Darby Glenn Nursing And Rehabilitation Center

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.

48.4% 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 45 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 33.3% 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 24 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 0.21 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 24% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 10% 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 93.8 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 5 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.41 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.56 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.03 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 3.03 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.56 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.61 to 0.41 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 43% 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.

25 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 14 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2022-02-11 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observations, interviews with staff, a family member and Nurse Practitioner (NP) #263, and review of information from the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (NPUAP), the facility failed to implement pressuring relieving interventions for a resident at risk for further skin breakdown due to existing pressure ulcers and failed to complete weekly skin assessments. This resulted in Actual Harm when staff failed to implement pressure relieving interventions to prevent further skin breakdown for Resident #49 resulting in the development of an avoidable Deep Tissue Injury (DTI) to the left heel. Resident #49 also had increased measurements in the coccyx and heel pressure ulcers and experienced discomfort during a dressing change. This affected one (#49) of four residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility identified 10 current residents with pressure sores. Facility census was 91. Findings include: Review of the medical record for the Resident #49 revealed an admission date…

  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 before2026-02-10 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
  Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, medical record review, interviews and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure one resident (#69) received a nutritious vegetarian diet. This affected one resident (#69) of four residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility census was 93. Findings Include:Review of the medical record for resident #69 revealed an initial admission date of 02/09/17 with the diagnoses including but not limited to moderate protein calorie malnutrition, hypertension, anemia, major depression disorder, osteoarthritis, spinal stenosis, hyperlipidemia, constipation, polyneuropathy and hypothyroidism. Review of the plan of care dated 02/15/17 revealed the resident had the potential for alteration in nutrition and hydration related to at moderate risk for malnutrition, followed a vegetarian diet related to cultural patterns. Interventions included assist with set up of meal items as needed/requested, honor food preferences as able, medications as ordered, monitor consistency of diet served 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 · D2026-02-10 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolated
  Provide 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 interview, medical record review, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure non-pharmacological interventions were provided prior to the administration of as needed pain medications for Resident #5, #1 and #30, this affected three of four residents reviewed for pain management. The facility failed to ensure descriptions of pain were documented for Resident #1 and #30 which affected two of four residents reviewed for pain management. The facility census was 93.Findings include:1. Review of Resident #30's medical record revealed an admission date of 08/22/25 and diagnoses including ataxia, mild neurocognitive disorder due to known physiological condition without behavioral disturbance, anxiety disorder, and major depressive disorder. Review of Resident #30's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had moderately impaired cognition. Review of Resident #30's plan of care revised 10/15/25 revealed the resident was at risk for alteration in comfort…

  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 before2026-02-10 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolated
  Ensure 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 interview, medical record review, and review of facility policy the facility failed to ensure pain parameters were in place for Resident #1, #30, and #66, who received multiple as needed pain medications. This affected three of four residents reviewed for pain management. The facility census was 93. Findings include:1. Review of Resident #30's medical record revealed an admission date of 08/22/25 and diagnoses including ataxia, mild neurocognitive disorder due to known physiological condition without behavioral disturbance, anxiety disorder, and major depressive disorder.Review of Resident #30's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had moderately impaired cognition.Review of Resident #30's plan of care revised 10/15/25 revealed the resident was at risk for alteration in comfort due to diagnoses, generalized pain, and impaired mobility. Interventions included administering medications as ordered, offering backrub or warm blankets, offering nonpharmacological…

  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 · D2025-01-14 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolated
  Protect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY THE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCY REPRESENTS AN INCIDENT OF PAST NON-COMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY. Based on interview, medical record review, review of facility investigation, and review of facility self-reported incidents (SRI's) revealed the facility failed to ensure Resident #59's money was not misappropriated by facility staff. This affected one resident (#59) of three residents reviewed for misappropriation. The facility census was 94. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #59 revealed an admission date of 11/10/24 with diagnoses including Parkinson's disease, type two diabetes mellitus, bipolar disease, anxiety disorder, dementia, and major depressive disorder. Review of Resident #59's Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed he had intact cognition. Review of the SRI created 12/18/24 and completed 12/26/24 revealed an incident of misappropriation had been substantiated. Resident #59's wallet had been missing. Review of the narrative…

  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 · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-25 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolated
  Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each 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 interview and observation, the facility failed to ensure Resident #65's bed was set to the proper setting to ensure comfort. This affected one resident (#65) of 18 reviewed for speciality mattresses. The facility census was 91. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #65 revealed an admission date of 06/15/20 with diagnoses including cerebral infarction due to thrombosis of other cerebral artery, type 2 diabetes mellitus, need for assistance with personal care, anxiety, insomnia, lower back pain, hemiplegia, and major depressive disorder. Review of Resident #65's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed she required maximal assistance for bed mobility. Review of Resident #65's medical record revealed an order dated 03/26/24 for a low air loss (LAL) mattress. Staff required to check placement and function every shift. Review of Resident #65's care plan dated 06/26/24 found she was at risk for alteration in comfort due to pain and hemiplegia. 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-25 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
  Develop 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 interview, family interview, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure care conferences were held quarterly. This affected three residents (#22, #68, and #79) of six residents reviewed for care conferences. The facility census was 91. Findings include: 1. Review of medical record for Resident #22 revealed admission date of 02/12/23 with diagnoses including but not limited to paraplegia, congestive heart failure, cognitive communication deficit, and need for assistance with personal care. Review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed the resident was cognitively intact. Review of social service note dated 02/28/23 revealed care conference was held on this date with the resident. Review of social service note dated 10/04/23 revealed spoke with the resident and offered care conference. The resident declined. Social Worker let her know we would offer quarterly, and they could request one at anytime. Further review of the medical record revealed no further notes or…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-25 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolated
  Provide 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, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to provide and offer Resident #65 activities per preference. This affected one resident (#65) of one resident reviewed for activities. The facility census was 91. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #65 revealed an admission date of 06/15/20 with diagnoses including cerebral infarction due to thrombosis of other cerebral artery, type 2 diabetes mellitus, need for assistance with personal care, anxiety, insomnia, lower back pain, hemiplegia, and major depressive disorder. Review of Resident #65's activity assessment completed 03/11/24 revealed she prefers one-on-one (1:1) and small group activities. She enjoys bingo, television, pop music, and socializing. In line with her preferences, Resident #65 participates in bingo, crafts, happy hour/live music, and special events when she is up from bed. Activity staff will continue to invite, encourage, and assist her with activities as needed. Resident #65, who was recently…

  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 · D2024-07-25 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide 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, staff interviews, and record review, the facility failed to identify and assess new skin impairment timely. This affected one resident (#62) of four reviewed for skin. Facility census was 91. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #62 revealed an admission date of 11/10/21. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, kidney disease, hypertension, pulmonary embolism, atrial flutter and delusion disorder. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #62 was cognitively intact and had no impairment in range of motion. The MDS revealed the resident was on an anticoagulant medication. Review of physician orders dated 06/25/23 for Eliquis (anticoagulant) 2.5 Milligrams (mg) tab with instructions to give one tab twice daily for atrial fibrillation. Facility had no orders for monitoring of bruising or bleeding. Review of the plan of care dated 05/14/24 revealed the resident was at risk of bleeding and bruising from anticoagulant…

  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 · D2024-07-25 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
  Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
  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 interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure tube feed was labeled and dated. This affected one resident (#79) of one reviewed for tube feed. The facility census was 91. Findings include: Review of medical record for Resident #79 revealed admission date of 06/28/23 with diagnoses including but not limited to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, type two diabetes, moderate protein-calorie malnutrition, dysphagia, kidney disease, hypertension, major depressive disorder, malignant neoplasm of unspecified part of right bronchus or lung, and acquired absence of lung. Review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was cognitively intact. The resident was set up/supervision for meals. The resident rejected care one to three days during the seven day look back period. No weight loss or gain noted. Fifty one percent or more calories received from tube feeding and 501 milliliters a day or more average fluid intake per day provided by tube…

  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 · D2024-04-29 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
  Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
  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 manufacturer's instructions, the facility failed to ensure medication error rates were not five percent or greater when staff failed to prime two insulin pens for Resident #7. There was 32 medication administration opportunities with two errors, for a medication error rate of 6.25%. This affected one (Resident #7) of three residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 93. Findings include: Review of Resident #7's medical record revealed an admission date of 02/04/23. Diagnoses included type II diabetes mellitus, chronic congestive heart failure (CHF), hyperlipidemia, hypertension, atherosclerotic heart disease of native coronary artery, atrial fibrillation, hypothyroidism, anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, low back pain, chronic kidney disease, and gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD). Review of a physician order dated 03/22/23 revealed humalog kwikpen subcutaneous solution pen-injector 100 unit/milliliter insulin lispro inject 15 units subcutaneously three times 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.

  Pharmacy Service 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 $1.0M 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