No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Sanctuary At Ohio Valley

2932 South 5th Street, Ironton, OH 45638 · Non profit - Corporation · 93 certified beds · (740) 532-6188 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (740) 532-6188 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0609) — cited Dec 2024Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0758)
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed

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.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
2727 S 3rd St · (740) 534-2100 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1848 Campbell Dr · (740) 533-9215 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
702 High St · (740) 532-2381 · Call to confirm hours
Park
1701 S 7th St · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 1 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 improved from 3 to 4 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.

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased5.0%5.3%15.4%typical for the state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight4.0%6.2%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.2%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.6%0.4%2.0%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms5.2%30.1%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury2.0%3.2%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened6.9%6.1%16.1%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication34.1%25.5%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%94.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers5.6%3.4%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control15.0%21.4%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table18.3%8.8%17.1%typical
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication2.1%1.2%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine96.8%75.6%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission26.1%24.9%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit12.4%12.9%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.511.731.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.661.801.80better

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.

30.2% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 69 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

30.2%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.6%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
52.9%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.40U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.19hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.16hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 52.9% 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 34 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 0.40 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 68% 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.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF30.2%CMS range 19.1–46.451.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.6%CMS range 7.8–16.610.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge52.9%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge44.1%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge26.5%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 identified98.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 dischargenot 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 stay2.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization8.9%CMS range 5.3–13.67.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.281.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

0.48
RN hours/ resident / day
0.91
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.04
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.43
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.18
RN hoursweekends
40.6%
Total nursing turnover
22.2%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 93 beds and averages 76.7 residents a day — about 82% occupied, or roughly 16 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 3.43 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.48 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.04 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 3.12 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.55 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.60 to 0.18 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 41% 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

5
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-03-06)
2
at the previous standard inspection (2022-09-15)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

11 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · D2025-03-06 · tag F0644 — isolated
    Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as 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 and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure resident Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) documents were accurate to resident current conditions and diagnoses. This affected one (Resident #5) of three residents reviewed for PASRR documents. The census was 79. Findings Include: Resident #5 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses were cerebral infarction, diabetes mellitus type II, muscle weakness, abnormal posture, constipation, atrial fibrillation, unspecified psychosis, hypertension, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary disease, hyperlipidemia, anxiety, depression, renal dialysis, chronic kidney disease, arteriovenous fistula, end stage renal disease, and morbid obesity. Review of her Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 01/28/25 revealed she had minimal cognitive impairment. Most recent PASSR was completed on 11/29/23 with a diagnosis of mood disorder. A new diagnosis of unspecified psychosis was added on 04/12/24 and a new PASSR was not completed…

    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 before2025-03-06 · 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 observation, interview, medical record review and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure Resident #59 had a physicians order for oxygen therapy. This affected one (Resident #59) of one residents reviewed for respiratory care. The facility census was 79. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #59 revealed an admission date of 07/12/23 with diagnoses including chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder, chronic pulmonary embolism, and hypertension. Review of the physician orders dated 03/25 revealed Resident #59 did not have an order for oxygen therapy. Resident #59 had an order for Bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPap), a mechanical breathing device, to be worn as tolerated except during meals. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #59 was cognitively intact and refused care four to six days of look back period. Resident #59 was depended on staff for completion of most activities of daily…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-03-06 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services 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 facility policy review the facility failed to ensure Resident #80 had physician order for dialysis treatment and care. This affected one (Resident #80) of two residents reviewed for dialysis. The facility census was 79. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #80 revealed an admission date of 02/10/25 with diagnoses including acute kidney failure with tubular necrosis, chronic kidney disease stage five, hypertension and congestive heart failure. Review of the physician orders dated 03/25 revealed Resident #80 did not have a physician order for dialysis treatment, the name of the facility or contact information and no orders for care and treatment of dialysis port. Review of the nursing progress notes from 02/10/25 through 03/05/25 revealed one note on 02/28/25 at 3:40 P.M. indicated the local dialysis center was notified of Resident #80 discharge date of 03/09/25 from the facility and residents request for chair time change. No other progress…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-03-06 · tag F0699 — isolated
    Provide 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 reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) was appropriately assessed to identify the cause of the residents PTSD and minimize triggers and/or re-traumatization. This affected two residents (#23 and #70) out of two residents identified by the facility as having PTSD/trauma. The facility census was 79. Findings include: 1. Record review for Resident #23 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses including cerebrovascular disease, acute and chronic respiratory failure, hyperlipidemia, insomnia, anxiety, depression, peripheral vascular disease, hypertension, atherosclerosis, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (on 5-9-18), transient ischemic attack, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 02/11/25, revealed this resident was assessed to have intact cognition evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) assessment score of 15 out of 15.…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-03-06 · 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 facility policy review the facility failed to ensure Resident #22 and Resident #72 had low blood sugar parameters and directions of action when obtaining accucheck blood sugars with sliding scale insulin. This affected two (Resident #22 and Resident #72) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 79. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #22 revealed an admission date of 01/09/23 with diagnoses including cerebrovascular disease, diabetes mellitus type two, schizoaffective disorder, hypothyroidism and mood disorder. Review of the physician orders dated 03/25 revealed Resident #22 received Novolog (fast acting insulin) injection solution 100 units per milliliter (ml) per sliding scale. Inject insulin subcutaneously before meals and at bedtime. Inject as per sliding scale if blood sugar was 200-249 give two units, 250-299 give four units, 300-349 give six units, 350-400 give 8 units, 401-450 give 10 units 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-12-17 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    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 Electronic Information Dissemination and Collection (EIDC) portal for Self-Reporting Incidents (SRI) and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to report an allegation of sexual abuse to the state agency and failed to implement the abuse policy. This affected one (Resident #64) of three reviewed for sexual abuse. The facility census was 82. Findings include: Medical record review revealed Resident #64 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease, diabetes mellitus type two, psychotic disorder, dementia, and depression. Review of Resident #64's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #64 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of one of 15, indicating severely impaired cognition. Resident #64 required staff assistance with activities of daily living. Review of Resident #64 nursing progress notes dated 11/29/24 through 12/18/24 revealed no documentation…

    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 · D2022-09-15 · tag F0645 — isolated
    PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
    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 complete the Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) Identification Screen correctly for two residents (Resident #20 and #58) out of six residents reviewed during the annual survey. The facility census was 64. Findings include. 1. Medical record review for Resident #58 revealed an admission date of 08/12/22. Diagnoses included but were not limited to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, idiopathic aseptic necrosis of right femur, right femur fracture, ventricular tachycardia, major depressive disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, unspecified mood disorder, bipolar disorder, and history of alcohol dependence. Review of Resident #58's physician orders revealed an order for Clonazepam one milligram by mouth twice daily, start date of 08/13/22, Aripiprazole 10 milligrams by mouth once daily for depression, start date of 08/12/22, and Sertraline 50 milligrams by mouth once daily for depression, start date of 08/12/22. Review of 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 · Dcited before2022-09-15 · 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to administer oxygen as ordered by the physician and failed to obtain physician orders for the administration of oxygen. This affected two residents (#36 and #38) of the three residents reviewed for respiratory care. The facility census was 64. Findings include: 1. Record review for Resident #36 revealed this resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses including legal blindness, dementia, history of falling, hypertension, and dyspnea. This resident had no known allergies. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 07/14/22, revealed this resident had severely impaired cognition. This resident was assessed to require extensive assistance from one staff member for bed mobility, extensive assistance from two staff members for transfers, extensive assistance from one staff member for toileting, and extensive assistance from one staff member for eating. This resident was assessed to have used 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 · F2020-01-16 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — widespread
    Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on resident interview, staff interview and a test tray, the facility failed to ensure food was served at an appetizing temperature. This had the potential to affect all residents except three residents (Resident #17, #48, and #78) who received no food from the kitchen. The facility census was 75. Findings include: Interview of Resident #45 on 01/13/20 at 2:44 P.M. revealed sometimes the hot foods were served cold. A test tray was requested on 01/15/20. The test tray was loaded on to the meal cart at 12:07 P.M. The meal cart arrived on the hallway at 12:08 P.M. The first tray was served at 12:10 P.M., and the last tray was served at 12:30 P.M. The temperature of the food on the test tray at 12:31 P.M. included: the hot ham and cheese sandwich was 110 degrees Fahrenheit (F) and cool to taste, the potato wedges were 108 degrees F and cool to taste, and the milk was 60 degrees F and warm to taste. The temperatures were verified with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #20. The facility identified Residents #17, #48, and #78 did not receive food from the kitchen. Interview of Dietary…

    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 · D2020-01-16 · tag F0742 — isolated
    Provide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with mental disorder or psychosocial adjustment difficulty, or who has a history of trauma and/or post-traumatic stress disorder.
    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 and medical record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident with mental disorders received treatment for the disorder. This affected one (Resident #28) of two sampled residents reviewed for mood and behavior. The facility census was 75. Findings include: Review of Resident #28's medical record revealed he was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including dementia, mood disorder, bipolar disorder, anxiety and agitation. Review of Resident #28's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the following: Resident # 28's speech was unclear, he was rarely understood, he rarely understands, his short and long-term memory was impaired, he recalled staff names and faces and had severely impaired decision making. Resident #28 had minimal depression, had no indicators of psychosis, had other behaviors one to three days of the assessment reference period that did not significantly impact him or other residents, he did not reject care and did not wander.…

    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 · D2020-01-16 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview and medical record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who received psychotropic drugs had target behaviors identified and were monitored for those behaviors. This affected two (Residents #28 and #50) of five sampled residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #28's medical record revealed he was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including dementia, mood disorder, bipolar disorder, anxiety and agitation. Review of Resident #28's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the following: Resident # 28's speech was unclear, he was rarely understood, he rarely understands, his short and long-term memory was impaired, he recalled staff names and faces, and had severely impaired decision making. Resident #28 had minimal depression, had no indicators of psychosis, had other behaviors one to three days of the assessment reference period that did not significantly impact him or other residents, he did not reject care…

    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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to AMERICAN HEALTH FOUNDATION — 5 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 4 of 52.8+1.2 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.6+1.4 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 52.8+0.2 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 53.6+0.4 vs chain
The other 4 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.8★, 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 / managerTypeRoleSince
LEHMAN, TIMOTHYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 05/01/2016
MCDONOUGH, JAMESIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2017
HAEMMERLE, J MICHAELIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 05/01/2016
HAEMMERLE, JEFFREYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 12/20/2023
HAEMMERLE, JOHNIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 11/20/1996
HAEMMERLE, MARKIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 12/29/1995
AHF MANAGEMENT CORPOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/25/2025
AMERICAN HEALTH FOUNDATION , INC.OrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/25/2025
EICHENLAUB, BRIANIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/30/2025
SALSER, ANNETTEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 05/01/2016
APGAR, DAVIDIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2016

CMS files one row per role, so the 18 rows in the source record cover these 11 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.

2 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.

$8.9M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+19.6%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$440K
Related-party expense6% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 52%Medicare 10%Other / private 38%

This home reported $440K 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

$253per resident / day
operating cost
$7,688per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$314per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in Ohio
$9,186/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$10,389/mo
Nursing home (private)
$6,103/mo
Assisted living

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 365791. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-03-06, 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.

What to do next