Ohio Veterans Home - Georgetown

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.18 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 18% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 0% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 168 beds and averages 97.5 residents a day — about 58% occupied, or roughly 70 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 5.61 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.68 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.18 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 4.91 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.89 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.79 to 0.41 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 40% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

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

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.

18 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 8 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · E2025-06-13 · tag F0712 — pattern
  Ensure that the resident and his/her doctor meet face-to-face at all required visits.
  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 reviews and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure regulatory physician visits were conducted by the physician or authorized designee at least every 60 days. This affected four (#75, #84, #88, and #94) of four residents reviewed for physcian services. The facility census was 102. Findings include: 1. Record review for Resident #88 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses which included Alzheimer's disease, Diabetes Mellitus, and emphysema. Review of the significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 05/28/25, revealed the resident was assessed to have intact cognition. Review of the facility assessments for Resident #88 revealed the most recent regulatory visit and exam had been completed by the physician on 03/24/25. 2. Record review for Resident #75 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses which included Alzheimer's disease, dementia, and major depressive disorder. Review of the quarterly MDS…

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

  Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-05-04 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a residents' advanced directives matched in the electronic record and the paper record. This affected one (Resident #14) of two residents reviewed for advanced directives. The facility census was 77. Findings include: Record review for Resident #14 revealed an admission date of 10/03/13. Diagnoses included dementia and Alzheimer's disease. Review of the significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #14 had mildly impaired cognition. Review of Resident #14's electronic medical record on 05/02/23 revealed the electronic record had the resident as a Do Not Resuscitate Comfort Care (DNRCC). Review of Resident #14 paper medical record on 05/03/23 revealed the paper chart had the resident as a Do Not Resuscitate Comfort Care- Arrest (DNRCC-A). Interview with Registered Nurse (RN) #569 on 05/03/23 at 10:35 A.M. verified Resident #14's code status in the paper chart and the electronic record does not match.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-05-04 · tag F0622 — isolated
  Not transfer or discharge a resident without an adequate reason; and must provide documentation and convey specific information when a resident is transferred or discharged.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview and record review, the facility failed to have the necessary paperwork for a resident when they discharged to the hospital. This affected one (Resident #12) of three residents reviewed for hospitalization. The facility census was 77. Findings include: Record review for Resident #12 revealed an admission date of 11/23/15. Diagnoses included myocardial infarction, type II diabetes mellitus, dementia, anxiety, and peripheral vascular disease. Review of the Medicare five-day Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #12 was moderately cognitively impaired. Review of a progress note dated 02/28/23 at 7:00 P.M. revealed a state tested nurse aide (STNA) came to the nurse and asked the nurse to check on Resident #12 because he claimed he felt weak and had shortness of breath. Resident #12 did require more assistance to transfer to bed due to generalized weakness, vital signs were taken and the nurse was made aware. The progress note dated 03/01/23 at 10:01 A.M. 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-05-04 · tag F0644 — isolated
  Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record reviews and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure pre-admission screening and resident review (PASARR) was completed timely after a significant change. This affected one (Resident #63) of four residents reviewed for PASARR during the annual survey. The facility census was 77. Findings include: Record review for Resident #63 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, dementia, post-traumatic stress disorder, and chronic kidney disease. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 03/08/23, revealed Resident #63 had minimal cognitive impairments. Review of current medical diagnoses revealed diagnoses of mood disorder and bipolar disorder were added to the resident record on 11/04/21. Review of the PASARR completed on 09/25/20 revealed bipolar disorder and mood disorder were not captured on this review. No other PASARR has been completed after 09/05/20 to reflect the addition of mood disorder or bipolar Disorder.…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2020-03-05 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on review of infection control surveillance documents, staff interview review of facility policy the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program that monitored monthly infection control trends. This had the potential to affect all 151 facility residents. Findings include: Review of the infection control surveillance documents revealed there was no evidence of monthly tracking of infection control trends. Interview with Registered Nurse (RN) #131 on 03/05/20 at 11:20 A.M. revealed she was in charge of the infection control program and she verified the facility did not have monthly surveillance of infection control trends including lists of organisms and infections and the location of the residents with the infections. Review of the facility policy titled Infection Prevention Program dated 10/01/19 revealed the surveillance process consists of documenting data on the infection surveillance form and the data is aggregated monthly quarterly and annually and compared monthly quarterly and annually.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2020-03-05 · tag F0625 — pattern
  Notify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents received written bed hold notifications upon discharge to the hospital. This affected four (#13, #56, #60 and #98) residents of four reviewed for discharge notification. The facility census was 151. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #60 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included vascular dementia, hypothyroidism, anemia and cerebrovascular disease. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had severe cognitive impairment and required extensive assistance with transfers and bed mobility. Resident #60 also required total dependence with dressing, eating, toileting and personal hygiene on the 12/15/19 MDS. Further review of the medical record revealed the resident was discharged to the hospital on [DATE] with a hip fracture. There was no evidence Resident #60 or his representative received a written bed hold notice upon discharge to 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2020-03-05 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — pattern
  Provide 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 medical record review, controlled substance sheet review, observation, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure proper procedures were in place regarding the storage and administration of controlled substances. This had the potential to affect a total of 20 Residents (#32, #55, #60, #101, #103, #116 on the A1 Blue Cart, Residents #4, #23, #50, #69, #92, #119 on the A2 Blue Cart, Resident #137 on the C1 Blue Cart, Residents #9, #14, #47, #53, #110, #115, #128 on the C2 Blue Cart who had controlled substances stored. The census was 151. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #50 revealed an admission date of [DATE] with a diagnosis of Parkinson's disease. Review of the physician orders for [DATE] revealed an order for Norco at 9:00 A.M., 1:00 P.M., and 9:00 P.M. for chronic pain. Review of the controlled substance sheet for Resident #50's Norco revealed the 9:00 A.M. routine dose of Norco, tablet #25 for resident had not been signed out as…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2020-03-05 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — pattern
  Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy the facility failed to ensure the consultant pharmacist completed a thorough monthly review of each resident's medication regimen which included documentation of the presence or absence of irregularities. This affected four Residents (355, #59, #60, and #110) of five reviewed for unnecessary medications. The census was 151. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #59 was admitted on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease. Review of the monthly physician order sheets for January 2020, February 2020, and March 2020 revealed the consultant pharmacist signed indicating resident medications had been reviewed but did not indicate the presence or absence of irregularities noted to the resident's medication regimen. 2. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #55 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included dementia, vitamin B12 insufficiency, stenosis of lumbar spine, pericardial…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2020-03-05 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — pattern
  Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, review of dining spreadsheets, review of list of residents receiving pureed meals and review of facility policy the facility failed to ensure the portion sizes reflected in the menu spreadsheet were followed to ensure residents received adequate nutrition. This affected seven residents (#36, #60, #98, #99, #101, #133 and #143) of a total census of 151. Findings include: Review of the dining spreadsheet for lunch for 03/03/20 revealed residents pureed diets were to receive 4 ounces (oz) of pureed chicken Alfredo, 4 oz of pureed fettuccine, 5 oz of pureed broccoli, 4 oz of pureed peaches and 2 oz of pureed garlic bread. Observation of the tray line in the A1 unit kitchenette on 03/03/20 at 11:54 A.M. revealed Food Service Worker #134 prepared a tray for Resident #101. Resident #101 received a regular pureed diet. Food Service Worker #134 was observed to give Resident #101 4 oz of pureed chicken Alfredo, 3 oz of pureed fettuccine, 5 oz of pureed broccoli, 4 oz of pureed peaches and 2 oz of pureed garlic bread. Interview with Food Service Worker #134 at…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2020-03-05 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, interview, review of residents diets and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure food items on the C2 unit were kept at a safe temperature during food service. The facility also failed to ensure staff utilized sanitary practices when handling a resident's food items. This had the potential to affect 40 Residents (#9, #10, #13, #14, #17, #20, #29, #35, #39, #40, #42, #45, #47, #49, #53, #61, #64, #67, #70, #76, #80, #85, #87, #94, #96, #100, #109, #110, #112, #115, #117, #124, #128, #130, #134, #135, #138, #139, #148 and #254) out of 151 residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 151. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #138 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included dementia with behavioral disturbance, vascular dementia, depressive disorder, disorder of skin, muscle weakness, glaucoma, knee pain, vitamin D deficiency, history of appendectomy, history of knee surgery, seizure disorder,…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 10 rows in the source record cover these 4 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

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