Doverwood Village

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

59.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 204 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 86.9% 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 84 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 0.46 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 77% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 15% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 99 beds and averages 91.1 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 8 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.42 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.58 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.73 is at or above 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 4.09 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.56 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.69 to 0.29 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 45% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

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

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.

19 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 9 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · F2025-06-27 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure that dented cans were removed from the dry storage area in the kitchen. This had the potential to affect all 83 residents residing in the facility. The census was 83.Findings include:Observations of the kitchen dry storage area on 06/23/25 at 10:04 A.M. with the Chef revealed 13 dented cans amongst the canned goods. The dented cans included two (2) seven-pound (lb.) cans of pudding, 2 five lb. cans of spinach, eight (8) six lb. cans of peaches, and one (1) seven lb. can of refried beans. During an interview on 06/23/25 at 10:06 A.M., the Chef stated she and the cooks put the canned food deliveries away. She stated [NAME] #2 stocked the canned peaches the prior Monday. She stated dented cans should be removed from the dry storage and placed in her office so she could submit them for credit and confirmed the dented cans. She stated botulism bacteria could get into the canned food if the dent caused a hole or broke the seal. She stated the dented canned food found should have been removed…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-06-27 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — pattern
  Make sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident and resident representative interview, staff interview, medical record review, facility document and policy review, and review of corrective action documents, the facility failed to execute an effective pest control program for the prevention and control of mice in the facility. This affected four (#5, #12, #13, and #20) of 83 residents residing in the facility. The census was 83. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #5's medical record revealed an admission date of 11/14/24. Diagnoses included major depressive disorder and adjustment disorder with anxiety.Review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 04/09/25, revealed Resident #5 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12, which indicated the resident had moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS assessment indicated Resident #5 had no potential indicators of psychosis. During a concurrent interview and observation in Resident #5's room on 06/23/25 at 9:29…

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

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-27 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
  Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, medical record review, and facility document and policy review, the facility failed to ensure services were provided to meet professional nursing standards of clinical practice when staff failed to date or initial intravenous tubing or a peripherally inserted central catheter line dressing when changed and failed to date and initial a wound dressing as required. This affected one (#41) of five residents reviewed for care and services. The census was 83. Findings include: Review of Resident #41's medical record revealed the resident admitted to the facility on [DATE] and most recently admitted the resident on 06/06/25. Medical diagnoses included acute osteomyelitis of the left ankle and foot and osteomyelitis of the vertebra, sacral, and sacrococcygeal region.Review of an admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 06/12/25, revealed Resident #41 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of three (3), which indicated the…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-27 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
  Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure wound care was documented accurately for one (#82) of three residents sampled for pressure ulcers. The census was 83. Findings include:Review of Resident #82's medical record revealed an admission date of 02/05/25. Diagnoses included multiple sclerosis, morbid obesity, hyperlipidemia, major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, restless leg syndrome, essential hypertension, pulmonary embolism, constipation, neurogenic bowel, and neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder. Review of an admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 02/11/25, revealed Resident #82 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, which indicated the resident had intact cognition. The MDS assessment indicated the resident was dependent on staff for toileting hygiene, rolling left to right, sitting to lying, lying to sitting on the side of the bed, sit to stand, chair/bed to chair transfer, toilet transfer, tub/shower transfer, and to walk 10 feet. The MDS assessment…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-12-11 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide 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, staff interview, review of the transportation schedule, and review of the facility statement form the facility failed to ensure a resident had an adequate supply of oxygen when leaving the facility for a medical appointment. This affected one (#91) resident of three residents reviewed for respiratory care and services. The facility census was 90. Findings include: Medical record review for Resident #91 revealed an admission date of 03/20/24. Diagnoses included hemiplegia, hemiparesis following stroke, narcolepsy, type two diabetes mellitus, chronic heart failure, hypertension, pulmonary embolism, kidney failure and a history of covid. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #91 had significant cognitive impairment, required moderate to maximum assistance from staff for eating, toileting, transfers and bed mobility. Resident #91 had oxygen usage during the assessment period. Review of the plan of care revealed Resident #91 had…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-01-11 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
  Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observations, staff interview, policy review and review of the Standards of safe medication administration by a certified medication aide, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered by the staff member who prepared the medications. This affected one (#45) of four residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 76. Finding include: Review of the medication record for Resident #45 revealed an admission on [DATE] with diagnoses including but not limited to hypoatremia, anemia, hypertensive orthostatic hypotension renal disease, dementia, and depression. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Assessment (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #45 revealed a brief interview for mental status revealing severe cognitive impairment. Resident #45 required moderate assistance with bed mobility, transfers, and toileting. Resident #45 required set up assistance for meals. Review of the plan of care for Resident #45 revealed the resident had impaired…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-12-07 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
  Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, review of controlled substance records, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a resident's narcotic medication administration was accurately documented in the medical record. This affected one (#81) of three residents reviewed for narcotic medication administration. The census was 78. Findings include: Review of Resident #81 closed medical record revealed an admission date of 10/16/23. Diagnoses included pubic fracture, dorsalgia, osteoarthritis, and femur fracture. Resident #81 was discharged from the facility on 11/03/23. Review of an admission Minimum data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #81 was cognitively intact and needed some help with activities of daily living (ADL's). Review of physician orders revealed an order dated 10/16/23 for take 0.5 to one Oxycodone hydrochloride five milligram (mg) tablet (narcotic pain medication) every six hours for pain up to seven days. Review of the facility's Controlled Drug…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-10-27 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
  Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff, resident and resident representative interviews and policy review, the facility failed to notify the resident's representative when their was a change of condition. This affected one (#1) of three reviewed for change of condition. The census was 71. Findings included: Medical record review for Resident #1 revealed an admission date of 08/18/23. Medical diagnoses included history of fractures and atrial fibrillation. Review of admission Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] revealed she was cognitively intact. Her functional status was extensive assistance for bed mobility, transfers, and toilet use. She was independent for eating. She was occasionally incontinent for bowel and bladder. Review of physician progress note dated 09/26/23 revealed Resident #1 was being seen for red, painful, and warm thumb noted by the therapy department. Review of the progress note dated 09/26/23 revealed there wasn't any evidence Resident #1's Representative was notified of this skin condition.…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2022-09-28 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident was provided privacy. This affected one resident (#01) out of three residents reviewed. The facility census was 58. Findings Included: Review of the medical record for Resident #01 revealed an admission date of 12/21/21. Diagnoses included cerebrovascular disease, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, non-pressure chronic ulcer of the left ankle, atrial fibrillation, and disorientation. Review of the minimum data set (MDS) dated on 08/28/22 revealed Resident #01 was severely cognitively impaired. The resident required extensive two-person physical assistance for transfer, dressing, and personal hygiene. Resident #01 required total dependence for toilet use and bathing. Observation on 09/20/22 at 5:07 P.M. Resident #01 was lying in the bed with the sheet pulled up exposing his adult brief. The resident was awake, had no Geri sleeves (protective sleeves) on or the bolster to the bed. Observation on 09/20/22 at 5:08 P.M. Resident #01 could be seen from the hallway in bed with 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2022-09-28 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's code status was accurately documented. This affected one resident (#13) out of one resident reviewed for advanced directives. The facility census was 58. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #13 revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included chronic diastolic heart failure, insomnia, chronic fatigue, chronic atrial fibrillation, anxiety disorder, severe protein calorie malnutrition, dysphasia, and history of coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19), Review of the quarterly [NAME] Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #13 had impaired cognition. Review of the physician orders for Resident #13 revealed an order dated 12/16/19 and discontinued 12/19/19, Do Not Resuscitate Comfort Care (DNRCC). An order dated 12/19/19 and discontinued on 04/02/21 revealed a code status of DNRCC. Further review of the physician orders revealed an order dated 04/02/21 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to CARESPRING — 16 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

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

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 9 rows in the source record cover these 8 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

5 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 $2.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 20% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

Cost & finances

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

What families pay in OH