Jamestown Place Health And Rehab
4960 Us 35 East, Jamestown, OH 45335 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 50 certified beds · (937) 675-3311 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has citations for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565, F0569)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (43) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (66%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- about 21% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 4 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 3 to 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 10.8% | 5.3% | 15.4% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 12.1% | 6.2% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 0.4% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 10.7% | 30.1% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.9% | 3.2% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 10.5% | 6.1% | 16.1% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 29.7% | 25.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 91.2% | 94.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.1% | 3.4% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 16.1% | 21.4% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 0.0% | 8.8% | 17.1% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 46.4% | 75.6% | 79.4% | worse |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
50.0% 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 25 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.59 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 87% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 15% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 50.0%CMS range 36.6–65.9 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.7%CMS range 6.8–15.7 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.74 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 50 beds and averages 31.4 residents a day — about 63% occupied, or roughly 19 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 3.77 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.99 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.97 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 3.27 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.97 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.09 to 0.76 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 66% is well above the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
43 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 33 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · E2026-01-27 · tag F0638 — patternAssure 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 reviews, staff interview, and review of the Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) 3.0 User's Manual, the facility failed to complete Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments per RAI guidelines. This affected five (#02, #04, #17, #19, and #29) out of sixteen residents reviewed. The facility census was 30. 1)Review of the medical record for Resident #02 revealed an admission date of 11/05/20 with medical diagnoses of end stage renal disease (ESRD), congestive heart failure (CHF), anxiety disorder, hypertension (HTN), and dementia. Review of the medical record for Resident #02 revealed a quarterly MDS assessment, with assessment reference date (ARD) 11/01/25. Review of the MDS assessment revealed the assessment was completed on 11/17/25. 2) Review of the medical record revealed Resident #04 was admitted on [DATE]. Diagnoses included type II diabetes mellitus (DM II), atrial fibrillation, major depressive disorder, and peripheral vascular disease (PVD). Review of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-01-27 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop 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 medical record review, family interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure care conferences were completed as required. This affected three (#07, #22, and #29) of three residents reviewed for care conferences. The facility also failed to ensure care plans were updated in a timely manner. This affected one (Resident #06) of one resident reviewed for advanced directives. The facility census was 30. 1) Review of the medical record of Resident #07 revealed an admission date of [DATE]. Diagnoses included dementia with agitation, senile degeneration of brain, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, repeated falls, depression, gastro-esophageal reflux disease, prostate cancer. Review of the comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #07 had severely impaired cognition. The resident required setup/cleanup assistance with eating, partial/moderate assistance with bed mobility and transfers, substantial/maximal assistance…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-01-27 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure care-planned fall interventions were in place and failed to implement appropriate fall interventions following an unwitnessed fall. This affected one (Resident #07) of five residents reviewed for falls. The facility also failed to ensure neurological (neuro) checks were completed following unwitnessed falls. This affected five Residents (#06, #07, #19, #25, and #29) of five residents reviewed for falls. The facility census was 30. 1) Review of the medical record of Resident #07 revealed an admission date of 10/09/24. Diagnoses included dementia with agitation, senile degeneration of brain, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, repeated falls, and prostate cancer. Review of a physician order for Resident #07 dated 01/22/25 revealed the resident was ordered to have a fall mat on the floor next to the left side of the bed. Review of the fall investigation dated 09/10/25 revealed Resident #07 had an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-01-27 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to implement appropriate infection control practices for residents on transmission-based precautions. This affected four (Residents #06, # 07, #09, and #29) of five residents reviewed for transmission-based precautions (TBP.) The facility also failed to ensure staff performed appropriate hand hygiene after performing catheter care. This affected one (Resident #04) of one resident reviewed for catheter-use. The facility census was 30 residents.Findings include:Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to implement appropriate infection control practices for residents on transmission-based precautions. This affected four (Residents #6, # 7, #9, and #29) of five residents reviewed for transmission-based precautions (TBP.) The facility also failed to ensure staff performed appropriate hand hygiene after performing catheter…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-27 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation, family interview, staff interview, and review of facility policies regarding significant changes in resident health status and weight assessment, the facility failed to notify residents' responsible parties of significant changes. This affected two residents (#25 and #07) out of five residents reviewed for notification of changes in status. The facility census was 30. Findings include: 1) Review of the medical record for Resident #25 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included fracture of orbital floor on the right side, fracture of other specified skull and facial bones on the right side, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting the right dominant side, generalized anxiety disorder, oropharyngeal dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), muscle weakness, seizures, and underweight status. Review of the weight summary for Resident #25 ' s revealed the resident weighed 164.4 pounds (lbs.) on 07/15/25 (admission). The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-27 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record reviews, staff interviews, and policy reviews, the facility failed to implement the abuse policy upon the discovery of an injury of unknown origin. This affected one (Resident #06) of the one resident reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 30. Review of the medical record for Resident #06 revealed an admission date of 11/09/25. Diagnoses included arthropathy (joint pain), hypertension, chronic kidney disease, and muscle weakness.Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #06 dated 01/15/25 revealed a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of eight, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. Review of a physician progress note dated 01/07/26 revealed Resident #06 saw the facility's nurse practitioner (NP) on 01/06/26 for an acute visit presenting with a bruise on the right side of her scalp, swelling of her upper left lip, and a skin tear on her left wrist. When asked, Resident #06 reported that she had hit her hand on a screen door but could not recall any head trauma. Resident #06 reported she was up walking around the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-27 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely 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
Based on record reviews, staff interviews, review of Self-Reported Incidents (SRIs), and policy reviews, the facility failed to report an injury of unknown origin to the state agency. This affected one (Resident #06) of the four residents reviewed for falls. The facility census was 30. Review of the medical record for Resident #06 revealed an admission date of 11/09/25. Diagnoses included arthropathy (joint pain), hypertension, chronic kidney disease, and muscle weakness.Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #06 dated 01/15/25 revealed a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of eight, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. Review of a physician progress note dated 01/07/26 revealed Resident #06 saw the facility's nurse practitioner (NP) on 01/06/26 for an acute visit presenting with a bruise on the right side of her scalp, swelling of her upper left lip, and a skin tear on her left wrist. When asked, Resident #06 reported that she had hit her hand on a screen door but could not recall any head trauma. Resident #06 reported she was up…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-27 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record reviews, staff interviews, review of Self-Reported Incidents (SRIs) and policy reviews, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate an injury of unknown origin. This affected one (Resident #06) of four residents reviewed for falls. The facility census was 30 Review of the medical record for Resident #06 revealed an admission date of 11/09/25. Diagnoses included arthropathy (joint pain), hypertension, chronic kidney disease, and muscle weakness.Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #06 dated 01/15/25 revealed a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of eight, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. Review of a physician progress note dated 01/07/26 revealed Resident #06 saw the facility's nurse practitioner (NP) on 01/06/26 for an acute visit presenting with a bruise on the right side of her scalp, swelling of her upper left lip, and a skin tear on her left wrist. When asked, Resident #06 reported that she had hit her hand on a screen door but could not recall any head trauma. Resident #06 reported she was up walking…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-27 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
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 interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to provide bed hold notices to hospitalized residents. This affected two Residents (#29 and #32) of the four residents reviewed for discharges. The facility also failed to notify the State Ombudsman Agency of a resident's discharge. This affected one (Resident #36) of the four residents reviewed for discharges. The facility total census was 30. 1) Record review for Resident #29 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses for Resident #29 included diabetes, dysfunction of heart disease, chronic kidney disease, malnutrition, and coronary graft. Review of the Minimum Data Set, (MDS) comprehensive assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #29 had intact cognition and required set assistance for eating and partial assistance for mobility. Review of hospitalization log revealed the Resident #29 was hospitalized on [DATE], 07/14/25 and 10/22/25. Interview on 01/22/26 at 1:35 P.M., Regional Clinical Nurse, (RCN) #160 verified…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-27 · tag F0637 — isolatedAssess 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 Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were completed in a timely manner. This affected one (Resident #07) of one resident reviewed for hospice services. The facility census was 30. Review of the medical record of Resident #07 revealed an admission date of 10/09/24. Diagnoses included dementia with agitation, senile degeneration of brain, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, depression, and prostate cancer. Review of the significant change MDS assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #07 had severely impaired cognition. The resident required setup/cleanup assistance with eating, partial/moderate assistance with bed mobility and transfers, substantial/maximal assistance with toileting, and bathing. The assessment was not completed until 11/21/25. Review of the medical record on 01/22/26 at 3:45 P.M., revealed the resident began receiving hospice services on 10/06/25.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 33 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-27 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the medical record, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a dental care plan was created timely. This affected one (Resident #04) of three residents reviewed for dental services. The facility census was 30.Review of the medical record revealed Resident #04 was admitted on [DATE]. Diagnoses included type II diabetes mellitus (DM II), atrial fibrillation, major depressive disorder, and peripheral vascular disease (PVD).Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #04 had moderate cognitive impairment as evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of six. This resident was assessed to require setup with eating, dependent with toileting and transfers, partial assistance with bathing, and substantial assistance with dressing.Review of the physician order dated 07/10/25 revealed Resident #04 was ordered to see podiatrist, dentist, audiologist, and ophthalmologist. Interview on 01/21/26 at 3:55 P.M. with the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-27 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the medical record, staff interviews, observations, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure dressing changes were changed as ordered. This affected one (Resident #04) of three residents reviewed for skin concerns. The facility census was 30. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #04 was admitted on [DATE]. Diagnoses included type II diabetes mellitus (DM II), atrial fibrillation, major depressive disorder, and peripheral vascular disease (PVD).Review of the physician order dated 11/25/25 revealed Resident #04 was ordered a continuous wound vacuum-assisted closure (Wound Vac) (therapeutic technique using a suction pump, tubing, and a dressing [usually foam] to apply sub-atmospheric pressure to a wound) at 125 millimeters of mercury (mmHg) to be changed every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday every shift.Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #04 had moderate cognitive impairment as evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-27 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to thoroughly assess a resident's pressure wound upon admission and readmission. This affected one (Resident #32) of one resident reviewed for wound assessment. The facility total census was 30. Record review of Resident #32 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], discharged to the hospital on [DATE] and was readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses for Resident #32 included Stage IV pressure ulcer, respiratory failure with atrial fibrillation, hypoxia and hypercapnia, incontinence, and obesity. Review of the census information for Resident #32 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], discharged to the hospital on [DATE] and was readmitted to the facility on [DATE].Review of the Admissions Data Collection document for Resident #32 dated 12/19/25 (admission) revealed the resident had an open area on the sacrum. The document had no measurement of the pressure wound. Review of the Resident #32 readmissions…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-27 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide 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 record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to implement and execute physician orders to ensure maintenance of acceptable nutrition status parameters. This affected one (Resident #25) out of five residents (#25, #02, #19, #07, and #29) reviewed for weight loss. The facility census was 30. Review of the medical record for Resident #25 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included fracture of orbital floor on the right side, fracture of other specified skull and facial bones on the right side, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting the right dominant side, generalized anxiety disorder, oropharyngeal dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), muscle weakness, seizures, and underweight status.Review of the weight summary for Resident #25's revealed the resident weighed 164.4 pounds (lbs.) on 07/15/25 (admission). The resident experienced a weight loss of 45 pounds (27 percent [%] weight loss) in less than six months when the resident's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-27 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide 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
Based on medical record review, staff interview, review of the dialysis contract, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure pre/post dialysis communication forms were completed consistently and thoroughly and failed to ensure pre/post dialysis vital signs and weights were obtained as per physician orders. This affected one (Resident #02) resident who received dialysis. The facility census was 30. Review of the medical record for Resident #02 revealed an admission date of 11/05/2020 with medical diagnoses of end stage renal disease (ESRD) with dependency on dialysis, congestive heart failure (CHF), anxiety disorder, hypertension (HTN), and dementia.Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 12/17/25, which indicated Resident #02 had severe cognitive impairment and required substantial/maximum staff assistance for showers, bed mobility, and transfers and was dependent upon staff for toilet hygiene. The MDS indicated Resident #02 received dialysis. Review of the physician orders for Resident #02 dated 10/29/25 revealed the resident was ordered to receive…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-27 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, family interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure care conferences were completed as required. This affected three (#07, #22, and #29) of three residents reviewed for care conferences. The facility also failed to ensure care plans were updated in a timely manner. This affected one (Resident #06) of one resident reviewed for advanced directives. The facility census was 30. 1) Review of the medical record for Resident #04 revealed an admission date of 07/10/25 with medical diagnoses of diabetes mellitus (DM), morbid obesity, hypertension (HTN), chronic kidney disease Stage III, and depression. Review of a physician order for Resident #04 dated 07/10/25 revealed the resident was ordered to receive Trulicity pen-injector (used to improve blood sugar levels) 0.75 milligram (mg) per 0.5 milliliter (ml) to inject 0.5 ml subcutaneously (SQ) one time weekly on Sunday and an order dated 09/09/25 for insulin glargine (long acting insulin) SQ pen-injector 100 units per ml…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-27 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the medical record, observations, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure medication error rate was less than five percent (%) during medication administration pass. This affected two Residents (#31 and #33) of four residents observed for medication administration. The facility census was 30. 1) Review of the medical record for Resident #33 revealed an admission date of 12/09/24. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and emphysema. Review of the physician order dated 07/15/25 revealed Keppra 500 milligrams (mg), give one tablet by mouth two times a day for seizures. Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #33 had severe cognitive impairment as evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of six. This resident was assessed to require setup with eating, toileting, and transfers, and partial assistance with bathing and dressing.Observation on 01/21/26 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-27 · tag F0773 — isolatedProvide or obtain laboratory tests/services when ordered and promptly tell the ordering practitioner of the results.
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 interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to notify the physician of abnormal laboratory (lab) results/values. This affected one (Resident #29), of one resident reviewed for labs. The total facility census was 30. Record review of Resident #29 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses for Resident #29 included diabetes, dysfunction of heart disease, chronic kidney disease, malnutrition, and coronary graft. Review of the Minimum Data Set, (MDS) comprehensive assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #29 had intact cognition and required set-up assistance for eating and partial assistance for mobility. The resident received a carbohydrate controlled and no added salt diet.Review of physician orders dated 02/19/25 revealed the Resident #29 had orders for weekly potassium levels drawn every Wednesday and to fax the results to a designated nephrology practice physician. Review of potassium level lab tests dated 12/24/25, 12/31/25 and 01/14/26, revealed the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-27 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolatedProvide or obtain dental services for 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 medical record review, observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure dental services were provided as required. This affected one (Resident #04) of three residents reviewed for dental services. The facility census was 30 residents.Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #04 was admitted on [DATE] diagnoses including diabetes mellitus, atrial fibrillation, major depressive disorder, and peripheral vascular disease (PVD).Review of the medical record for Resident #04 revealed the resident was seen by a dentist in August 2024. There were no subsequent dental visits.Review of the physician's orders for Resident #04 revealed an order dated 07/10/25 for the resident to receive dental services.Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #4 dated 12/16/25 revealed the resident had moderate cognitive impairment and required assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs.)Interview on 01/21/26 at 2:45 P.M. with Regional…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-27 · tag F0808 — failed to follow doctor-ordered diets — isolatedEnsure therapeutic diets are prescribed by the attending physician and may be delegated to a registered or licensed dietitian, to the extent allowed by State law.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, resident interview, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to follow therapeutic diets as ordered by the physician. This affected three (Residents #02, #29 and #32) of three residents reviewed for therapeutic diets. The facility census was 30 residents.Findings include: 1.Review of the medical record for Resident #02 revealed an admission date of 11/05/20 with diagnoses including end stage renal disease, congestive heart failure, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #2 dated 12/17/25 revealed the resident had severely impaired cognition and required maximum assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs.)Review of the physician's orders for Resident #02 revealed orders for dialysis three times a week and a renal diet. Review of the physician's orders for Resident #02 revealed an order dated 01/21/26 for a fluid restriction of 1500 cubic centimeters (cc) of fluid per…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-27 · tag F0887 — isolatedEducate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure residents were provided education on benefits and risks of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccination. This affected two (Residents #02 and #25) of five residents reviewed for vaccinations. The facility census was 30 residents.Findings include:1.Review of the medical record for Resident #02 revealed an admission date of 11/05/20 with diagnoses including end stage renal disease (ESRD), congestive heart failure (CHF), anxiety disorder, hypertension (HTN), and dementia. Review Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #2 dated 12/17/25 revealed the resident had severe cognitive impairment and required substantial/maximum staff assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs.) Review of the medical record for Resident #02 revealed the resident had refused COVID-19 vaccination. The medical record did not include documentation regarding resident education on the risks and benefits of the vaccination. Interview on 01/22/26 at 12:09 P.M. with Regional Clinical Nurse #160…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2025-11-03 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — widespreadMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to maintain safe clean environment. This had the potential to affect all 30 residents. The facility census was 30.Findings Included: Observation on 10/30/25 at 2:23 P.M. in [NAME] hallway there was staining on the ceiling tile around the water sprinkler which was located close to the nurse's station.Interview on 10/30/25 at 2:23 P.M. with Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) #135 verified there was staining on the ceiling around the water sprinkler down [NAME] hallway.Observation on 10/30/25 at 2:27 P.M. in Summer hallway the air vents in the ceiling were observed, the second and third air vents from the entrance to the hallway had dust, dirt and debris in them, the sixth air vent was observed with staining on the ceiling around the air vent which had visible dust and debris hanging in the air vent.Interview on 10/30/25 at 2:27 P.M. with Physical Therapy Assistant #192 verified the condition of the air vents in Summer hallway as…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-09-18 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, staff and resident interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure there was a homelike environment. This affected 11 (# 20, #9, #10, #11, #12, #13, #14, #15, #16, #17, #18) out of 11 reviewed for the environment. The facility census was 34.Findings Included: Observation of Resident #13's room on Winter Hall on 09/15/25 at 8:16 A.M., revealed the bathroom light made a loud screeching noise, the faucet leaked in the sink, and the hot water temperature was 82.7 degrees Fahrenheit. Interview with Resident #13 on 09/15/25 at 8:17 A.M., revealed the light in her bathroom had been screeching for about five or six days, and an aide knew about it, however the resident could not remember her name. Resident #13 reported the water in her bathroom had not been hot for about three weeks and the aides would give her washcloths that were lukewarm, and they would apologize for it when they had to provide care when the washcloth wasn't hot. Review of the following resident's rooms on Winter Hall on 09/15/25 at 8:30 A.M., revealed:Resident #9's bathroom…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-09-18 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, staff and resident interviews, and policy review the facility failed to ensure residents received two showers a week. This affected five (#25, #29, #20, #8 and #3) of five residents reviewed for bathing. The facility census was 34. Findings Included:1.Medical record review revealed Resident #25 was admitted on [DATE]. Medical diagnoses included encephalopathy and non-Alzheimer's dementia.Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #25 was severely cognitively impaired. Her functional status was dependent for eating, toileting, bathing and bed mobility. She was non-applicable for transfers. Review of the shower sheets for Resident #25 revealed out of eight shower opportunities the resident received one on 08/21/25 and 09/08/25. The resident had not been out to the hospital. 2.Medical record review for Resident #29 revealed an admission date of 04/03/24. Medical diagnoses included aftercare following joint replacement surgery,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-09-18 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — patternProvide 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 medical record review, staff and resident interview, observation, and policy review the facility failed to ensure fresh water was passed out during the day. This affected four Residents (#26, #19, #24, #29) out of four residents reviewed. The facility identified residents who received nothing by mouth. In addition, the facility failed to ensure a resident with significant weight loss was given his ordered supplement. This affected one resident (#3) of two residents reviewed for weight loss. The facility census was 34. Findings Included:1.Medical record review for Resident #26 revealed an admission date of 05/27/21. Medical diagnoses included quadriplegia, neurogenic bladder, diabetes, and cerebrovascular attack.Review of Resident #26's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed she was cognitively intact. Her functional status was dependent for eating, toileting, bed mobility, and non-applicable for transfers. She was always incontinent for bowel and bladder. Review of the care plan for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-09-18 · tag F0557 — isolatedHonor the resident's right to be treated with respect and dignity and to retain and use personal possessions.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure dignity and respect were shown to residents who needed help to eat. This affected three (#25, #26, #7) of three residents reviewed for assistance with eating. The census was 34.Findings Included:1.Medical record review for Resident #25 was admitted on [DATE]. Medical diagnoses included encephalopathy and non-Alzheimer's dementia.Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #25 was severely cognitively impaired. Her functional status was dependent for eating, toileting, bathing and bed mobility. She was non-applicable for transfers. 2.Medical record review for Resident #26 revealed an admission date of 05/27/21. Medical diagnoses included quadriplegia, neurogenic bladder, diabetes, and cerebrovascular attack.Review of Resident #26's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed she was cognitively intact. Her functional status was dependent for eating, toileting, bed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-09-18 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — isolatedHonor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of the resident council minutes, staff and resident interviews, and policy review the facility failed to ensure resident council concerns had a resolution. This affected two (#13 and #29) of two residents reviewed for resident council. The facility identified not all of the residents were able to attend resident council. The facility census was 34.Findings Included:Review of Resident Council Minutes revealed:On 06/23/25 there was a complaint noted about the facility driveway needed the cracks fixed.On 07/21/25 there was a complaint noted about the facility driveway still needed fixed. On 08/25/25 there was a complaint noted a resident's wheelchair got stuck in a hole out front and the resident could hardly get out of the hole. The resident's voiced in this resident council meeting they felt like nothing was done about their concerns when the administration was made aware of the concerns. Interview with the Resident Council President #13 on 09/15/25 at 10:32 A.M., revealed the resident council does not receive timely answers to their complaints, if they even answer…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-18 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely 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
Based on medical record review, staff interview, and policy review revealed the facility failed to ensure a resident elopement was reported to the state agency. This affected one (#20) of two residents reviewed for elopement. The facility census was 34.Findings Included: Medical record review for Resident #20 revealed an admission date of 10/13/23. Medical diagnoses included non-Alzheimer's dementia, seizure disorder, and schizophrenia.Review of the progress notes dated 05/01/24 revealed Resident #20 had a history of eloping from home.Review of the care plan dated 04/03/25 revealed Resident #20 was identified as an elopement risk and would be wearing a wander guard alarming device. Interventions to prevent elopement included: to monitor placement and function of the wander guard alarming device every shift, provide redirection from the lobby area when visitors were leaving, and redirect the resident from the doors.Review of the medical record dated 04/12/25 revealed Resident #20 eloped from the facility at approximately 7:45 A.M., went to a gas station 0.2 miles away, got into a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-09-18 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolatedProvide 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 review of the activity calendar, observation, staff and resident interview, medical record review, and policy review the facility failed to ensure meaningful activities were provided as scheduled. This affected three (#13, #16, #26) of three residents reviewed for activities. This had the potential to affect all of the residents who participated in activities. The facility census was 34. Findings Included:Review of the activity calendar dated 09/01/25 through 09/30/25 revealed on 09/11/25:10:30 A.M. pass mail11:30 A.M. lunch1:30 P.M. bingo 3:30 P.M. manicuresFurther review of the activity calendar for the month of September 2025 revealed every day at 10:30 A.M., was mail and 11:30 A.M., was lunch. Observation on 09/11/25 at 10:30 A.M., revealed no one was passing mail to the residents. At 11:30 A.M., lunch was served to the residents. At 1:30 P.M., bingo was held by a resident who called out the numbers for the game. The Activity Director (AD) #38 walked around the bingo area for a while and then sat…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-18 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY THE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCY REPRESENTS AN INCIDENT OF PAST NON-COMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY. Based on medical record review, review of the facility investigation statements, staff interview and policy review the facility failed to provide adequate interventions and/or supervision to ensure a resident who was assessed as being at risk for elopement did not elope from the facility. This affected one (#20) of three residents reviewed for elopement. The facility census was 34. Findings Included:Medical record review for Resident #20 revealed an admission date of 10/13/23. Medical diagnoses included non-Alzheimer's dementia, seizure disorder, and schizophrenia.Review of the progress notes dated 05/01/24 revealed Resident #20 has a history of eloping from home.Review of the physician orders dated 05/28/24 revealed to place a wander guard alarming device to alert staff of attempt to elope. Check function and placement every shift.Review of the physician orders dated 08/09/24 revealed to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-09-18 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — isolatedProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the daily staffing, observation and staff interview the facility failed to ensure there was enough staff to assist residents to eat. This affected three (#25, #26, and #7) of three residents reviewed for staffing. The facility census was 34. Findings Included:Review of the daily staffing dated 09/11/25 revealed there were two nurses, and three Certified Nursing Assistants (CNA)'s to take care of 34 residents. There was one CNA who was out of the facility taking a resident to dialysis. The affected three (#25, #26, and #7) of three residents reviewed for assistance with eating.1.Medical record review for Resident #25 was admitted on [DATE]. Medical diagnoses included encephalopathy and non-Alzheimer's dementia.Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #25 was severely cognitively impaired. Her functional status was dependent for eating, toileting, bathing and bed mobility. She was non-applicable for transfers. 2.Medical record review for Resident #26 revealed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2022-10-04 · tag F0882 — widespreadDesignate a qualified infection preventionist to be responsible for the infection prevent and control program in the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure the appointed Infection Preventionist had proper infection prevention and control training and certification. This had the potential to affect all the residents in the facility. The facility census was 40. Finding include: Record review revealed the Director of Nursing (DON) was the Infection Preventionist for the facility. Further record review revealed the DON had not completed specialized training in infection prevention and control. Interview on 09/29/22 at 9:33 A.M. with DON confirmed she was the appointed Infection Preventionist in the facility to manage the Infection Prevention Control Program (IPCP). The DON confirmed she had not completed specialized training in infection prevention and control. Interview on 09/29/22 at 10:02 A.M. with Regional Nurse #150 confirmed DON was the appointed Infection Preventionist for the facility and DON had not completed specialized training for infection prevention and control.
- Potential for harm · D2022-10-04 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure advance directives were dated when signed. This affected one (Resident #32) out of four residents reviewed for advance directives. The facility census was 40. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #32 revealed an admission date of 02/14/15. Diagnoses included cellulitis of right lower limb, peripheral vascular disease, type two diabetes mellitus with other circulatory complications, major depressive disorder, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, atrial fibrillation, iron deficiency anemia, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, and angina pectoris. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 08/14/22, revealed this resident had intact cognition. This resident was assessed to require extensive assistance for bed mobility, transfer, dressing, toileting, and personal hygiene. The resident was able to eat independently. Review of the current physician orders revealed an order dated 07/17/18 for Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) Comfort Care. Review of the completed DNR form revealed the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-10-04 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure an advanced beneficiary notice of non-coverage was completed. This affected one resident (Resident #36) out of three residents reviewed for beneficiary notice. The facility census was 40. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #36 revealed an admission date of 02/25/22. Diagnoses included major depressive disorder, dementia, squamous cell carcinoma, pressure ulcer of sacral region, stage four, and protein calorie malnutrition. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 09/01/22, revealed this resident had moderately impaired cognition. This resident was assessed to require extensive assistance with transfers, dressing, and toileting as well as supervision for eating. Review of form titled CRI Notification for Discharge of Therapy Services, dated 04/19/22, revealed Resident #36 was discharged from therapy services effective 04/21/22 because the resident achieved all goals and was not expected to make further progress. Interview on 09/29/22 at 2:50 P.M. with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-10-04 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
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 interviews and medical record review, the facility failed to complete comprehensive person-centered care plans for two (Resident #14 and Resident #19) out of the four residents sampled. The facility census was 40. Findings include: 1. Review of medical record for Resident #14 revealed an admission date of 05/28/21. Review of the medical record revealed medical diagnoses of protein calorie malnutrition, major Depression, syncope and collapse, atrial fibrillation, anemia, hypertension and unspecified injury of head. Review of the medical record revealed the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] which stated Resident #14's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was three indicating Resident #14 had severely impaired cognition. The MDS revealed the resident required extensive staff assistance of two staff members for bed mobility and transfers and extensive assist of one staff member for toileting. The MDS revealed Resident #14 was dependent upon staff for personal cares. Further review of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-10-04 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to complete quarterly care conferences for residents and family. This affected one (#39) of two residents reviewed for care plans. The facility census was 40. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #39 revealed an admission date of 03/01/19. Diagnoses included dementia, Alzheimer's disease, fracture of right wrist and hand, and hypertension. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #39 had severe cognitive impairment. This resident was assessed to require two-person extensive assistance with transfers, dressing, and toileting, supervision with eating, and two-person total dependence with bathing. Review of the care conferences for the last 12 months revealed Resident #39 had a care conference on 08/30/21, 06/28/22 and 09/06/22. Interview on 09/28/22 at 11:46 A.M. with social services director #350 revealed care conferences were to be completed quarterly. Social services…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-10-04 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, and medical record review, the facility failed to provide fingernail care to one (Resident #14) out of the four residents sampled. This had the potential to affect all the residents in the facility. The facility census was 40. Findings include: Review of medical record for Resident #14 revealed an admission date of 05/28/21. Review of the medical record revealed medical diagnoses of protein calorie malnutrition, major Depression, syncope and collapse, atrial fibrillation, anemia, HTN and unspecified injury of head. Review of the medical record revealed the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] which stated Resident #14's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was three indicating Resident #14 had severely impaired cognition. The MDS revealed the resident required extensive staff assistance of two staff members for bed mobility and transfers and extensive assist of one staff member for toileting. The MDS revealed Resident #14 was dependent upon staff for personal 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-10-04 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide 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 record review, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to accurately monitor weights per nutritional parameters. This affected three (#8, #20, and #28) out of three residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility census was 40. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #8 revealed an admission date of 01/25/22. Diagnoses included Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, major depressive disorder, pneumonia, COVID-19, and dysphagia. Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #8 had severe cognitive impairment. This resident was assessed to require two-person extensive assistance with transfers, dressing, and toileting, supervision with eating, and two-person total dependence with bathing. Review of the care plan dated 06/20/22 revealed Resident #8 had potential for inadequate food/beverage intake due to depression and parkinson's. Interventions included assist feed as tolerated and indicated. Staff to give diet as ordered.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-09-05 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, observation and staff interview, the facility failed to provide to dignity during dining for a resident. This affected one (#11) of 10 residents observed who required assistance/dependence with eating. The facility census was 39. Findings include: Clinical record review revealed Resident #11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Alzheimer's dementia. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment revealed the resident had severely impaired cognition and required the extensive assist of one staff for feeding at meals. Observation on 09/03/19 at 5:27 P.M. revealed State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #53 standing while feeding Resident #11 her meal. There were five resident who received feeding assistance from the staff. Interview at that time of observation with the Director of Nursing (DON) verified STNA #53 was standing and should be sitting in a chair next to the resident when assisting a resident with her meal.
- Potential for harm · D2019-09-05 · tag F0569 — isolatedNotify each resident of certain balances and convey resident funds upon discharge, eviction, or death.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the resident fund accounts, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to provide the resident's funds within 30 days from discharge from the facility. This affected one (Resident #194) of two residents reviewed for a closed fund account. The facility identified eight residents who had a fund accounts with the facility. The facility census was 39. Findings include: Review of the resident's fund account information revealed Resident #194 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident discharged to a different facility on [DATE]. A check for a balance of $516.74 was sent to the resident on [DATE]. Interview with Business Office Manager (BOM) #51 on [DATE] at 11:45 A.M. verified that Resident #194 discharged to a different facility on [DATE]. BOM #51 verified a check for a balance of 516.74 dollars was sent to the resident/responsible party on [DATE] which was 66 days after discharge. Review of the facility's undated policy titled Patient Resident Trust Fund Policy revealed the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-09-05 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, staff and family interview and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a 48-hour baseline care plan was reviewed with the resident and their representative, and a copy of the care plan given to the resident or their representative. This affected one (Resident #15) out of 12 residents reviewed for baseline care plans. The facility census was 39. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #15 revealed an admission date of 07/03/19. Diagnoses included malignant neoplasm of the hard palate, dysarthria and anarthria, dysphagia, blindness left eye, chronic hepatitis, benign prostatic hyperplasia, obstructive and reflux uropathy weakness and severe calorie malnutrition. Review of the 48-hour baseline care plan for Resident #15, dated 07/03/19, revealed the care plan was completed and signed by the Registered Nurse (RN). Further review of the care plan revealed no documentation that the plan had been reviewed with the resident or his representative. Review of the nursing progress notes dated 07/03/19 through 07/10/19,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-09-05 · tag F0687 — failed to care for feet properly — isolatedProvide appropriate foot care.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observations, family and staff interviews and facility procedure review, the facility failed to provide timely and appropriate foot care a resident. This affected one (Resident #22) of one resident reviewed for activities of daily living care. The facility census was 39. Findings include: Record review for Resident #22 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including a stroke resulting in left sided hemiplegia and Parkinson's disease. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 07/04/19, revealed the resident was non-verbal with moderately impaired cognition. S he required the extensive assistance of one staff for hygiene. The resident's daughter was the responsible party. Review of a Health Care Services Consent Form, dated 08/12/19, revealed the resident's daughter signed a consent for audiology, optometry and podiatry services with a visiting mobile care group. Observation on 09/03/19 at 3:47 P.M. revealed Resident #22 was in bed with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-09-05 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure 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
Based on observation, medical record review and staff and family interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident #15 received the prescribed amount of enteral nutrition. This affected one (Resident #15) out of one resident reviewed for enteral feeding. The facility identified four residents received tube feedings. The facility census was 39. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #15 revealed an admission date of 07/03/19. Diagnoses included dysarthria and anarthria, dysphagia and severe calorie malnutrition. Review of the 30-day Medicare Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 07/31/19, revealed Resident #15 to have moderate cognitive impairment. He was also assessed to be totally dependent upon staff for his eating and nutrition and his weight loss was assessed as unknown. Review of Resident #15's nutritional assessment, dated 07/11/19, revealed Resident #15 was currently receiving Jevity one point two calories at 55 ml/hr., with 30 ml. of water flush every hour. Nutritional summary documented by Licensed Dietitian (LD) #97, revealed the current rate 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.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to SIMCHA HYMAN & NAFTALI ZANZIPER — 79 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 2.6 | -0.6 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 2.7 | -1.7 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 3.4 | +1.6 vs chain |
The other 78 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.6★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 78; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FLYER 5 OPERATIONS HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 09/29/2022 |
| ACM ASHEM HOLDINGS, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 09/29/2022 |
| FLYER 5 HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 09/29/2022 |
| FTK FLYER OH, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 09/29/2022 |
| ZANZIPER FAMILY TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 09/29/2022 |
| BIRNBAUM, EZRA | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| HIRSCH, SHAYE | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| MOERMAN, RAFAEL | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| SINGER, SIMON | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| JAMESTOWN PLACE PROPERTY LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| HARRISON, QUIANA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/15/2024 |
| KRIESER, AKIVA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| ZANZIPER, NATALIE | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/26/2025 |
| CITRIN COOPERMAN ADVISORS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| FASTEN HALBERSTAM LLP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| GALE HEALTHCARE SOLUTIONS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| MED-NET COMPLIANCE LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/01/2018 |
| NPNH1 LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| OVATION REHABILITATION SERVICES LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| SHS KEREN LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| THE PAVILION MANAGMENT COMPANY LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| VERACITY RESOURCING AND SERVICES LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/29/2022 |
| CRAGER, MARK | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/02/2025 |
| ZANZIPER, NAFTALI | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/29/2022 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 30 rows in the source record cover these 24 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
15 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $993K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 21% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in OH
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Ohio Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 365368. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-27, 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.