Enniscourt Nursing Care

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

40.2% 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 66 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 55.6% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 27 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.46 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 77% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 24% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 50 beds and averages 42.7 residents a day — about 85% occupied, or roughly 7 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.18 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.40 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.18 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 3.54 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.43 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.49 to 1.20 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 53% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.

This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 3 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.

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.

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

• Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2026-02-25 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on closed medical record review, interview, review of the emergency medical services (EMS) run report, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide timely, necessary and adequate care and services following an acute change in condition. Resident #45 had a recent hospitalization and a significant cardiac history including cardiac coronary disease, history of a heart attack, atrial fibrillation, and congestive heart failure. The facility failed to ensure changes in the resident's medical condition were adequately assessed, failed to have documented evidence of notification to the physician and that adequate care and services were implemented for Resident #45 when the resident had repeatedly complained of chest pain and tightness. This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy with subsequent death beginning on [DATE] when Resident #45's repeated complaints of chest pain and tightness were not adequately addressed. This affected one (Resident #45) of three residents reviewed for change in condition. 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-02-25 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
  Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on the medical record review, review of the emergency medical services (EMS) run report, facility policy and procedure review and interview, the facility failed to report an allegation of neglect to the State agency. This affected one (Resident #45) of three residents reviewed for change in condition. The facility census was 42.Findings include:Review of the closed medical record revealed Resident #45 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and expired in the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included acute on chronic congestive heart failure, atrial fibrillation, atherosclerotic coronary heart disease, hypertensive heart disease with heart failure, muscle weakness, and ischemic cardiomyopathy. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #45's memory was intact, and he had modified independence for cognitive skills for daily decision making. The assessment indicated the resident required supervision with eating, was dependent on staff for toileting hygiene, and…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-16 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolated
  Protect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY THE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCY REPRESENTS AN INCIDENT OF PAST NON-COMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY. Based on observation, interview, record review, review of facility self-reported incidents (SRI) and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure Resident #4 was free from misappropriation. This affected one resident (#4) of three residents reviewed for abuse, neglect and misappropriation of property. The facility census was 44. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia, recurrent urinary tract infection (UTI), chronic kidney disease, atrial fibrillation and peripheral vascular disease. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #4 was cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance with activities of daily living. Review of a facility self-reported incident (SRI) control number 260103 dated 05/06/25 revealed Resident…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · D2025-01-29 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interview and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to correctly transcribe and record oxygen orders upon admission to ensure oxygen was administered properly. This affected one resident (#43) of three residents reviewed for oxygen. Facility census was 40. Findings include: Review of Resident #43's closed medical record revealed an admission date of [DATE] and diagnoses including right arm humorous fracture, acute on chronic congestive heart failure, hypertensive heart disease with heart failure, hyperlipidemia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, type two diabetes and chronic kidney disease stage four. Resident #43 expired in the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #43's 5-day minimum data set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed he was cognitively intact and was dependent on staff for toileting and transfers. The assessment indicated Resident #43 expired in the facility. Review of Resident #43's hospital paperwork dated [DATE] revealed additional discharge…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2023-09-07 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — widespread
  Keep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review, observation and interview, the facility did not ensure private and confidential handling of resident medical information for Residents #14, #15, #19, #20, #29 and #31. This affected six residents ( #14, #25, #19, #20, #29 and #31) of six residents reviewed for weights and had the potential to affect all residents living in the facility. The facility census was 42. Findings include: Record review of weight documentation and physician orders for weights revealed Residents #14, #15, #19, #20, #29, and #31 each had an order to be weighed at least once a month and each had multiple weights missing from the medical record of weights. Interview on 09/06/23 at 8:50 A.M. with the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed the system in place for recording resident weights consisted of weights obtained by State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #944 who recorded the weights in a paper logbook and those weights were then transposed into the electronic medical record (EMR) by the DON. Interview on 09/06/23 at 2:18 P.M. with STNA #944 revealed he was the staff person who was…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2023-09-07 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — pattern
  Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure adequate and sufficient documentation of residents' weights in the medical record for the monitoring of residents at nutrition risk and identification and assessment of significant weight changes. This affected six residents (#14, #15, #19, #20, #29, and #31) of six reviewed for nutrition. The facility census was 42. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #14 revealed an admission date of 12/04/22. Diagnoses included feeding tube, muscle weakness, hypothyroidism, lupus, dementia, and history of cancer of the uterus. Review of the quarterly minimum data set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had impaired cognition, required supervision with set up help for eating, weight was 124 pounds, with no weight changes, received mechanically altered diet, and received 26%-50% of calories and 501 ml or more per day of fluids from a feeding tube. Review of Resident #14 weight history revealed on 12/04/22…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-09-07 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolated
  Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, staff and resident interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure call lights were within reach and accessible. This affected two residents (#5 and #31) of two residents reviewed for call light placement. The facility census was 42. Findings Include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #5 revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including dementia, dysphagia and difficulty walking. Review of the annual, Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 07/16/23, revealed Resident #5 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10 indicating she was alert and oriented with long-term and short-term cognition impairment. Review of the MDS assessment revealed Resident #5 was a one-person extensive assist for activities of daily living (ADLs). Review of the care plan dated 07/14/23 revealed Resident #5 was at risk for falls and falls with injury due to a history of falls with interventions including call light within reach.…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-09-07 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolated
  Provide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a physician order was written for dialysis treatments, a dialysis contract was in place between the facility and the dialysis center, and also failed to ensure assessments before and after dialysis treatments were completed for Resident #145. This affected one resident (#145) of one resident reviewed for dialysis services. The facility census was 42. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #145 revealed an admission date of [DATE]. Diagnoses included end stage renal disease (ESRD), dependence on renal dialysis, and congestive heart failure. Review of the 48 hour care plan dated [DATE] revealed the resident received dialysis on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturday. Review of the care plan dated [DATE] revealed the resident was on dialysis and received treatments two to three times per week. At risk for infection, diagnosis of ESRD. Resident had a history of choosing not to go to dialysis as scheduled. Review of the [DATE]…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2021-06-21 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — widespread
  Develop 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 staff interview, review of personnel files and the abuse policy and procedure, the facility failed to develop and implement policies and procedures to include screening of all employees against the State of Ohio Nurse Aide Registry to identify if an employee had a finding concerning abuse, neglect, exploitation, mistreatment of residents or misappropriation of resident property This affected nine of nine employees whose personnel files were reviewed for screening against the State of Ohio Nurse Aide Registry (Dietary Aide (DA) #587 , Registered Nurse (RN) #570, Maintenance Director (MD) #505, Activities Assistant (AA) #533 and State Tested Nursing Assistants (STNAs) #507, #526, #536, #540, #567). This had the potential to affect all 43 residents residing in the facility. Findings include: Review of the personnel files for DA #587 , RN #570, MD #505, AA #533 and STNA's #507, #526, #536, #540, #567 revealed no evidence they were screened using the State of Ohio Nurse Aide Registry. The identification of findings would be necessary to determine if any employee had actions…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2021-06-21 · tag F0582 — isolated
  Give 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) letters and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide the correct Quality Improvement Organization (QIO) information to residents who were completing therapy. This affected three (Resident #22, Resident #243 and Resident #244) of three reviewed for liability notices. The facility also failed to provide 48-hour notice of the non coverage to the residents. This affected two (Resident #243 and Resident #244) of three reviewed for liability notices. The census was 43. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #22's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage letter revealed services were ended on 06/10/21. The letter did not provide the correct QIO information if the resident wanted to appeal. 2. Review of Resident #243's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage letter revealed services were ended on 12/15/20. The…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2021-06-21 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolated
  Ensure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
  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, policy review and resident interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #5 was free from unnecessary restraint. This affected one (Resident #5) of two residents reviewed for elopement. The facility census was 43. Findings Include: Resident #5 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia, major depressive disorder and psychotic disorder. Review of the Minimum Data Set 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #5 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating no cognitive impairment and exhibited no physical, verbal or wandering behaviors. Review of the physician orders dated 12/17/19 revealed an order for a wanderguard to right wrist and to check placement every shift. A Wanderguard Bracelet triggers alarms and locks monitored doors to prevent the wearer from leaving an area unattended. Review of the policy entitled Wanderguard System dated 06/12/12 revealed ongoing assessment of the resident shall occur to identify changes in…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Fines & penalties

$40,803 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $40,803 — penalty dated 2026-02-25

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 22 rows in the source record cover these 12 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

3 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.

A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

Cost & finances

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

What families pay in OH