed Resident #267 was care planned for respiratory disorders with chronic respiratory failure. Interventions included use of oxygen as ordered. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for May…
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 before2024-05-30 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services 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, observation, resident interview, staff interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to maintain accurate physician orders and failed to accurately assess a dialysis access site. This affected one (#30) of one resident reviewed for dialysis. The facility identified six residents who received dialysis. The facility census was 68. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #30 revealed an admission date of 03/22/17. Diagnoses included end stage renal disease with a dependence on renal dialysis, type II diabetes mellitus, major depressive disorder, primary glaucoma left and right eyes, legal blindness, hyperparathyroidism and peripheral vascular disease. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #30 was cognitively intact and received dialysis. Review of the care plan revealed Resident #30 had an alteration in health maintenance due to dialysis for end stage renal disease. Interventions included…
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 · D2024-05-30 · tag F0740 — failed to provide behavioral / mental-health care — isolatedEnsure each resident must receive and the facility must provide necessary behavioral health care and services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, observations, staff interview and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure timely psychiatric follow-up for a resident experiencing an exacerbation of mood symptoms. This affected one (#33) of one residents reviewed for behavioral services. The facility census was 68. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #33 revealed an original admission date of 04/05/20 and a readmission date of 02/16/24. Diagnoses included Parkinson's disease, dementia, morbid obesity, delusional disorders, heart failure, major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, visual hallucinations, bipolar affective disorder and bipolar II disorder. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 04/23/24, revealed Resident #33 was cognitively intact with no functional impairment with a walker and wheelchair used for mobility. Resident #33 was independent with eating, oral care, and toilet hygiene, moderate assistance with bathing and personal hygiene, and maximal assistance with dressing. Active diagnosis included non Alzheimer's…
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 before2024-05-30 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations of medication storage, medical record review, staff interview, review of the manufacturer's recommendations and policy reviews, the facility failed to ensure insulins were dated when opened and failed to ensure expired insulins were discarded. This affected three (#10, #20, and #267) of three residents medications observed for medication storage. The facility census was 68. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #267 revealed an admission date of [DATE], with diagnosis of diabetes mellitus type II. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #267 revealed he was cognitively impaired and required the use of insulin. Review of the current physician orders from [DATE] for Resident #267 revealed jardiance 10 milligrams (mg) and blood sugar monitoring before meals and at bedtime with Lispro insulin per sliding scale coverage 151-200=two units, 201-250=four units, 251-300=six units, 301-350=eight units, 351-400=10 units, greater than…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-30 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview, and review of the policy, the facility failed to ensure used soiled bed pans were stored appropriately in a shared bathroom. This affected one (#38) of one resident reviewed for used bed pan storage in a shared bathroom. The facility census was 68. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #38 revealed an admission date of 02/22/24, with diagnoses of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), diabetes mellitus type II, high blood pressure, dependence on oxygen, anxiety, and schizoaffective disorder, and bipolar disorder. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #38 revealed she is cognitively intact and is independent with transfers, ambulating, and requires moderate assistance with toileting. Review of the care plan dated 02/26/24 for Resident #38 revealed she is care planned for assistance with toileting. Interview on 05/28/24 at 8:58 A.M., with Resident #38 stated my roommate only uses…
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 · D2023-04-27 · 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 resident and staff interviews, review of a resident concern form, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure residents were treated with dignity and respect. This affected three (Residents #21, #28, and #42) of three reviewed for dignity. The facility census was 63. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #21's medical record revealed an admission date of 12/21/22. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), emphysema, type II diabetes, history of falling, muscle weakness, obesity, displaced bimalleolar fracture of left lower leg, subsequent encounter for closed fracture with routine healing, dependence on supplemental oxygen, congestive heart failure (CHF), chronic kidney disease, depression, osteoporosis, atrial fibrillation, hypertension, Alzheimer's disease, and fibromyalgia. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #21 was cognitively intact and required extensive assistance with bed mobility, dressing, and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-27 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of 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, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure bilateral grab bars were in place on a resident's bed per physician orders. This affected one (Resident #25) of two residents reviewed for position and mobility. The facility census was 63. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #25 had an admission date of 07/12/13. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, dementia, and osteoarthritis. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #25 had impaired cognition. Resident #25 required the extensive assistance of one staff for bed mobility and transfers. Review of a physician order dated 05/04/22 revealed the resident had an order for bilateral grab/transfer bars to the bed to facilitate independence. Review of the most recent physical device data collection evaluation dated 04/18/23 revealed the left and right grab bar on the bed assisted the resident with independent repositioning in bed. Observations 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 · D2023-04-27 · 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 Beneficiary Protection Notification Review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure Advanced Beneficiary of Non-Coverage (ABN) notifications were issued to residents who remained in the facility following termination of Medicare Part A services. This affected two (Residents #21 and #40) of three residents reviewed for beneficiary notice protection. The facility census was 63. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #21's Beneficiary Protection Notification revealed the resident's last covered day of Medicare Part A services was 03/03/23. The facility issued the Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) on 02/28/23. A Advanced Beneficiary of Non-Coverage (ABN) was not issued by the facility, with a notation Resident #21 remained in the facility under Medicaid. 2. Review of Resident #40's Beneficiary Protection Notification revealed the resident's last covered day of Medicare Part A services was 04/07/23. The facility issued the NOMNC on 04/05/23. An ABN was not issued by the facility, with a notation Resident #40 remained in the facility under Medicaid. 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 · D2023-04-27 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, resident interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure residents were provided an environment with comfortable sound levels. This affected one (Resident #22) of three reviewed for comfortable sound levels. The facility census was 63. Findings include: Review of Resident #22's medical record revealed an admission date of 10/24/19. Diagnoses included type II diabetes, cognitive communication deficit, legally blind, history of lung cancer, history of skin cancer, history of bladder cancer, major depressive disorder, mild cognitive impairment, and hearing loss. Review of Resident #22's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of eight, indicating Resident #22 was moderately cognitively impaired. Resident #22 was independent or required set up only with all of his activities of daily living. Resident #22 had moderate difficulty with hearing. Resident #22 was able to make himself…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-04-27 · 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, interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to provide care and services to potentially prevent additional and/or worsening pressure ulcers. This affected one (Resident #34) of two residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility census was 63. Findings included: Review of the medical record for Resident #34 revealed an admission date of 01/18/23, diagnoses included heart failure, osteoarthritis, dementia, with mood disturbance, anxiety disorder, hypoxemia, iron deficiency anemia, hypertension, hearing loss, and diverticulosis. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #34 had impaired cognition, required the extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, transfers and toilet use, and the extensive assistance of one staff for walking, locomotion, dressing, and personal hygiene. Resident #34 used a wheelchair and walker for mobility. Resident #34 was occasionally incontinent of bowel and bladder, had no skin…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-04-27 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, resident interview, staff interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure oxygen supplies were dated when initiated according to physician orders. This affected one resident (#42) of five residents reviewed for oxygen therapy. The facility census was 63. Findings include: Review of Resident #42's medical record revealed an admission date of 06/01/22. Diagnoses included congestive heart failure (CHF), type II diabetes, morbid obesity, osteoarthritis, anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, hypertension. Review of Resident #42's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #42 was cognitively intact with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15. Resident #42 required extensive assistance with bed mobility, dressing, toilet use, and personal hygiene. Resident #42 received oxygen therapy at the time of the review. Review of Resident #42's care plan revised 03/12/23 revealed supports and interventions for need…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
“Disputed” is CMS’s own flag, not our reading: the CMS deficiency file records whether the home has formally contested a citation, and we reproduce that. IDR is Informal Dispute Resolution, run by the state survey agency that wrote the citation; IIDR is Independent Informal Dispute Resolution, a separate process before an outside entity, available when CMS has proposed a civil money penalty. They are different processes and we mark them differently. Two things to hold at once. A disputed citation is still a citation — it was written by a surveyor, it stands on the record unless and until it is changed, and we neither hide it nor discount it. And we cannot tell you how the dispute came out: CMS publishes that a citation is under dispute, not the outcome, so a tag marked here may since have been upheld, reduced, or deleted, and an unmarked tag may have been disputed and resolved before this file was cut. Ask the home what it disputed and why — it is entitled to tell you, and the answer is often the most informative thing on this page.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$64,604 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $64,604 — penalty dated 2024-12-13
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 GARDEN SPRINGS HEALTHCARE — 5 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 | 2 of 5 | 2.0 | ≈ chain avg |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.0 | ≈ chain avg |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.0 | ≈ chain avg |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 3.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
The other 4 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.0★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OHEADS OPCO HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 06/20/2024 |
| RAP 118 LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | 15% | since 06/20/2024 |
| YFR EQUITIES LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | 5% | since 06/20/2024 |
| DONENBAUM, ELI | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 06/20/2024 |
| FRIEDMAN, DEVORA | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 06/20/2024 |
| FRIEDMAN, LEBA | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 06/20/2024 |
| FRIEDMAN, MATIS | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | 50% | since 06/20/2024 |
| MAHILNITSKI, ILYA | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | 15% | since 06/20/2024 |
| NEAL, KERRY | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 06/20/2024 |
| STRAUSS, JENNIFER | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 06/20/2024 |
| HINGJ INC. | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 06/20/2024 |
| MEB IRRV TR | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 06/20/2024 |
| BOTH, JOHN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/20/2024 |
| WILSON, GARY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/20/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 21 rows in the source record cover these 14 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
5 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.
A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. 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, FY2024). 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 365510. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-02, 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.