Meadow Grove Transitional Care

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

70.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 245 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 26.7% 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 45 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 0.28 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 42% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 4% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 99 beds and averages 93.5 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 6 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.36 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.59 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.96 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.18 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.43 on weekdays — 7% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.66 to 0.42 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 55% 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.

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

• Potential for harm · F2025-03-24 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to store and serve food in a safe and sanitary manner. This had the potential to affect all 95 residents in the facility who were identified as receiving meals from the kitchen. Findings include: 1. Observations in the kitchen on 03/17/25 from 8:22 A.M. to 8:28 A.M. revealed a box containing 12 containers of a nutritional supplement was holding the door to the dry storage room ajar and resting on the floor, a large meat roast was resting on the floor of the walk in refrigerator, tulip serving bowls were not inverted on the storage rack, a bottle of opened barbecue sauce in the walk in refrigerator was undated, two opened bags containing frozen food items were unlabeled and undated in the walk in freezer, a black fuzzy substance was on the walk in refrigerator fan, and a black fuzzy substance was on the overhead vent located directly over the serving tray line. Interview with Dietitian #192 on 03/17/25 at 8:28 A.M. confirmed a box containing 12 containers of a nutritional supplement was holding the door to the dry…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-03-24 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — pattern
  Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, medical record review, resident interview, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to properly monitor resident fluid restrictions. This affected two (Residents #58 and #47) of two residents reviewed for hydration. Also, the facility failed to adequately monitor and address resident nutritional status. This affected three (Residents #29, #19, and #47) of four residents reviewed for nutrition. The census was 95. Findings Include: 1. Resident #58 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses were aftercare following joint replacement surgery, type II diabetes, muscle weakness, hypo-osmolality and hyponatremia, osteoarthritis, chronic kidney disease, anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, mood disorder, hypertension, atherosclerotic heart disorder, insomnia, pneumonia, and presence of cardiac pacemaker. Review of her minimum data set (MDS) assessment, dated 03/10/25, revealed she was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #58's physician orders found she…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-03-24 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide 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 observations, interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to complete hand hygiene during medication administration for one resident (Resident #50) of five residents observed for medication administration. The facility failed to disinfect a glucometer used to monitor finger stick blood sugars for one observed resident (Resident #27) and had the potential to affect six (Resident #1, Resident #18, Resident #41, Resident #57, Resident #145, and Resident #147) residents on the identified hallway who utilized the same glucometer. Additionally, the facility failed to use gloves during tracheostomy for one resident (Resident #46) and had the potential to affect all 15 residents identified by the facility as requiring Enhanced Barrier Precautions (Residents #1, #11, #33, #34, #44, #46, #51, #80, #84, #85, #86, #146, #198, #199, #200). The facility census was 95. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for resident #50 revealed an admission date of 02/01/21 with…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-24 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide 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 observation and interview the facility failed to ensure dependent residents received assistance with activities of daily living. This affected one (Resident #79) out of two residents observed for activities of daily living. The facility census was 95. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #79 revealed an admission date of 02/09/24 with diagnoses of chronic myeloid leukemia, retention of urine, hypertension, anemia, chronic diastolic heart failure, anxiety, and orthostatic hypotension. Review of minimum data set (MDS) 3.0 assessment completed 02/19/25 revealed Resident #79 had a memory problem, was severely cognitively impaired, and requires substantial to maximal assistance with showering and bathing. Review of behavior symptoms from 02/23/25 through 03/24/25 revealed no behavioral concerns or symptoms observed. Review of the care plan dated 02/23/24 revealed Resident #79 requires one to two person assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs), with expected decline due to the disease process. Interventions include providing assistance with…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-03-24 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
  Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interview, review of drug administration labeling, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents receive anti-psychotics as clinically indicated. This affected one (Resident #7) out of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 95. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #7 revealed an admission date of 02/17/25 with diagnoses of metabolic encephalopathy, muscle weakness, dysphagia, urinary tract infection, dementia without behavioral/psychotic/mood disturbance, and anxiety. Review of the antipsychotic risk versus benefit assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #7 was prescribed Seroquel (Quetiapine Fumarate) (antipsychotic) 400 milligrams twice a day for agitation and increased anxiety. Behaviors include increased anxiety, which at times, interferes with care. Person-centered approaches included redirection, repositioning, one-on-one supervision, and environmental alterations. The conclusion included a gradual…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-24 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
  Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interviews, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure the physician was informed timely of a resident's change in condition. This affected one (Resident #49) of three residents reviewed for change in condition. The facility census was 93. Findings include Review of the medical record for Resident #49 revealed an admission date of 01/22/23. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), emphysema, respiratory failure, atrial fibrillation, heart failure, and anxiety. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #49 was cognitively impaired and required set up or clean up assistance from staff for all activities of daily living. Review of the plan of care dated 10/28/23 revealed Resident #49 was at risk for altered health status due to respiratory failure with interventions to monitor for signs and symptoms and report to the doctor including respiratory symptoms, cough, confusion, and fatigue. 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-01-24 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolated
  Ensure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
  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, review of the Ohio Board of Nursing Scope of Practice for Registered Nurses (RN) and Licensed Practical Nurses (LPN) and the job description for an LPN, and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure an LPN worked within their scope of practice and requirement of nursing standards during a resident's change in condition. This affected one (Resident #49) of three residents reviewed for a change in condition. The facility census was 93. Finding include: Review of the medical record for Resident #49 revealed an admission date of 01/22/23. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), emphysema, respiratory failure, atrial fibrillation, heart failure, and anxiety. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #49 was cognitively impaired and required set up or clean up assistance from staff for all activities of daily living. Review of the plan of care dated 10/28/23 revealed Resident #49 was at risk for altered health…

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

  Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-01-24 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
  Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review, review of the Ohio Board of Nursing Scope of Practice for Registered Nurses (RNs) and Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs), and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure there was complete and accurate documentation of a resident's change in condition in the medical record. This affected one (Resident #49) of three residents reviewed for change in condition. The facility census was 93. Finding include: Review of the medical record for Resident #49 revealed an admission date of 01/22/23. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), emphysema, respiratory failure, atrial fibrillation, heart failure, and anxiety. Review of the respiratory assessments in the Medication Administration Record (MAR) dated 12/2023 revealed Resident #49 had an order for oxygen saturations to obtained three times daily. On 12/30/23, Resident #49's oxygen saturation was at 93% and 96%. There was no other documentation of Resident #49's oxygen saturations that were taken by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #215 on 12/30/23 on the MAR. Review of the progress note…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-03 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on medical record review, staff interview, review of wound clinic notes, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure new wound treatment orders were timely obtained and implemented. This affected one (#40) of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility census was 86. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #40 revealed an admission date of 09/26/23. Diagnoses included metabolic encephalopathy, status post surgical repair of the left fibula, polyosteoarthritis, and generalized muscle weakness. Resident #40 had no unhealed pressure ulcers upon admission to the facility. Review of the Medicare 5-day Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 10/02/23, revealed Resident #40 was moderately cognitively impaired. Additionally, Resident #40 was not identified to refuse care or have any behaviors. Resident #40 required one person assistance with performance of daily care tasks and transfers. He was not recorded to have any unhealed pressure ulcers but was identified to be at risk for pressure ulcer development. Review of the plan of…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-12-28 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
  Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's physician was notified when weight gains were noted of greater than 2.5 pounds (lbs.) as ordered by the physician. This affected one (Resident #88) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility's census was 86. Findings include: A review of Resident #88's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included chronic ischemic heart disease, cardiac arrhythmias, and a history of a myocardial infarction (heart attack). A review of Resident #88's current physician's orders revealed the resident had an order to be weighed daily with parameters to notify the physician if her weight was greater than 2.5 lbs. in 24 hours or five lbs. in a week. The order originated on 03/15/22. A review of Resident #88's Medication Administration Record (MAR) for November 2022 revealed there were two times when the resident's weight increased more than 2.5 lbs. in 24 hours. 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to FOUNDATIONS HEALTH SOLUTIONS — 64 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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 12 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

This home reported $812K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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

Cost & finances

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