Monterey Care Center
3929 Hoover Road, Grove City, OH 43123 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 148 certified beds · (614) 875-7700 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Nov 2023
- 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
- 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 | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 3 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 | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 2 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 | 0.6% | 5.3% | 15.4% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 8.8% | 6.2% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.6% | 0.2% | 0.9% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.5% | 0.4% | 2.0% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 60.7% | 30.1% | 6.5% | worse 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 | 3.5% | 3.2% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 1.4% | 6.1% | 16.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 37.9% | 25.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 94.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 19.4% | 3.4% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 18.0% | 21.4% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 6.1% | 8.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.4% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 91.3% | 75.6% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 20.2% | 24.9% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 0.0% | 12.9% | 12.0% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ 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.
53.4% 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 82 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 82.8% 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 29 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 43% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 17% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| 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 | 53.4%CMS range 40.1–64.3 | 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 | 10.7%CMS range 7.3–15.8 | 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 | 82.8% | 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 | 48.3% | 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 | 48.3% | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 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 | 4.3% | 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 | 6.8%CMS range 4.0–12.7 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.06 | 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 148 beds and averages 105.8 residents a day — about 71% occupied, or roughly 42 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 3.49 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.48 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.11 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 3.11 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.64 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.57 to 0.23 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 56% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
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.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2025-06-10 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY THIS IS AN INCIDENCE OF PAST NON-COMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY. Based on medical record review, review of facility incident report, resident and staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident was safely transferred by a mechanical lift. This resulted in Actual Harm on 05/27/25 when one staff attempted to transfer Resident #103 from the wheelchair to the bed with the mechanical lift and the strap to the lift pad tore and Resident #103 dropped to the floor. Resident #103 was observed by staff to have one missing tooth, and one tooth was broken in half at the time of the incident. Resident #103 was sent to the hospital and returned to the facility with no other injuries noted. The resident has a follow up appointment with the emergency dentist. This affected one resident (#103) of three residents reviewed for mechanical lift transfers. The facility census was 117. Findings Include: Resident #103 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His…
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 · D2026-06-04 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolatedEnsure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
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 resident record reviews, observations, staff interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure adequate activities of daily living (ADL) care was provided for two residents (#77 and 87). This affected two residents out of five residents reviewed for activities of daily living. Findings Include: 1. Review of a resident record revealed that Resident #77 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses that included cognitive communication deficit, need for assistance with personal care and vascular dementia. Review of Resident #77's admission photo revealed that he was clean shaven. Review of Resident #77's Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed that he had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 03, indicative of severe cognitive impairment. Resident #77 required partial to moderate assistance with personal hygiene, such as shaving. Review of Resident #77's care plan dated 05/15/26 revealed that Resident #77 had an ADL self-care deficit related to…
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 before2026-06-04 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a physician-ordered pressure reducing mattress was functioning as intended for Resident #131 who had multiple pressure ulcers requiring pressure relieving interventions. This affected one (Resident #131) out of four residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. Findings Include:Review of the medical record for Resident #131 revealed an admission date of 05/22/26. Diagnoses included cognitive communication deficit, disorder of muscle, rhabdomyolysis, chronic pain syndrome, spinal stenosis of the lumbar region without neurogenic claudication, peripheral vascular disease, osteoarthritis, other specified disorders of bone density and structure, idiopathic scoliosis, and macular degeneration.Review of the admission skin assessments revealed the resident was admitted with multiple areas of skin impairment. Documentation identified a Stage III pressure ulcer to the left gluteus present on admission, a Stage III…
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 before2026-06-04 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, interviews, and facility policy, the facility failed to ensure fall prevention interventions were implemented and maintained following a fall for two (Resident #07 and #84) out of two residents reviewed for falls. The facility census was 112.Findings Include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #07 revealed an admission date of 11/06/25 and re-entry date of 03/11/26. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, fracture of neck of left femur with routine healing following surgical repair, type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic neuropathy, chronic kidney disease stage 3, and syncope and collapse.Review of the significant change Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 02 indicating severe cognitive impairment. The resident required extensive assistance with most activities of daily living and was dependent for ambulation beyond short distances. The resident utilized a wheelchair and had a history of falls including a…
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 · D2026-06-04 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
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 resident records, interviews and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure appropriate pain management medications were administered per professional standards of practice, when parameters were not in place for as needed pain medications, including opioids, for two residents. This affected two residents (#21 and #101) of three residents reviewed for pain management. Findings include: 1. Review of a resident record revealed that Resident #101 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses that included bipolar disorder and chronic pain syndrome. Review of Resident #101's Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #101 received scheduled and as needed pain medication. Occasionally, pain interfered with therapy and day to day activities. Review of Resident #101's care plan dated 10/14/25 revealed that Resident #101's cognition fluctuated, as she initially had a Brief Interview Score of 12, indicative of a moderate cognitive impairment.…
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 · D2026-06-04 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, resident interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to properly store medications. This affected two residents (#16 and #122) out of 28 residents in the survey sample.Findings Include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #131 revealed an admission date of 11/07/25. Diagnoses included type two diabetes mellitus without complications, essential (primary) hypertension, peripheral vascular disease, and acute kidney failure. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 14 indicating intact cognition. The assessment indicated the resident required extensive assistance with activities of daily living and medication administration. Review of physician orders revealed an active order for Losartan Potassium 100 milligrams by mouth daily for hypertension. Review of the Medication Administration Record confirmed the medication was administered on 06/01/26. Review of nursing documentation 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 · Dcited before2026-06-04 · 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, interview, and review of Centers for Disease Control (CDC) guidance, the facility failed to ensure glucometers were sanitized/disinfected between resident use. This affected one resident (#05) and had the potential to affect four residents the facility identified as residents who utilized the facility glucometer. Findings Include: Review of the medical record for Resident #69 revealed the resident was originally admitted on [DATE] with the diagnosis of diabetes type two. Review of Resident #69's physician orders revealed an order for Humalog insulin 100 units per milliliter per sliding scale (a specific dose of insulin per the residents blood glucose reading). Review of the medical record for Resident #05 revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] with the diagnosis of diabetes mellitus. Observation on 06/04/26 at 11:15 A.M. revealed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #238 used a facility owned glucometer (a small, portable electronic device used to measure how much sugar (glucose) is in 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 · D2025-07-09 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately 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 review of resident records, staff interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to provide documented evidence of good faith efforts to notify a former resident of an active urinary tract infection. This affected one former resident (Former Resident #115) out of four residents reviewed for urinary tract infections. The facility census was 113 residents. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Former Resident (FR) #115 revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including retention of urine and presence of urogenital implants. Review of FR #115's Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 comprehensive assessment dated [DATE] revealed that he was cognitively intact and that he had an indwelling catheter. Review of FR #115's nursing progress notes dated 06/22/25 revealed that FR #115 was observed with intermittent confusion. The physician was called, and a new order was made to obtain a urinalysis and culture and sensitivity (UA C&S). Nursing progress notes dated 06/24/25…
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 before2025-04-01 · 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 observation, record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve foods in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This had the potential to affect all residents in the facility except one (Resident #34) who was ordered nothing by mouth (NPO) and didn't receive food from the kitchen. The facility census was 111. Findings include: Observation of the kitchen on 03/31/25 at 11:20 A.M. revealed Staff #41 was preparing lunch trays without wearing a beard restraint over his beard. Interview on 03/31/25 at 11:20 A.M. Staff #41, verified he wasn't wearing a beard restraint, and one was required when preparing food for the residents. Interview on 03/31/25 at 11:26 A.M. with the Dietary Manager #500, verified Staff #41 was preparing lunch plates without a beard restraint in place. Dietary Manager #500 stated it was the facility's policy for all food service employees to wear hair and beard restraints while working in the food preparation and service areas of the kitchen. Review of the facility's policy titled…
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 before2024-11-24 · 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 observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the kitchen was maintained in a clean and sanitary manner. This had the potential to affect all residents who received food from the kitchen. The facility identified one resident (#60) who consumed nothing by mouth. The facility census was 108. Findings include: Observations and interview on 11/18/24 at 9:30 A.M. with Dietary Manager (DM) #118 revealed an area in the center of the kitchen was about an inch lower than the rest of the kitchen. This area contained cooking equipment such as the oven, fryer, and soup kettle. In this area, the floor (which was supposed to be a red tile) had a thick black build up, and had a large amount of food and other debris including a dome lid, plastic utensils, and French fries. There was a large amount of dirt-like material behind and around the soup kettle. DM #118 verified the observation. Subsequent observations on 11/18/24 from 11:05 A.M. to 11:35 A.M. revealed the area in the center of the kitchen, that was about an inch lower than the rest of the kitchen, had been…
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 before2024-11-24 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide 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 reviews, staff interview, review of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure the Water Management Program was timely and appropriately implemented to prevent the spread of Legionella. This had the potential to affect all 108 residents residing in the facility. Findings include: Review of the facilities Water Management Program logs revealed no evidence of testing or interventions to prevent Legionella were present prior to 10/2024. Interview with the Administrator on 11/19/24 at 10:27 A.M. confirmed there was no record of water testing, flushing, or any other Legionella prevention measures being conducted prior to 10/2024. The Administrator stated there was a new Maintenance Director in place who had begun implementing the Water Management Plan in 10/2024. Review of the facility policy titled Legionella Policy/Procedure - Environmental, reviewed 12/26/23, revealed the facility would implement control measures to reduce the potential for the growth and spread of Legionella as identified int he…
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.
Show the remaining 27 citations
- Potential for harm · E2024-11-24 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide 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 observation, interview, and medical record review, the facility failed to ensure nail care was provided for dependent residents. This affected four residents (#75, #91, #95, #104) of six residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL). The facility census was 108. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #104's medical record revealed an admission date of 08/01/24 with diagnoses including bipolar disorder, secondary parkinsonism, schizoaffective disorder, mild cognitive impairment, and disorientation. Review of Resident #104's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed she had intact cognition. She required partial to moderate assistance with personal hygiene. Review of Resident #104's care plan dated 08/01/24 revealed she had an Activity of Daily Living (ADL) self-care deficit related to decreased mobility, use of assistive device, need of staff assistance, weakness, and diagnoses. Interventions included assisting with daily hygiene as needed, therapy evaluation as needed,…
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 · E2024-11-24 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — patternProvide 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure there were sufficient activities in the memory care unit especially in the evening and weekend. This affected four residents (#75, #91, #95, and #99) of four residents reviewed for activities and had the potential to affect all 25 residents residing in the memory care unit. The facility census was 108. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #95's medical record revealed an admission date of 10/10/23 with diagnoses including protein-calorie malnutrition, bilateral age-related nuclear cataracts, Alzheimer's disease, anxiety disorder, adult failure to thrive, cognitive communication deficit, depression, and bilateral sensorineural hearing loss. Review of Resident #95's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed his cognition was not assessed. Review of Resident #95's plan of care dated 06/10/24 revealed the resident was sometimes dependent on staff for cognitive stimulation related to cognitive deficits. The resident could…
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 · D2024-11-24 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure resident dignity was maintained during dining experiences. This affected two residents (#35 and #103) observed for dining during the annual survey. The facility census was 108. Findings include: Observation on 11/20/24 at 8:05 A.M. revealed Resident #35 and Resident #103 were lying in bed and did not have breakfast meal trays. A newly admitted resident residing in the room with Resident #35 and Resident #103 was sitting up in bed consuming breakfast from a meal tray set up in front of her. Resident #35 and Resident #103 both confirmed they were hungry and would like a meal tray. Observation on 11/20/24 at 8:19 A.M. revealed Resident #35 and Resident #103 had still not been served a breakfast meal tray. Three unknown facility employees were standing at the end of the hall by the breakfast meal cart discussing who was responsible for Resident #103. All three employees stated the resident was not on their assignment and walked away. Observation on 11/20/24 at 8:29 A.M. revealed Registered Nurse (RN)…
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 · D2024-11-24 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide residents with a bed hold notification prior to hospital stay. This affected two (Residents #15 and #39) of four residents reviewed for notification of bed hold. The facility census was 108. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #15 revealed an admission date of 08/28/18 with diagnoses including epilepsy, clavicle fracture, humerus fracture, dysphagia, Alzheimer's disease, dementia, Lennox-Gastaut Syndrome, convulsions, idiopathic progressive neuropathy, anxiety, depression, cervical vertebrae fracture, and nontoxic thyroid nodule. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #15 had severe cognitive impairment. Resident #15 was sent to the hospital on [DATE] following a fall with a laceration to her forehead. Review of the Notification of Bed Hold form with this resident's name written at the top revealed the form did not provide the total amount of bed hold days left.…
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 before2024-11-24 · 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure Thrombo-Embolic Deterrent (TED) hose were applied as ordered by the physician. This affected one resident (#57) of the eight residents reviewed for skin conditions during the annual survey. Additionally, the facility failed to timely collect urine and treat a urinary tract infection (UTI) for Resident #86. This affected one resident (#86) of one reviewed for UTI. The facility census was 108. Findings include: 1. Record review for Resident #57 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses including history of venous thrombosis and embolism, chronic pain, and muscle weakness. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed the resident was assessed to be rarely/never understood. Review of the active physicians order dated 06/25/24 revealed the resident was to have knee high TED hose applied every morning and removed at bedtime for edema. Observation on 11/19/24 at 8:25 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 · D2024-11-24 · tag F0685 — isolatedAssist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
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, resident and staff interviews, medical record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff assisted one resident (#13) with the placement of bilateral hearing aids daily as ordered. This affected one resident (#13) of one reviewed for hearing services. The facility census was 108. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #13 revealed an initial admission date on 04/25/17 and a readmission date on 09/25/23. Medical diagnoses included dementia without behavioral disturbance, unspecified bilateral hearing loss, anxiety disorder, depression, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #13's cognition had not been assessed for the assessment. Resident #13 had minimal difficulty hearing and used hearing aids. Resident #13 required a varied amount of assistance from staff ranging from supervision to partial/moderate assistance to complete Activities 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 before2024-11-24 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, record reviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure pressure ulcer prevention interventions were in place per the plan of care, failed to ensure pressure ulcers were comprehensively evaluated upon admission, and failed to ensure staff were educated on the appropriate settings for Low Air Loss (LAL) mattresses. This affected two residents (#43 and 362) out of the five residents reviewed for pressure ulcers during the annual survey. The facility census was 108. Findings include: 1. Record review for Resident #43 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses including hemiplegia and hemiparalysis following cerebral infarction affecting the left non-dominant side, presence of pressure ulcers, and contracture of the muscle of the left hand. Review of the significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was assessed to have moderately impaired cognition. The resident was assessed to have…
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 · D2024-11-24 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
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, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure care and services to prevent the development or worsening of contractures were timely and appropriately implemented. This affected two residents (#43 and #91) out of two residents reviewed for limited range of motion during the annual survey. The facility census was 108. Findings include: 1. Record review for Resident #43 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses including hemiplegia and hemiparalysis following cerebral infarction affecting the left non-dominant side, presence of pressure ulcers, and contracture of the muscle of the left hand. Review of the significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was assessed to have moderately impaired cognition. The resident was assessed to have an impairment in functional range of motion present on one side of the upper body. Review of the active care plans for the resident revealed no plan of care had been…
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 before2024-11-24 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, record reviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure fall interventions were in place per the plan of care. This affected one resident (#57) of the four residents reviewed for falls during the annual survey. The facility census was 108. Findings include: Record review for Resident #57 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses including muscle weakness, unsteadiness on feet, and dementia. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 11/05/24, revealed the resident was assessed to be rarely/never understood. Review of the care plan, initiated 08/01/23, revealed the resident was at risk for falls and potential injury. Interventions included grip strips to the floor in front of the bed. Observation on 11/20/24 at 11:00 A.M. revealed there were no grip strips present on the floor by Resident #57's bed. Interview with Unit Manager #144 at the time of the observation confirmed there were no grip strips…
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 · D2024-11-24 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, resident interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to complete timely follow up to obtain sleep study results for one resident (Resident #13). This affected one (Resident #13) of four residents reviewed for respiratory care. The facility census was 108. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #13 revealed an initial admission date on 04/25/17 and a readmission date on 09/25/23. Diagnoses included dementia without behavioral disturbance, anxiety disorder, depression, obstructive sleep apnea, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #13's cognition had not been assessed for the assessment. Resident #13 required a varied amount of assistance from staff ranging from supervision to partial/moderate assistance to complete Activities of Daily Living (ADLs). Review of the Order Summary Report dated February 2024 revealed Resident #13 had an order to place…
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 · D2024-11-24 · tag F0699 — isolatedProvide care or services that was trauma informed and/or culturally competent.
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 with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) was appropriately assessed to identify the cause of the resident's PTSD and minimize triggers and/or re-traumatization. This affected one (#46) of three resident identified by the facility as having PTSD/trauma. The facility census was 108. Findings include: Record review for Resident #46 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included anxiety, cognitive communication deficit, depression, and suicidal ideations. Resident #46 was assessed to have an active diagnosis of PTSD initiated on 08/28/24. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 10/28/24, revealed Resident #46 had intact cognition evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) assessment score of 14. Review of the active care plans for Resident #46 revealed no plan of care was in place addressing the cause of PTSD, triggers which may cause re-traumatization, or interventions…
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 · D2024-11-24 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview and medical record review, the facility failed to ensure Resident #69's blood pressure was monitored as ordered. This affected one (#69) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 108. Findings include: Review of Resident #69's medical record revealed an admission date of 09/03/21 with diagnoses including senile degeneration of the brain, dementia, and hypertension. Review of Resident #69's quarterly Minimum data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed her cognition was not assessed and staff was not interviewed. Review of Resident #69's plan of care dated 09/29/22 revealed the resident had tendency for fluctuation in blood pressure related to hypertension, orthostatic blood pressure, cardiac medications, anemia, pain, and anxiety. Interventions included administering medications as ordered, diet as ordered, monitoring blood pressure as ordered, and monitoring for signs of hypotension. Review of Resident #69's physician order dated 08/03/24…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-24 · tag F0808 — failed to follow doctor-ordered diets — isolatedEnsure therapeutic diets are prescribed by the attending physician and may be delegated to a registered or licensed dietitian, to the extent allowed by State law.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation,staff interview, and review of medical record, the facility failed to ensure Resident #29 was served his meal as physician ordered. This affected one resident (#29) of 25 residents in the memory care unit. The facility census was 108. Findings include: Review of Resident #29's medical record revealed an admission date of 08/09/24. Diagnoses included dementia, cognitive communication deficit, schizoaffective disorder, anxiety disorder, dysphagia, and hypertension. Review of Resident #29's physician order dated 08/09/24 revealed the resident was to receive a regular diet with double entree portions. Observation on 11/18/24 at 12:07 P.M. of Resident #29 revealed his lunch tray included one sandwich. Review of Resident #29's tray ticket for lunch revealed he was on a regular diet. No double entrees were indicated on his tray ticket. Interview on 11/18/24 at 12:07 P.M. with State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #162 verified Resident #29's physician order indicated he was to receive double entrée portions, and verified Resident #29 did not receive double entree…
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 · D2024-11-24 · tag F0810 — isolatedProvide special eating equipment and utensils for residents who need them and appropriate assistance.
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 review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure resident received appropriate set up assistance and adaptive equipment during meals necessary to maintain adequate nutrition. This affected one resident (#43) out of the five residents reviewed for nutrition during the annual survey. The facility census was 108. Findings include: Record review for Resident #43 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses including hemiplegia and hemiparalysis following cerebral infarction affecting the left non-dominant side, muscle weakness, and contracture of the left hand. Review of the significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 10/08/24, revealed the resident was assessed to have moderately impaired cognition. Review of the care plan, revised 10/12/24, revealed the resident had a history of declined intake with liberated diet and appetite had improved. Interventions included to provide feeding and set up assistance…
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 before2023-11-14 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — widespreadMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to provide a safe and sanitary environment for residents who use the facility shower rooms. This had the potential to affect all 118 residents in the facility. Findings included: Observation on 11/13/23 at 10:30 A.M. of the shower room at the corner of the South and East hallways revealed three large, untied garbage bags on the floor with soiled linens, three small tiles missing from the floor, the back wall of the shower had a black, filmy substance on it, a container of sharps that was overfilled, several large, red biohazard bags piled in the front left corner, a pair of used gloves on the sink, a rancid odor, and several linens were laying out on an over the bed table in the right front corner. Interview on 11/13/23 at 10:35 A.M. with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #117 confirmed findings in the shower room at the corner of the South and East hallways. Observation on 11/13/23 at 10:47 A.M. revealed two shower rooms at the corner of the South and [NAME] hallways. The shower room to the right had a black mold-like substance…
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 · D2023-11-14 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
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, facility reported incident review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents remained free from staff to resident abuse and resident to resident altercations. This affected three residents (#144, #158, and #214) of 13 residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 118. Findings included: Record review revealed Resident #144 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease, conversion disorder with seizures, anxiety disorder, sciatica, hypertension, major depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, nightmare disorder, and gastro-esophageal reflux disease. A minimum data set completed on 10/19/23 revealed Resident #144 had intact cognition and exhibited no behaviors. Interview on 10/13/23 at 10:10 A.M. with Resident #144 revealed Activity Director (AD) #257 would come up behind her to give her a hug, kiss the top of her head, and say inappropriate terms of endearment to her, such as you're fine as wine and you're sexy. Resident #144…
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 · F2022-05-05 · tag F0868 — widespreadHave the Quality Assessment and Assurance group have the required members and meet at least quarterly
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on facility document review and staff interview, the facility failed to fully participate in Quality Assurance and Assessment (QAA) committee activities. This had the potential to affect 85 of 85 residents in the facility. Findings Include: Review of facility QAA meeting sign in sheets, dated March 2021 to March 2022, revealed the only meeting that the facility medical director attended was in April 2021. Review of facility Medical Director Monthly Reports, dated January 2022, October 2021, and July 2021, revealed hand written notes that indicated the QAA meeting minutes were reviewed with the medical director. There was no documentation to support which QAA meeting minutes and information was reviewed at that time, so there was no documentation to support the information reviewed with the medical director was current/relevant to what was discussed in each monthly/quarterly QAA meeting. Also, there was no documentation/evidence to support the medical director was provided, or offered meaningful participation in the QAA program. Interview with Director of Nursing (DON) 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 · Ecited before2022-05-05 · 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 — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to properly store/date food in the main kitchen. This had the potential to affect 82 of 85 residents who receive food from the facility kitchen (Residents #8, #16, and #19 receive no food by mouth). The census was 85. Findings Include: Observations on 05/02/22 from 8:38 A.M. to 8:47 A.M. revealed the following items were found in the walk in freezer as opened and undated/improperly dated: opened bag of country friend steak that had a delivery date of 01/05/22 on the opened box, but no date on the bag of steak that was opened, and bags of chicken patties, breadsticks, green peas, and chicken tenders were opened and undated as to when they were opened or should be used by. Observations on 05/02/22 from 8:50 A.M. to 8:55 A.M. revealed the following items were found in the walk in refrigerator as opened and undated/improperly dated: bag of hot dogs, cole slaw, and two bags of lettuce were all opened and had no dates indicated as to when they were opened or when to use by. Also, there was a pan 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 · D2022-05-05 · 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 — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, resident and facility staff interview the facility failed to maintain a safe home like environment. This had the potential to affect three residents (#133, #15 and #68) of 24 residents reviewed. The total facility census was 85. Findings Include: During initial observation of rooms on the secured hallway on 05/02/22 at 9:40 A.M. it was observed Resident #133's room had 10 floor tiles that were gouged through the top layer of the tile. The wall at the head of the resident's bed was damaged with the top layer of the drywall removed exposing the inner surface of the drywall. At this time, observation of Resident #15's room revealed the wall, the resident's bed was against, had multiple divots in the drywall. During an interview and observation of Resident #68's room on 05/02/22 at 10:29 A.M. it was revealed the cold water side of the sink did not work. The resident stated the sink has water but only on the hot side. At this time, the cold water faucet was turned on and no water came out of the faucet. The cold side of the faucet was turned off and the hot side was…
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 · D2022-05-05 · 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 resident record review, resident interview, staff interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide a resident the opportunity to participate in a plan of care meeting. This affected one Resident (#4) of one resident reviewed for care planning. The facility census was 85. Findings Include: On 05/02/22 at 1:12 P.M., an interview with Resident #4 was conducted. Resident #4 stated she was concerned about a wound that was bothering her on her head and a loose tooth causing discomfort in her mouth. Resident #4 further stated she did not remember talking to the staff about her concerns. She also stated she had not been asked to participate in a plan of care meeting to discuss those concerns. A review of the medical record for Resident #4 revealed an admission date of 08/17/21 and diagnoses that included diabetes mellitus, hypertension, renal insufficiency, chronic pain, fibromyalgia. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated Resident #4 was alert and oriented, able to make…
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 before2022-05-05 · 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, and facility staff interview the facility failed to ensure a resident who had discontinuation of hospice services had timely monitoring and evaluation of anti-seizure medication. This affected one resident (#38) of one resident reviewed for change of condition. The total facility census was 85. Findings Include: Review of Resident #38's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include but are not limited to unspecified dementia adult failure to thrive, seizures, unstable angina, repeated falls. hypertension and trans ischemic attack. Review of a significant change Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] revealed the resident is not able to complete the brief interview of mental status score, resident had no behaviors, delusions, hallucinations, rejection of care but had one instance of wandering during the review period. Resident #38 required extensive assist with bed mobility, dressing, toileting, and hygiene, and limited assist 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.
- Potential for harm · D2022-05-05 · tag F0710 — isolatedObtain a doctor's order to admit a resident and ensure the resident is under a doctor's care.
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 facility staff interview the facility failed to ensure a physician was directing the care of a resident. This affected one resident (#38) of one reviewed for change of condition. The total facility census was 85. Findings Include: Review of Resident #38's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include but are not limited to unspecified dementia adult failure to thrive, seizures, unstable angina, repeated falls, hypertension, and trans ischemic attack. Review of significant change Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] revealed the resident is not able to complete the brief interview of mental status score, resident had no behaviors, delusions, hallucinations, rejection of care but had one instance of wandering during the review period. Resident #38 required extensive assist with bed mobility, dressing, toileting, and hygiene, and limited assist with transfers, walk in the room and eating. The resident is coded as requiring supervision…
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 before2019-08-07 · 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 observation, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to provide clean storage of china plates used for resident meals, a clean can opener, and clean ice scoop/container. This had the potential to affect all 130 residents who consumed meals in the kitchen. The facility identified one resident (#70) who received nothing by mouth. Findings include: On 08/04/19 at 9:34 A.M. kitchen observations with [NAME] #8 revealed 37 ivory china plates had been washed and stored stacked soaking wet. The kitchen can opener blade was very soiled. [NAME] #8 verified the wet stored china plates and soiled can opener blade at the time of the observation. On 08/04/19 at 5:01 P.M. observations with Dietary Manager #126 revealed the inside bottom of blue ice container was wet and soiled with the ice scoop sitting inside container. Dietary Manager #126 verified the ice container was soiled and had a scoop inside at the time of the observation. Review of the policy titled Handling Clean Equipment and Utensils dated 01/01/12 revealed clean equipment and utensils were to be stored in a…
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 · F2019-08-07 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespreadDispose of garbage and refuse properly.
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 lids were placed on trach cans. This had the potential to affect all 130 residents who consumed meals in the kitchen. The facility identified one resident (#70) who received nothing by mouth. Findings include: Observations on 08/04/19 at 9:34 A.M. with [NAME] #8 verified there was an open bin full of trash near the back door with no lid near the food storage/production. There were several gnats above the trash. In addition, the trash bin outside had no lid and was full of of trash. [NAME] #8 verified the finding at the time of the observation. Review of the policy titled Waste Disposal dated 01/01/12 revealed all waste was to be kept in leak proof covered containers.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2019-08-07 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — widespreadMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure baseboard heaters were secured in resident rooms. This had the potential to affect 19 residents (#286, #84, #104, #118, #40, #72, #81, #105, #23, #115, #87, #101, #133, #67, #90, #122, #31, #75, and #19). In addition, the facility failed to control urine odors potentially affecting all 131 residents of the facility. Findings include: 1. Interview and observation with Resident #286 on 08/04/19 at 11:11 A.M. revealed she was a newly admitted resident. The observation revealed her baseboard heater in her room was hanging off the wall. Observations of the environment on 08/06/19 starting at 11:15 A.M. revealed old/dirty baseboard heaters not in use which were hanging off the walls with a two/three inch gap in 19 resident (#286, #84, #104, #118, #40, #72, #81, #105, #23, #115, #87, #101, #133, #67, #90, #122, #31, #75, and #19) rooms. Some of the gaps had visible dust, pipes, wires and coils. Interview with the Administrator and Chief Operating Officer (COO) #142 on 08/06/19 at 12:00 P.M. verified 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 before2019-08-07 · 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, staff interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to implement interventions and treat a resident for constipation. This affected one resident (#29) of five reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 131. Findings include: Review of Resident #29's medical record revealed an admission date of 05/04/19 with diagnoses including Lewy body dementia, toxic encephalopathy, dysthymic disorder, and depression. Review of Resident #29's care plan dated 05/15/19 revealed the resident was at risk for constipation due to impaired mobility and medication usage. The goal was for the resident to have a medium to large bowel movement every two to three days. Intervention included if no bowel movement in three days to assess for nausea, vomiting, abdominal distention, pain, bowel sounds, monitor bowel patterns and notify the physician if needed. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #29 had severe cognitive impairment 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.
- No harm found · B2024-11-24 · tag F0641 — patternEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to accurately complete Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments for residents. This affected six residents (#1, #22, #69, #91, #95, #99) of six residents reviewed for MDS accuracy. The facility census was 108. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #99's medical record revealed an admission date of 02/22/24 with diagnoses including dementia, neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder, dysphagia, encephalopathy, anxiety disorder, chronic diastolic heart failure, cognitive communication deficit, and edema. Review of Resident #99's quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed two sections of the assessment, Section C, Cognitive Patterns and Section D, Mood were not completed. All areas including resident and staff interviews were marked as 'not assessed.' Interview on 11/20/24 at 5:33 P.M. with MDS Coordinator #242, Licensed Social Worker #204, and MDS Coordinator #256 verified the MDS assessments were not being completed as they should have been. If a…
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
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to OPTALIS HEALTH & REHABILITATION — 36 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 | 2 of 5 | 2.4 | -0.4 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 1.9 | +0.1 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 2.4 | -1.4 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.3 | +0.7 vs chain |
The other 35 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.4★, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OM HOLDCO 3 LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 06/01/2022 |
| SNW LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 33% | since 06/01/2022 |
| DUNN, CHARLES | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | 33% | since 04/29/2025 |
| SIENA LENDING GROUP LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTEREST | — | since 06/01/2022 |
| PATEL, RAJAN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 06/01/2022 |
| OPTUM MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS. INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/29/2025 |
| LINK, MARSHA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/31/2025 |
| RATNARAJAH, GOKULAN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/31/2025 |
| SHARON, ROBERT | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/13/2024 |
| SIZEMORE, ASHLEE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 01/01/2019 |
| SHAH, HEMANT | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/02/2025 |
| CLIFTONLARSONALLEN LLP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| SCHLAUPITZ MADHAVAN | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2022 |
| SPTMISC PROPERTIES TRUST | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2022 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 20 rows in the source record cover these 14 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
7 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $610K 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
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 365077. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-11-24, 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.