Spring Creek Nursing And Rehabilitation Center LLC

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

60.9% 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 25 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 36.4% 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 22 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 0.26 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 38% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 12% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 71.6 residents a day — about 60% occupied, or roughly 48 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 3.72 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.35 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.19 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 3.45 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.83 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.40 to 0.22 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 41% 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.

This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

31 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 20 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · J2024-09-24 · 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 medical record review, review of facility incident investigations with witness statements, review of staff education, staff interviews, review of a resident handbook, review of a facility Self-Reported Incident (SRI), and review of facility smoking policies, the facility failed to ensure Resident #75 who had a known history of smoking with oxygen on, was assessed as an independent smoker, exhibited safe smoking practices and did not smoke while wearing oxygen. This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy and serious life-threatening harm, injuries and/or death when Resident #75 lit a cigarette while wearing oxygen therapy via nasal cannula, in the designated smoking area. Resident #75's oxygen ignited and set Resident #75 on fire with the oxygen. Resident #75 sustained singed facial hair, and the skin around his mouth, nose, and bilateral cheeks was charred black. Resident #75, while being treated by the local emergency medical squad, began to experience a deteriorating airway and adventitious lung sounds…

  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 · D2026-03-09 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolated
  Protect 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 medical record review, resident interview, staff interview, police officer interview, review of Self-Report Incident (SRI) #269318, review of the facility investigation, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to protect a resident from misappropriation. This affected one resident (#2) of three reviewed for misappropriation. The facility census was 71.Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #2 revealed an admission date of 12/04/13. Diagnoses included Multiple Sclerosis (MS), diabetes mellitus type two, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), heart failure, chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage three, atrial fibrillation (A-fib), hypertension, and peripheral vascular disease (PDV). Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] for Resident #2 revealed the resident had mild cognitive impairment. Review of the statement submitted by Resident #2, dated 01/02/26, revealed the resident reported she reviewed her most recent bank statement and it had charges…

  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 · D2025-09-15 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolated
  Honor 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 and staff interview, review of resident shower sheets and shower schedules, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents who were dependent on staff for bathing received showers on their scheduled days per their preference. This affected three (#17, #25, and #67) of four residents reviewed for showers. The facility census was 68. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #17 revealed an original admission date of 12/04/13 with re-admission to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included multiple sclerosis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and atrial fibrillation. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #17 had intact cognition evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15. The resident was assessed to require maximal assistance with showers and was dependent on staff to transfer into the shower. Review of the care plan dated 07/26/22 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 · E2025-08-27 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — pattern
  Make sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, resident and staff interviews, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure the resident's call devices were functioning in their bathroom and/or bedrooms and failed to ensure the residents had accessibility and/or functionality of call devices in the shower rooms. This affected three (#22, #23, and #24) of five residents reviewed for call lights and had the potential to affect the residents who utilize the showers on first and third floor. The facility census was 74.1. Observation and interview on 08/14/25 at 8:45 A.M. revealed Resident #22's bathroom call light did not work. Resident #22 stated he would just wait for staff to come back after he was toileted. He could not recall if he used his call light or not. Interview on 08/14/25 at 11:10 A.M. with Plant Operation Director (POD) #102 confirmed Resident #22's bathroom call light did not work. 2. Observation and interview on 08/14/25 at 8:30 A.M. revealed Resident #23's bathroom call light was in the pulled position and the light was not functioning. Interview on 08/14/25 at 8:30 A.M.…

  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.

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-27 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
  Honor 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 observation, resident and staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure the residents had a homelike environment. This affected three (#22, #23,and #24) of four residents reviewed for homelike environment. The facility census was 72.1. Review of the medical record for Resident #22 revealed a re-admission on [DATE]. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and seizures. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #22 had severe cognitive impairment.Observation and interview on 08/14/25 at 8:45 A.M. of Resident #22's bathroom revealed a sink with a built in soap dispenser holder without a soap container in the holder. There was not any soap or paper towels available. Interview on 08/14/25 at 8:45 A.M. with Resident #22 stated she ambulates with one assist to the restroom. Resident #22 stated to wash his hands, the Certified Nursing Aide (CNA) would have to get a washcloth and soap from outside…

  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 · D2025-08-27 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop 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 medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to develop a care plan based on Resident #23's medical needs. This affected one (#23) of one resident reviewed for care plans. The facility census was 72.Review of the medical record for Resident #23 revealed an admission on [DATE]. Diagnoses included type I diabetes mellitus (DM). Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #23 was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #23's physician orders dated 06/05/25 revealed an order for insulin aspart injection solution 100 units (u) per milliliter (ml). Inject 100 units subcutaneously as needed for type I DM, administered through insulin pump. Review of the care plan for Resident #23 dated 06/25/25 revealed there was no care plan developed for Resident #23's diagnosis of type I DM, use of insulin for DM and management of Resident #23's insulin pump. Interview on 08/14/25 at 8:30 A.M. with Resident #23 revealed there have been times when she has low…

  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 · Ecited before2025-05-30 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
  Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to maintain a clean environment in the shower rooms. This had the potential to affect all residents residing One South and One [NAME] (#1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10, #11, #12, #13, #14, #15, #16, #17, #18, #19, #20, #21, #51, #52, #53, #54, #55, #56, #57, #58, #59, #60, #61, #62, #63, #64, #65, #66, #67, #68, #69, #70, #71, #72, #73, and #74). The facility census was 73. Findings include: Observation on 05/28/25 from 1:31 P.M. to 2:21 P.M. revealed the shower room on One [NAME] with a brown substance observed on the back of the shower chair seat. Shower bed with brown residue underneath on the drip cloth running the length of the bed and peg-tube cap under the shower bed mattress. Observation on 05/29/25 at 4:15 P.M. of One South shower room revealed brown sticky substance on the floor in the shower area, one tile missing on the shower wall, brown/black substance on the ceiling above the foot washer, brown substance on the wall of the foot washer, three dirty washcloths in the tub, and standing water…

  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 · D2025-01-06 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
  Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and facility policy, the facility failed to notify a resident representative of a change of condition. This affected one (Resident #41) of three residents reviewed for notification of change. The facility census was 69. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #41 was admitted on [DATE]. Diagnoses included acute and chronic respiratory failure, unspecified combined systolic (congestive) and diastolic (congestive) heart failure, lymphedema, chronic kidney disease stage three, acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, bilateral primary osteoarthritis of knee, fibromyalgia, essential primary hypertension, and hyperlipidemia. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was cognitively intact. Review of the nursing note dated 11/18/24 at 12:29 A.M. revealed Resident #41 complained of shortness of breath and her chest feeling heavy. The resident's oxygen saturation was in the 70's and 80's at two liters 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2024-09-24 · tag F0835 — failed to run the facility competently — widespread
  Administer the facility in a manner that enables it to use its resources effectively and efficiently.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on review of the facility's billing statements, review of email communication, vendor interviews, and staff interviews, the facility failed to operate the facility in a manner to ensure facility bills were being paid in a timely manner. This had the potential to affect all 73 residents in a facility with a census of 73. Findings include: 1. Review of the facility's electric invoice dated 07/29/24 revealed an amount of $438,869.15 was due by 09/19/24 with a disconnection notice provided which states the facility's electric service payment is past due and the electric service could be disconnected unless payment of $409,334.97 is made by 08/19/24. Review of the facility's electric invoice dated 08/30/24 revealed an amount of $436,010.41 was due by 09/20/24 with a disconnection notice provided which stated the facility's electric service is payment is past due and the electric service could be disconnected unless payment of $403,795.52 is made by 09/20/24. Review of the facility's payments to the electric service provider revealed payments in the amount of $25,000 on 03/20/24,…

  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 · E2024-02-15 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — pattern
  Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview, medical record review, the facility failed to ensure the electronic medical record (EMR) accurately reflected physician orders and treatments provided to residents. This affected four (#49, #71, #74, and #77) of 20 residents reviewed for an accurate medical record. The facility census was 75. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #77 was admitted on [DATE]. Diagnoses included encounter for other orthopedic aftercare, other fracture of the left lower leg, subsequent encounter for closed fracture with routine healing, nontraumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage, unspecified fracture of the sacrum initial encounter for closed fracture, lesion of the radial nerve of the left upper limb, and cutaneous abscess of the left lower limb. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 01/17/24, revealed the resident was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #77's physician order, dated 01/10/24 to 02/13/24, revealed an order for…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-02-15 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor 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 observation, medical record review, staff interview, and review of a facility policy, the facility failed to ensure resident dignity was maintained. This affected one (#24) of one residents reviewed for dignity. The facility census was 75. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #24 was admitted on [DATE]. Diagnoses included Parkinson's disease without dyskinesia, hypertensive heart and chronic kidney disease with heart failure, peripheral vascular disease, chronic kidney disease stage three, unspecified dementia, major depressive disorder, and lymphedema. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 11/08/23, revealed the resident was moderately cognitively impaired. Resident #24 was always incontinent of bowel and bladder and required substantial/maximal assistance with toileting. Observation on 02/13/24 at 1:39 P.M. revealed Resident #24 was observed from the hallway with the door to the room open. Resident #24 was laying on her left side with her backside facing…

  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

“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

$77,618 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $77,618 — penalty dated 2024-09-24

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.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 11 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

This home reported $1.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 12% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. 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 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

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

What families pay in OH