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

Otterbein At Granville

2158 Columbus Road, Granville, OH 43023 · Non profit - Corporation · 22 certified beds · (740) 321-0400 Medicare only — no Medicaid

Call the home — (740) 321-0400 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0605) — cited Apr 2026
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
Worth asking about
  • 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

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.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★ 2/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1264 Weaver Dr · (220) 564-1961 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
200 E Broadway · (740) 587-0268 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
IGA0.5 mi
484 S Main St · (740) 587-0031 · Call to confirm hours
Park
411 W Broadway · (740) 404-4003 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
309 W Broadway · (740) 503-3941

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 5 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder3.2%0.2%0.9%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%0.4%2.0%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms46.2%30.1%6.5%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury0.0%3.2%3.3%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers0.0%3.4%4.7%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control23.2%21.4%21.2%typical
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.2%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine92.4%75.6%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission24.0%24.9%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit10.6%12.9%12.0%better

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

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

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.

61.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 150 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

61.4%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.9%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
57.1%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.90U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.34hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.42hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.14hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 57.1% 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 77 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.90 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 96% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 14% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF61.4%CMS range 54.4–67.551.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.9%CMS range 8.0–15.010.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge57.1%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge64.9%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge42.9%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified96.8%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge98.6%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.7%CMS range 3.6–11.97.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.721.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

1.57
RN hours/ resident / day
0.57
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.32
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.46
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.62
RN hoursweekends
55.6%
Total nursing turnover
60.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 22 beds and averages 20.6 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 1 bed 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 4.46 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.57 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.32 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 3.62 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.81 on weekdays — 25% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.96 to 0.62 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 56% 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

4
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-04-28)
2
at the previous standard inspection (2025-05-29)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-28 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolated
    Prevent 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 medical record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide proper justification for the use of anti-psychotic medications. This affected one (Resident #7) of two residents reviewed for medication use. The census was 18.Findings Include:Resident #7 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses were Parkinson's disease, morbid obesity, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, major depressive disorder, insomnia, sleep apnea, anxiety disorder, delusional disorder, dementia, dysphagia, psychotic disorder, vitamin D deficiency, anemia, and Type II Diabetes. Review of his minimum data set (MDS) assessment, dated 03/12/26, revealed he had a mild cognitive impairment.Review of Resident #7's physician orders, dated 12/06/25, revealed he was prescribed Quetiapine (antipsychotic) 25 milligrams (mg) every morning for delusions, paranoia related to psychotic disorder with delusions due to known physiological condition. Also, he was prescribed Quetiapine 50 mg, 1.5 tablets at bed…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-28 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure neurological assessments were completed after an unwitnessed fall. This affected one (Resident #6) out of one residents reviewed for falls. The facility census was 18.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #6 revealed an admission date of 10/16/23 with diagnoses including history of transient ischemic attack, syncope and collapse, hypertension, dementia and atrial fibrillation.Review of the care plan dated 04/15/25 revealed the resident had a history of an actual fall with minor injury. Interventions included performing neurological checks after any falls and monitoring/reporting neurological deficits such as changes in level of consciousness, visual changes, aphasia, dizziness, weakness and restlessness.Review of the Fall Risk Screening Tool dated 10/27/25 revealed the resident was identified as being at risk for falls.Review of annual minimum data set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #6 was severely…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-28 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolated
    Provide timely, quality laboratory services/tests to meet the needs of residents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure physician ordered laboratory specimens were collected. This affected one resident (Resident #5) out of one resident reviewed for laboratory services. The facility census was 18.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #5 revealed an admission date of 04/19/24 with diagnoses of major depressive disorder, Type II Diabetes Mellitus, chronic kidney disease, calculus of kidney and morbid obesity due to excess calories.Review of the care plan dated 05/23/25 revealed the resident had renal insufficiency with interventions to monitor laboratory reports as ordered and report results to the physician. The care plan also revealed the resident had Diabetes Mellitus Type II with an intervention to complete laboratory tests as ordered due to the risk of complications.Review of the physician visit dated 01/14/26 revealed the resident was seen for diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and chronic kidney disease follow up. The physician documented…

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

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-28 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — isolated
    Implement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
    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 facility policy review, the facility failed to provide adequate monitoring for the long term use of antibiotics. This affected one (Resident #21) of one resident reviewed for antibiotic use. The census was 18.Findings Include: Resident #21 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses were senile degeneration of brain, adult failure to thrive, hypothyroidism, dysphagia, feeding difficulties, anemia, cognitive communication deficit, anxiety disorder, hypertension, major depressive disorder, cerebral atherosclerosis, abnormal weight loss, apraxia, polyosteoarthritis, vascular dementia, restlessness and agitation, vitamin D deficiency, Type II Diabetes, and somnolence. Review of her minimum data set (MDS) assessment, dated 01/27/26, revealed she had a severe cognitive impairment.Review of Resident #21's physician orders, dated 05/30/23, revealed she had an order for Macrodantin Oral Capsule (antibiotic) 50 milligram (mg) one time a day for urinary tract…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-29 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide 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 interview, observation, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a treatment was implemented when Resident #8 obtained a skin tear and the treatment was discontinued when the skin tear was resolved. This affected one resident (#8) of two residents reviewed for skin conditions. The facility census was 19. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #8 revealed an admission date of 10/16/23. Diagnoses included but were not limited to hemiplegia and hemiparesis following unspecified cerebrovascular disease affecting right dominant side, personal history of transient ischemic attack, anxiety disorder, muscle weakness and depression. Review of the progress notes dated 04/26/25 at 1:06 P.M. revealed resident obtained a two (2) centimeter(cm) by (x) 2 cm skin tear to the back of the right hand. Review of the physician orders for Resident #8 from 04/26/25 through 04/29/25 at 11:08 A.M. revealed no treatment was ordered for the skin tear to the back of the resident's right hand. Review of…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-29 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure comprehensive pressure wound assessments were completed weekly. This affected one resident (#17) of two residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The census was 19. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident # 17 revealed an admission date of 03/15/25. Diagnoses included but were not limited to pressure ulcer to the sacral region stage II (partial-thickness skin loss, presenting as an open sore or blister with a red or pink wound bed), depression, anxiety disorder, moderate protein-calorie malnutrition, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting right dominant side and acute chronic systolic heart failure. Review of the plan of care dated 03/15/25 for Resident #17 revealed her to have a stage II pressure ulcer area to the coccyx on admission and interventions including but not limited to assess/monitor the wound for healing. Assess and document the status of the wound perimeter,…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to OTTERBEIN SENIORLIFE — 20 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 5 of 53.2+1.8 vs chain
Health inspection 5 of 53.0+2.0 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 53.2+0.8 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 54.1+0.9 vs chain
The other 19 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.2★, per CMS)

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

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
OTTERBEIN LSC, LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 02/01/2023
OTTERBEIN HOMEOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF100%since 12/01/2021
CRAWFORD, ANDYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2020
GREATHOUSE, TALYAIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2016
HAWK, CONNIEIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2020
JOHNSTON, RICHARDIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2017
LAYMAN, STEPHENIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 12/01/2021
LEWELLEN, DALEIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025
NEELY, NANCYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 12/01/2021
PETERSON, ANNEIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2023
SHARKEY, GREGIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2021
VARGO, CHRISTIEIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2021
WARE, TODDIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 12/01/2021
BROWNSON, WILLIAMIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/01/2021
INGOLD, MOLLY CIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2012
WEEKLY, JENNIFERIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 11/09/2004
GREEN, JAMESIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 12/01/2021
HAWKINS, RITAIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/16/2006
MILLER, JASONIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 12/01/2021
WILSON, JILLIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 05/01/2009
FUNCTIONAL PATHWAYS OF TENNESSEE LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/25/2025
APP, LYNNIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/01/2021
BARTLETT, VICTORIAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/01/2021
BAYLIFF, BECKYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/01/2021
BURKE, DANIELIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/01/2021
COLEMAN, ROBERTIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/01/2021
FRALEY, RALPHIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/01/2021
GLOSSER, HEIDIIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/01/2021
HAZELBAKER, TOMASIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/01/2021
HOLLISTER, JONATHANIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 12/01/2021
KROEZE, DERIKIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 11/13/2017
VONDERHAAR, STEVEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/01/2021
BAKER, STEVEIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/25/2025
GALBUT, ABRAHAMIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/25/2025
GALBUT, DANIELIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/06/2025
GALBUT, DAVIDIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/25/2025
GALBUT, ERICIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/06/2025
GALBUT, ROBERTIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/25/2025
PARITZKY, JONATHANIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/25/2025
ROMBRO, DAVIDIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/25/2025
ZISEK, TODDIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/25/2025
POLARIS PHARMACY SERVICES OF OHIO LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 12/01/2018

CMS files one row per role, so the 60 rows in the source record cover these 42 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

4 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.

$13.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+1.0%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$761K
Related-party expense6% of expenses

This home reported $761K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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

Cost & finances

$163per resident / day
operating cost
$4,970per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$165per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

What families pay in OH

Paying with Medicaid

CMS lists this home as Medicare-certified only — it is not Medicaid-certified, so it generally cannot accept Medicaid as payment for a long-term stay. That makes it one of roughly 545 homes nationally where a Medicaid-funded placement is not an option. If you expect to rely on Medicaid, ask the home directly before you tour, and see the Ohio Medicaid page for homes that do.

Typical monthly cost in Ohio
$9,186/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$10,389/mo
Nursing home (private)
$6,103/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 366314. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-28, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next