Ayden Healthcare Of Greenville
243 Marion Drive, Greenville, OH 45331 · For profit - Corporation · 92 certified beds · (937) 548-3141 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605, F0607, F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (38) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $15,593 in federal fines (most recent 2023-12-21)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 3 to 1 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 1.0% | 5.3% | 15.4% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.0% | 6.2% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 0.4% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 20.8% | 30.1% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.2% | 3.2% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 5.5% | 6.1% | 16.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 16.8% | 25.5% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 94.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.7% | 3.4% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 27.3% | 21.4% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 7.3% | 8.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 5.1% | 1.2% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.8% | 75.6% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 35.2% | 24.9% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 21.7% | 12.9% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.32 | 1.73 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.76 | 1.80 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
56.9% 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 28 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 71.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 38 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 0.39 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 66% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 1% 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.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 56.9%CMS range 38.0–72.9 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.5%CMS range 6.6–16.2 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 71.0% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 73.7% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 60.5% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 stay | 3.5% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.22 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 92 beds and averages 69.7 residents a day — about 76% occupied, or roughly 22 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 3.15 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.51 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.89 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 2.72 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.32 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.51 to 0.49 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 44% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
38 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 27 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2023-12-21 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY THE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCY REPRESENTS AN INCIDENT OF PAST NONCOMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY. Based on open and closed medical record review, review of hospital records, review of an emergency medical service (EMS) report, review of the facilities self-reported incident (SRI), staff interviews, review of witness statements, physician interview, review of the American Heart Association website, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to timely notify the physician of a significant change of condition for one resident (Resident #75). This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy and the potential for serious life-threatening harm, negative health outcomes, and/or death when Resident #75 experienced low blood pressure, with no notification to the physician of the abnormal level resulting in hospitalization and subsequent death. This affected one (Resident #75) of four residents reviewed for change in condition and death. The facility census was 71. On [DATE] at 5:53 P.M., the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-12-04 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to prepare food in a safe and sanitary manner to protect against foodborne illness. This had the potential to affect all 65 residents residing in the facility as the facility did not identify any residents with an order of nothing by mouth. Findings include:Observation of the preparation of puree diets and interview on 12/04/25 at 11:19 A.M. revealed [NAME] #102 cleaning the food processor in the three compartment sink. [NAME] #102 immediately assembled the food processor and added sandwiches without allowing the food processor to air dry prior to placing food in the processor. [NAME] #102 verified she did not allow the food processor to dry before adding food and the inside of the food processor was still wet with sanitizer. Observation on 12/04/25 at 11:25 A.M. revealed the ham and cheese sandwiches stored on the steam table were 125 degrees Fahrenheit (F). [NAME] #102 verified the sandwiches were 125 degrees F and that minimum hot holding temperature should be 135 degrees F. At 11:56 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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-12-04 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interview, and review of The International Pharmacopoeia guidance, the facility failed to ensure the resident's eye drops that were open were not used beyond four weeks of open date and failed to ensure all eye drops that were opened had an open date. This affected two of three medications cards observed for medication storage. This affected six residents (#12, #23, #27, #46, #54, and #56) reviewed for medication storage. The facility census was 65.Findings include: Observation on 12/02/25 at 9:02 A.M. of the east medication cart revealed artificial tears lubricant eye drop 0.5 ounce (oz) one-eighth full with open dated of 08/27/25 for Resident #12 and latanoprost solution 0.005% one-eighth full no open date with a delivered date of 10/04/25 for Resident #56. Interview on 12/02/25 at 9:11 A.M. with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #122 verified there were no open date on the eye drops for Resident #56 and the bottle was almost empty and the eye drops for Resident #12 was dated 08/27/25. Observation on 12/02/25 at 9:30 A.M. of the north medication cart…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-04 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff and resident interview, the facility failed to ensure resident bed linens were clean. This affected one (#29) out of 19 residents reviewed. The facility census was 65.Findings include: Observation on 12/01/25 at 9:59 A.M. revealed Resident #29's bed was made with sides and end of the bed tucked under mattress. The top white blanket had a large oblong light brown stain approximately 12 inches by six inches with a second light brown oblong stain four inches below approximately six inches by four inches The two stains near the top of the blanket. Interview on 12/01/25 at 9:59 A.M. revealed Resident #29 does not know what the stain was from and does not want to have a stained or dirty bed. Interview on 12/01/24 at 10:02 A.M with certified nursing assistant (CNA) #103 verified the bed was made and there were stains on the blanket and STNA #103 would change out the bedding.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-04 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
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 the facility incident log, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to follow the abuse policy related to an injury of unknown origin. This affected one resident (#78) of five residents reviewed. The facility census was 65.Based on medical record review, review of the facility incident log, review of the witness statements, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to follow the abuse policy related to an injury of unknown origin. This affected one resident (#78) of five residents reviewed. The facility census was 65.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #78 revealed an admission date of 04/09/24 with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, type two diabetes mellitus, and hypertension.Review of the discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #78 was dependent on staff for all activities of daily living (ADL).Review of the facility incident log revealed Resident #78 had an incident on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-04 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, facility incident log, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to report an injury of unknown origin to the state surveying agency. This affected one resident (#78) of five residents reviewed. The facility census was 65.Based on medical record review, review of the facility incident log, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to report an injury of unknown origin to the state surveying agency. This affected one resident (#78) of five residents reviewed. The facility census was 65.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #78 revealed an admission date of 04/09/24 with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, type two diabetes mellitus, and hypertension.Review of the discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], Resident #78 was dependent on staff for all activities of daily living (ADLs).Review of the facility incident log revealed Resident #78 had a hematoma incident on 08/08/25 at 7:30 AM. 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-04 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interviews, review of the facility's incident investigation, and policy review, the facility failed to complete a thorough investigation into a resident's injury of unknown source when the resident obtained a hematoma with bleeding to her head. This affected one (Resident #78) of five residents reviewed for abuse, misappropriation, neglect, and injury of unknown origin. The facility census was 65.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #78 revealed an admission date of 04/09/24 with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and type two diabetes mellitus. Review of the discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #78 was dependent on staff for all activities of daily living (ADLs). Review of the nursing progress notes dated 08/08/25 written by Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #120 revealed during morning care, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) staff alerted nursing that Resident #78 had a small amount of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-04 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident care plan addressed their dental needs. This affected one (Resident #55) out of 19 residents reviewed for care planning. The facility census was 65.Findings Include:Review of the medical record revealed Resident #55 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included Parkinson's disease without dyskinesia, mild protein calorie malnutrition, human immunodeficiency virus disease, type two diabetes mellitus, and adult physical abuse. Review of Resident #55's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was moderately cognitively impaired and required supervision with eating. Resident #55 was dependent with oral hygiene, toileting, showering, upper body dressing, lower body dressing, putting on and taking off footwear, personal hygiene, rolling left and right, sitting to lying, lying to sitting, sitting to standing, chair transfers, toilet transfers, and tub transfers.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-04 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to provide appropriate oral care. This affected one (Resident #62) of two residents reviewed for dental care. The facility census was 65. Based on medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to provide appropriate oral care. This affected one (#62) of two residents reviewed for dental care. The facility census was 65. Findings Include: Review of the medical record for Resident #62 revealed an admissions date of 03/31/15 with diagnoses including hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infraction affecting left dominant side and muscle weakness.Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #62 dated 10/07/25 revealed the resident was cognitively intact and required assistance with activities of daily living. Further review revealed Resident #62 does not exhibit the behavior of rejection of care. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #62 was seen by the dentist on 10/17/25. The notes revealed recommendations for staff to assist the resident with brushing twice…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-04 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolatedProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation, and staff and resident interview, the facility failed to provide an activities program that supported residents in their choice of activities. This affected one resident (#57) of two residents sampled for activities. The facility census was 65.Based on medical record review, review of the activity participation document, staff and resident interview, and policy review, the facility failed to provide an activities program that supported residents in their choice of activities. This affected one resident (#57) of two residents sampled for activities. The facility census was 65.Findings Include:Record review for Resident #57 revealed this resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: malignant neoplasm (cancer) of the bladder, COVID-19, chronic heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, Parkinson's disease, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and chronic kidney disease.Review of the Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-04 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — isolatedEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow the menu for residents on a puree diet. This had the potential to affect three residents (#9, #12, and #54) who receive a puree diet . The facility census was 65. Findings include:Review of the lunch menu for 12/04/25 revealed residents on a puree diet should receive pureed tomato soup with crackers, pureed ham and cheese sandwiches, and pureed cantaloupe. Observation of the lunch service on 12/04/25 at 11:56 A.M. revealed the residents on a puree diet were being served tomato soup, pureed ham and cheese sandwiches, and cottage cheese. Interview on 12/04/25 at 12:10 P.M. with Dietary Director #169 verified the residents on a puree diet were served regular tomato soup without crackers and apple sauce instead of pureed cantaloupe. Review of the facility policy titled Texture and Consistency- Modified Diets dated 2021 revealed texture modification diets would be followed and changes should not be made without a written order.
Show the remaining 27 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-04 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, record review, review of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff wore the appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) for residents who were in Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP). This affected one (Resident #3) of two residents reviewed for EBP. The facility census was 65. Findings include: Record review revealed Resident #3 was admitted on [DATE]. Diagnoses included active primary progressive multiple sclerosis, and epilepsy (seizures). Review of the weekly wound assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #3 had a pressure ulcer (wound from constant pressure to the skin) stage IV (pressure ulcer with bottom extending to the muscle or bone) on the sacrum (tailbone). The active physician orders for Resident #3 for December 2025 reveled an order for EBP due to wound and indwelling catheter. Observation of Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #164 on 12/03/25 at 12:53 P.M. revealed CNA #164…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-04 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolatedMake 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's call light was in working order. This affected one (#55) of 24 residents reviewed for call lights. The facility census was 65. Findings include:Review of Resident #55's medical record revealed Resident #55 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included Parkinson's disease without dyskinesia and major depressive disorder. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #55 was moderately cognitively impaired and was dependent on staff with toileting, personal hygiene, and transfers. Review of the fall care plan dated 10/30/25 revealed Resident #55 was at risk for falls. Interventions included to ensure the call light was in reach. Observation of Resident #55's room on 12/01/25 at 10:28 A.M. revealed Resident #55's call light was not functioning or turning on in the room, hallway, or nursing station. Interview on 12/01/25 at 10:28 A.M. with Maintenance Director #155…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-02 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure the physician was updated regarding a wound change affecting Resident #10. The facility also failed to ensure wound treatments and assessments were obtained timely affecting two (#10, #13) of three reviewed for wounds. The facility census was 63.1.Review of medical record for Resident #10 revealed an admission date of 04/16/25. Diagnoses included malignant neoplasm of mouth, tracheostomy and gastrostomy tubes, and skin graft to the right forearm. The resident was discharged on 05/09/25 to the hospital and did not return.Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10 indicating impaired cognition. Resident #10 was dependent on eating and required maximum assistance for toileting hygiene, bed mobility and moderate assistance for transfers. Resident #10 was documented to be frequently incontinent of bowel and occasionally incontinent of urine…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-02 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, observation, staff interview and policy review the facility failed to ensure proper infection control practices were followed during incontinence care. This affected one (#13) of three residents reviewed for incontinence care. The facility census was 63.Review of medical record for Resident #13 revealed an admission date of 11/14/21 with diagnoses including diabetes mellitus type II, morbid obesity, depression and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #13 dated 04/09/25 revealed a Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating intact cognition. Resident #13 required supervision for meals and was dependent upon staff for bed mobility, transfers and toileting hygiene.Observation on 07/01/25 at 2:42 P.M. of incontinence care by Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #108 for Resident #13 revealed CNA #108 donned required personal protective equipment (PPE) prior to entering the room, Resident #13 was found lying on her back in bed. CNA #108 unfastened the incontinence product and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-07 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolatedPrevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record reviews, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure psychotropic medications had appropriate documentation for medical use and failed to ensure as needed (PRN) psychotropic medications had a date for re-evaluation of use or duration of use dates. This affected two (#05 and #16) residents out of three residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 60. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #05 revealed an admission date of 01/15/25 with medical diagnoses of dysphagia, tremors, dementia, osteoarthritis, and adult failure to thrive. Review of the medical record for Resident #05 revealed an admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 01/31/25, indicated Resident #05 was cognitively intact and required partial/moderate staff assistance for eating, substantial/maximum staff assistance for transfers, and was dependent upon staff for toilet hygiene and bathing. Review of the medical record for Resident #05 revealed a physician order dated 04/14/25 for Lorazepam (antianxiety medication)…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-07 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, observations, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to properly measure pressure ulcers and ensure treatments were completed as ordered. This affected one (#36) resident out of three residents reviewed for adequate wound care and services. The facility census was 60. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #36 revealed an admission date of 08/21/2020 with medical diagnoses of multiple sclerosis (MS), myelodysplastic syndrome, quadriplegia, anxiety, and schizophrenia. Review of the medical record for Resident #36 revealed a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 02/17/25, which indicated Resident #36 had severely impaired cognition and was dependent for all activities of daily living. The MDS indicated Resident #36 had a Stage IV pressure ulcer which was present upon admission. Review of the medical record for Resident #36 revealed a weekly wound assessment, dated 05/01/25, which indicated Resident #36 had a pressure ulcer to her coccyx which measured 6.1 centimeters (cm) by 5.6 cm by 0.4 cm and the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-07 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure medications were available for administration. This affected one (#10) resident out of the three residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 60. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #10 revealed an admission date of 02/11/25 with medical diagnoses of heart disease, diabetes mellitus, atrial fibrillation, depression, and bipolar disorder. Review of the medical record for Resident #10 revealed an admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 02/11/25, which indicated Resident #10 was cognitively intact and required supervision with eating, partial/moderate staff assistance with toilet hygiene and bed mobility, and substantial/maximum staff assistance with bathing and transfers. Review of the medical record for Resident #10 revealed a physician order dated 02/12/25 for Venlafaxine (antidepressant) extended release (ER) 150 milligram (mg) one tablet by mouth daily for depression. Observation with interview on 05/06/25 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-07 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure insulin injector pens were dated when opened. This affected one (#09) resident out of three residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 60. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #09 revealed an admission date of 02/15/25 with medication diagnoses of gas gangrene, chronic osteomyelitis of right ankle/foot, diabetes mellitus (DM) , peripheral vascular disease, and hypertension. Review of the medical record for Resident #09 revealed an admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 02/20/25, which indicated Resident #09 was cognitively intact and required set-up assistance with eating, partial/moderate staff assistance with showers, and substantial/maximum staff assistance with toilet hygiene, bed mobility, and transfers. The MDS indicated Resident #09 received six days of insulin injections. Review of the medical record for Resident #09 revealed a physician order dated 04/14/25 for Insulin Lispro pen to inject 10 units…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-12-26 · tag F0835 — failed to run the facility competently — widespreadAdminister 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of contractor services invoices, interview with outside contractor service, and staff interview, the facility failed to remain solvent by paying all contractors for their services. This had the potential to affect all 67 residents residing in the facility. The current census is 67. Findings include: Review of the facility's contract with the extermination services revealed the exterminators were scheduled to provide services for the facility monthly and treat for any infestations. The contract was for 12 months of service beginning February 2024. Further review revealed the facility had no invoices for the contractor after 08/20/24. Interview on 12/26/24 at 12:08 P.M., with the Receptionist #100, from the exterminator contracted service company, revealed as of August 2024, the facility had an unpaid balance and the extermination service were no longer providing any treatments to the facility due to nonpayment. Interview on 12/26/24 at 10:30 A.M., with Licensed Social Worker, (LSW) #1, revealed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-12-26 · tag F0839 — widespreadEmploy staff that are licensed, certified, or registered in accordance with state laws.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY THE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCY REPRESENTS AN INCIDENT OF PAST NON-COMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY Based on staff interview, review of resident records, review of employee files, review of license verification via the Ohio Board of Nursing database, review of facility corrective action, and review of staffing schedules the facility failed to ensure all nurses who were providing care to resident had active licenses. This had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. The current census is 67. Findings include: Review of Ohio Board of Nursing License Verification database revealed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #150's the nurse's licensed had expired as of [DATE]. Review of the facility's daily nursing schedules dating from [DATE] to [DATE] revealed LPN #150 had been scheduled to work on [DATE]. Review of LPN #150's employee file revealed her license had not been renewed as of [DATE], no new license verification evidence was noted in the employee file. Interview on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-12-26 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — widespreadMake sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of contractor services invoices, interview with outside contractor service, policy review, and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain a pest control program in accordance with policy. This had the potential to affect all 67 residents residing in the facility. The current census is 67. Findings include: Review of the facility's contract with the extermination services revealed the exterminators were scheduled to provide services for the facility monthly and treat for any infestations. The contract was for 12 months of service beginning February 2024. Further review revealed the facility had no invoices for the contractor after 08/20/24. Interview on 12/26/24 at 12:08 P.M., with the Receptionist #100, from the exterminator contracted service company, revealed as of August 2024, the facility had an unpaid balance and the extermination service were no longer providing any treatments to the facility due to nonpayment. Interview on 12/26/24 at 10:30 A.M., with Licensed Social Worker (LSW) #1,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-12-26 · tag F0696 — isolatedProvide appropriate care/assistance for a resident with a prosthesis.
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, record review, resident interview, staff interview, protocol review, the facility failed to ensure a resident with a prosthesis was able to use the device, when the facility failed to timely treat the device for bed bugs. This affected one (#12) of two residents reviewed for prostheses. The current census is 67. Findings include: Review of Resident #12's medical record revealed an admission date of 10/18/24. Diagnoses for Resident #12 included encephalopathy, traumatic leg amputation, failure to thrive, and pneumonia. Review of physician assistant progress note dated 10/21/24 at 8:17 A.M., revealed Resident #12 seen for readmission. Resident #12 was infested with bed bugs upon admission. Resident #12 prosthetic needed to be completely decontaminated and cleaned prior to giving it to him. This has not been returned at this time, which has him somewhat agitated. The plan included: the physician assistant spent a lot of time reassuring Resident #12 that this will be returned to him as soon 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-19 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observations, review of the facility policy, review of the Self-Reporting Incident (SRI) database, and staff interviews, the facility failed to report an injury of unknown origin to the State Agency. This affected one (#15) out of 11 residents reviewed for abuse allegations not being reported. The current census is 68. Findings include: Record review of Resident #15 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses for Resident #15 include dementia, retrograde amnesia, falls, and asthma. Review of the comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had impaired cognition and was a complete assist for Activities of Daily (ADL). Review of Resident #15's care plans dated 08/16/24 revealed no focus for behaviors. Further review of the care plans revised on 08/19/24 revealed a focus for actual skin impairment to skin integrity of right posterior calf. Interventions included follow protocols for treatments of injury, identify and document…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-19 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observations, review of the facility policy, review of the Self-Reporting Incident (SRI) database, and staff interviews, the facility failed to investigate an injury of unknown origin. This affected one (#15) out of 11 residents reviewed for abuse allegations not being reported. The current census is 68. Findings include: Record review of Resident #15 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses for Resident #15 include dementia, retrograde amnesia, falls, and asthma. Review of the comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had impaired cognition and was a complete assist for Activities of Daily (ADL). Review of Resident #15's care plans dated 08/16/24 revealed no focus for behaviors. Further review of the care plans revised on 08/19/24 revealed a focus for actual skin impairment to skin integrity of right posterior calf. Interventions included follow protocols for treatments of injury, identify and document potential…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-12-21 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard 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 record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to document in the resident record a medical change in condition and accurately document the care and services provided. This affected one (#75) of four resident records reviewed for accurate documentation. The facility census was 71. Findings include: Review of Resident #75's closed medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged to the hospital on [DATE]. The resident expired at the hospital on [DATE]. Diagnoses for Resident #75 included malignant neoplasm of the rectum with colon resection surgery on [DATE], diabetes, morbid obesity, chronic kidney disease, and heart failure. Review of the comprehensive Minimum Data Set, (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed the resident had intact cognition and required partial assistance for mobility, and extensive assistance for toileting and bathing. Review of a handwritten nurse notes, provided by the Director of Nursing, (DON), revealed the notes…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2023-06-14 · tag F0732 — widespreadPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and staff interview, the facility failed to post daily staffing information as required. This had the potential to affect at 73 residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 73. Findings included: Observations on 06/12/23 at 8:30 A.M., 06/13/23 at 7:30 A.M. and 06/14/23 at 7:50 A.M. revealed no evidence of daily staffing information posted in a prominent area visible to residents and visitors. Observation on 06/14/23 at 7:55 A.M. revealed a staffing schedule form posted on the back wall at the main nurse's station. The form was behind a four-foot-tall medical record chart rack, which was filled with resident charts. The form was not visible from the nurse's station counter. The form included the names of the nurses and aides working that day on each shift but did not have documentation to support the census or the total number of actual hours worked per shirt for licensed and unlicensed staff responsible for care. Interview on 06/14/23 at 7:59 A.M. with the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed the facility did not have daily staffing information…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-06-14 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to have an order or documentation of advance directives for Resident #37. This affected one (Resident #37) of 24 residents reviewed for advanced directives. The facility census was 73. Findings: Review of the medical record for Resident #37 revealed he was admitted [DATE] with diagnoses to including Parkinson's disease, dysphasia, aphasia, chronic atrial fibrillation, major depressive disorder, dementia, mixed hyperlipidemia, personal history of transient ischemic attack and cerebral infarction, hypertension, gastro-esophageal reflux disease and chronic pain. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #37's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was 14, indicating he was cognitively intact. Resident#37 required supervision with eating and extensive assistance with activities of daily living (ADL's). Review of the Physician's Orders for Resident #37 revealed no order for advanced directives. Further review the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-06-14 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record reviews, staff interviews, and review of Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) manual 3.0, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for one (Resident #51) of three residents reviewed for care plan development. The facility census was 73. Findings included: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #51 revealed an admission date of 02/25/23 with medical diagnoses of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), diabetes mellitus, congestive heart failure (CHF), major Depression, and chronic pain syndrome. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #51 was cognitively intact and required extensive assistance with bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toileting, and bathing. Further review revealed under the section, Care Area Assessment (CAA), revealed the facility would proceed with a care plan for Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), vision, communication, urinary incontinence, psychosocial well-being, and mood. Further review of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-06-14 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, resident and staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to provide showers/baths as scheduled. This affected one (Resident #6) of one resident reviewed for showers/bathing. The facility census was 73. Findings included: Review of the medical record for Resident #6 revealed an admission date of 03/13/15 with medical diagnoses of hypertension, arthritis, and transient ischemic attack (TIA). Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated Resident #6 was cognitively intact and required extensive assistance with bed mobility, transfers, toileting and was dependent upon staff for bathing. Review of Resident #6's care plan revealed the resident had an ADL deficit related to physical limitations and arthritis. Interventions included assisting Resident #6 with bath/showers as needed. Further review of the medical record revealed Resident #6 was scheduled for bath/showers on Tuesdays and Fridays each week. Review of the physician progress note dated 01/30/23 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-06-14 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure 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 and staff interview, the facility failed ensure the physican addressed pharmacy recommendations in a timely manner. This affected two (Residents #20 and #57) of five residents reviewed for phamacy recommendations. The facility census was 73. Findings: 1. Medical record review for Resident #20 revealed an admission date of 08/01/22. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, type II diabetes, moderate protein-calorie malnutrition, osteoarthritis, hyperlipidemia, occlusion and stenosis of carotid artery, peripheral vascular disease, gastroenteritis and colitis, major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, and hypertension. Review of Resident #20's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed her Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was 15, indicating she was cognitively intact. Resident #20 required supervision with eating and dressing, limited assistance with personal hygiene, and extensive assistance with toileting, bed mobility and transfers.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-06-14 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
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, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were offered the pneumococcal vaccine. This affected two (Residents #4 and #51) of the five reviewed for vaccinations. The facility census was 73. Findings included: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #4 revealed an admission date of 11/02/21 with medical diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease, hyperlipidemia, hypothyroidism, and hypertension. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #4 had severe cognitive impairment and required extensive staff assistance with bed mobility, transfers, toileting, dressing, and was dependent upon staff for bathing. Further review of the medical record revealed no documentation to support Resident #4 received the pneumococcal vaccine. The medical record did not contain documentation to support the facility provided Resident #4 or the resident's representative with education regarding the pneumococcal vaccine or offered the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2021-05-04 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure food stored in the walk in refrigerator had expiration dates, and failed to label food when opened. This had the potential for affect all resident residing in the facility with the exception of three Residents (#34, #41, and #60) identified by the facility who did not received food from the kitchen. The facility census was 66. Findings include: Observation on 04/26/21 at 2:30 P.M. of walk in cooler revealed the following food items to not have expiration dates, or a label with the date they were opened; two 46 ounce boxes of ready care thickened water, one Smucker's squeeze bottle of caramel flavored plate scrapers, one bottle of Smucker's raspberry flavored plate scrapers dessert topping, a large bag of shredded lettuce, and a bag of shredded cheese. Interview with Dietary Manager at the time of the observation confirmed the above findings. Review of the facility policy titled, Use by Date, dated 04/07/06, revealed food items will have an expiration date or use by date.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2021-05-04 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, facility policy review, and review of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) resources, the facility failed to ensure staff completed appropriate hand hygiene during meal service. This had the potential to effect 63 of 66 residents who consumed food from the kitchen. The facility identified three Residents (#34, #41, and #60) who did not consume food from the kitchen. Findings include: Observation on 04/29/21 at 11:25 A.M. revealed Dietary Aide (DA) #800 went into dietary office, pulled her N-95 mask down with her ungloved right hand, and touching the front of the mask seam. The DA then took a drink from a soda bottle. The DA sat the bottle down and replaced her N-95 mask on her face without completing hand hygiene or the donning of gloves before returning to the steam table. The DA then placed napkins, silverware, and individual condiments on trays for the residents' meal. At 11:30 A.M. the DA pulled her N-95 mask down below her chin exposing her mouth while on a personal phone and facility walkie talkie. She then replaced the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-05-04 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, resident interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to develop a care plan for a resident who received hospice services. This affected one Resident (#44) of three reviewed for hospice services. Additionally, the facility failed to update and hold a care conference for one Resident (#27) of 18 reviewed for care planning. The facility census was 66. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #44 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including amputation of right leg, anxiety, cerebral infarction, diabetes type two, and convulsions. Review of Resident #44's physician orders dated 07/14/20 revealed the resident was to receive hospice services. Review of Resident #44's care plans dated 03/2021 revealed no evidence of a care plan for hospice care. Interview on 04/29/21 at 10:10 A.M. with the Minimum Data Set Licensed Practical Nurse, (MDS-LPN) revealed Resident #44 was coded for hospice service in 07/2020. MDS-LPN…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-05-04 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, resident interview and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure appropriate bowel monitoring for constipation was in place for one Resident (#8) of one reviewed for constipation. The facility census was 66. Findings include: Medical record review for Resident #8 revealed an admission date on 11/22/19 with diagnoses including heart failure, chronic respiratory failure, and gastroesophageal reflex disease. Review of most recent quarterly Minimum data Set ( MDS) assessment dated [DATE] assessment for Resident #8 revealed the resident had intact cognition. Review of Resident #8's bowel and bladder elimination tracking document in the electronic health record (EHR) dated 04/16/21 through 04/29/21 revealed no evidence the resident had a bowel movement between 04/21/21 to 04/26/21 (five days). Interview on 04/27/21 at 5:45 P.M. with Resident #8 revealed the resident had complained of constipation to the nurse and requested medication for relief that morning. Interview on 04/29/21…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-05-04 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure 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
Based on medical record review, staff interview, review of pharmacy recommendations, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to respond to and implement pharmacy recommendations approved by the physician. This affected one Resident (#30) of seven residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The census was 66. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #30 revealed an admission date of 08/20/20 with a diagnosis of cerebral infarction (stroke). The resident was noted to be cognitively impaired. Review of pharmacist recommendation for Resident #30 dated 03/11/21 revealed resident had been on a routine daily dose of the antihistamine loratadine since August of 2020. The recommendation revealed the facility should document reason for continued therapy with a long term antihistamine, consider changing to an as needed dose, or consider discontinuing the medication. The Nurse Practitioner responded to the recommendation on 03/19/21 and wrote to change Resident #30's loratadine to an as needed dose. Review of the March 2021 and April 2021 Medication…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-05-04 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, review of hospital records, resident interview, staff interview, and review of online medication information, the facility failed to implement a physician's order to administer an oral medication to regulate blood sugar. This affected one Resident (#271) of seven residents reviewed for medications. The facility census was 66. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #271 revealed an admission date of 04/22/21 with a diagnosis of diabetes mellitus. Review of the hospital record for Resident #271 dated 04/21/21 revealed the resident the resident was to continue the same oral medications taken at home and referred to the discharge medication list. Review of the hospital discharge medication list for Resident #271 dated 04/21/21 revealed orders for 20 units of insulin to be given by injection at bedtime, and the oral medication Metformin to be taken twice daily for treatment of diabetes mellitus. Review of the April 2021 Medication Administration Record (MAR) for Resident #271 revealed no evidence the ordered Metformin was transcribed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$15,593 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $15,593 — penalty dated 2023-12-21
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to AYDEN HEALTHCARE — 11 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 1 of 5 | 2.1 | -1.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 1.9 | +0.1 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 1.8 | -0.8 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
The other 10 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.1★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BUCKEYE FAMILY TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF | 51% | since 12/31/2025 |
| KATZ, GEORGE | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 25% | since 02/01/2025 |
| KAZARNOVSKY, SOLOMON | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | 12% | since 02/01/2025 |
| STEIN, ABBA | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | 12% | since 02/01/2025 |
| LAHASKY, EPHRAM | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 02/01/2025 |
| CUSNER, ADAM | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/27/2025 |
| DEGYANSKY, JEFFREY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2020 |
| GOLDISH, ELIEZER | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 22 rows in the source record cover these 8 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
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 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in OH
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Ohio Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 365532. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-04, 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.