Glen Meadows

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.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.18 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 19% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

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

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 85 beds and averages 80.9 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 4 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.72 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.58 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.07 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 3.23 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.92 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.61 to 0.52 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 27% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

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

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.

15 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · D2026-03-26 · tag F0637 — isolated
  Assess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure significant change assessments were completed in a timely manner following initiaition of hospice services. This affected two (#27 and #04) of two residents reviewed for hospice services. The facility census was 82.1) Review of the medical record of Resident #27 revealed an admission date of 06/22/22. The resident transferred to the hospital on [DATE] and returned to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included localization-related symptomatic epilepsy, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and Alzheimer's disease. Review of the physician orders for Resident #27 dated 12/22/25, revealed the resident was admitted to hospice with a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #27 had severely impaired cognition. The resident received hospice care. Review of additional MDS assessments revealed no significant change assessment was completed following Resident…

  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 · D2026-03-26 · tag F0638 — isolated
  Assure that each resident’s assessment is updated at least once every 3 months.
  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 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Long-Term Care Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) User's Manual, the facility failed to ensure quarterly assessments were completed in a timely manner. This affected three (Residents #17, #20 and #21) of three residents reviewed for quarterly assessments. The facility census was 82.Findings include: 1) Review of the medical record reveled Resident #17 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of unspecified dementia, schizophrenia and major depressive disorder. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Quarterly assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #17 had severe cognitive deficit and was frequently incontinent of bowel and bladder. The resident required supervision for eating, oral hygiene, dressing, bed mobility and transfers, maximal assistance for toileting and bathing, and was dependent for personal hygiene. The MDS indicated an assessment reference date (ARD) of 02/18/26 and the 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 · D2024-09-26 · 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 observation, medical record review, staff interview and review of an orientation checklist, the facility failed to ensure residents were treated with dignity during meals. This affected two residents (#22 and #37) of two residents reviewed for dignity. The facility census was 81. Findings included: 1. Review of Resident #22's medical record revealed an admission date of 07/26/18. Diagnoses included gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), dysphagia and vascular dementia. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 07/02/24, revealed Resident #22 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3, which indicated the resident had severe cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated the resident required substantial/maximal assistance from staff for eating. 2. Review of Resident #37's medical record revealed an admission date of 03/03/22. Diagnoses included cerebral infarction and dysphagia. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment, dated 08/01/24, revealed Resident #37 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 8, which indicated the resident…

  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 · Dcited before2024-09-26 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
  Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on resident interview, staff interview, medical record review, review of facility investigations, review of a Self-Reported Incident (SRI) and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate an allegation of resident-to-resident abuse for Resident #12 and Resident #55 and further failed to thoroughly investigate an allegation of staff distributing an illegal substance to Resident #40. This affected three residents (#12, #55 and #40) of five residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 81. Findings included: 1. Review of Resident #55's medical record revealed an admission date of 06/14/23. Diagnoses included alcohol dependence with alcohol-induced persisting dementia, seizures, psychotic disorder with delusions and hallucinations due to known physiological condition. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MD'S) assessment, dated 06/19/24, revealed Resident #55 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BINS) score of 9, indicating the resident had moderate cognitive…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-09-26 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, medical record review, staff interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure fingernail care for a dependent resident. This affected one resident (#37) of two residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs). The facility census was 81. Findings included: Review of Resident #37's medical record revealed an admission date of 03/03/22. Diagnoses included cerebral infarction, abnormal posture, contracture of the left knee, left hip, and left elbow and vascular dementia. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 08/01/24, revealed Resident #37 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 8, indicating the resident had moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated the resident was dependent on staff for personal hygiene. Review of the care plan, initiated 03/22/22, revealed Resident #37 required assistance with ADLs. Interventions included total care for grooming (nails/shave/hair). Observation on 09/23/24 at 2:49 P.M. of Resident #37 revealed the resident's fingernails were cracked, had sharp edges…

  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 · D2024-09-26 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on medical record review, review of a fall investigation, staff interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a thorough investigation, to include staff interviews, was completed related to an unwitnessed fall. This affected one resident (#18) of two residents reviewed for falls. The facility census was 81. Findings included: Review of Resident #18's medical record revealed an admission date of 09/04/19. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease and sleep disorder. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 09/18/24, revealed Resident #18 was severely cognitively impaired for daily decision making. The MDS indicated the resident required supervision or touching assistance for the ability to roll left to right, to move from a sitting to a lying position and from sit to stand. Additionally, Resident #18 experienced one fall with injury during the assessment period. Review of the care plan, initiated 09/06/19, revealed Resident #18 was at risk for falls related to poor judgment and safety awareness and impaired balance and gait.…

  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 · D2024-09-26 · 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

  Based on observation, medical record review, staff interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure oxygen concentrator filters were adequately maintained. This affected one resident (#25) of one resident reviewed for oxygen use. The facility census was 81. Findings included: Review of Resident #25's medical record revealed an admission date of 04/10/20. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 07/01/24, revealed Resident #25 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 9, which indicated the resident had moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS revealed the resident required oxygen therapy. Review of the care plan, initiated 04/14/20, revealed Resident #25 required supplemental oxygen due to a diagnosis of COPD. Interventions directed the staff to administer supplemental oxygen as ordered. Observation on 09/23/24 at 9:27 A.M. of Resident #25's oxygen concentrator revealed a thick, white fuzz covered the filter. Observation on 09/24/24 at 7:49 A.M. of Resident #25's oxygen…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-26 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, staff interview, medical record review and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure appropriate hand hygiene was performed during wound care. This affected one resident (#14) of one resident reviewed for wound care. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure appropriate placement of biohazardous receptacles for a resident on contact and droplet precautions. This affected one resident (#18) of one resident reviewed for infection control. The facility census was 81. Findings included: 1. Review of Resident #14's medical record revealed an admission date of 06/07/22. Diagnoses included pressure ulcer of the sacral region, type II diabetes mellitus, moderate protein-calorie malnutrition and chronic multifocal osteomyelitis (infection of the bone) of multiple sites. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 08/15/24, revealed Resident #14 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3, which indicated the resident had severe cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated Resident #14 required substantial/maximum assistance from…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-11-06 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
  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, observation, staff interview, and review of the facility competency form, the facility failed to ensure a resident received appropriate incontinence care. This affected one (Resident #46) of three residents reviewed for incontinence care. The facility identified there were 47 residents who were incontinent. The facility census was 78. Findings include: Medical record review for Resident #46 revealed an admission date of 10/29/21. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, depression, and psychotic disorder. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #46 was severely cognitively impaired. Resident #46 required extensive assistance from staff with toileting and was always incontinent of bowel and bladder. Observation of incontinence care for Resident #46 on 11/06/23 at 9:40 A.M. revealed State Tested Nursing Aide (STNA) #93 took a soapy washcloth and wiped in a downward motion on the sides of the legs, but didn't wipe the labia area 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2021-09-22 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — widespread
  Ensure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview, record review and review of Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) memorandums, the facility failed to ensure non-licensed nursing staff demonstrated competencies in skills and techniques necessary to care for residents needs prior to providing care and services to residents. This affected two Staff #38 and #250 of five personnel files reviewed. This had the potential to affect all 67 residents who resident in the facility. Findings included: 1. Review of the personnel file for Staff #38 revealed a hire date of 04/06/21. Staff #38 was hired as Non-Certified Nurse Aide under the staffing waiver program for COVID-19. Staff #38 was not a State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA). The personnel file contained a certificate which indicated Staff #38 completed an eight-hour online training for Temporary Nurse Aide. There was no documentation of competencies being evaluated prior to Staff #38 providing care and services to residents. The file contained the following competency documents: a. Competency documented titled Staff member will demonstrate proper use 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.

  Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to FOUNDATIONS HEALTH SOLUTIONS — 64 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

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

Who owns this facility

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

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

This home reported $586K 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