Saint Joseph Care Center

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

64.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 111 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 48.3% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 29 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 0.51 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 82% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 21% 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 60 beds and averages 55.6 residents a day — about 93% occupied, or roughly 4 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.33 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.49 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.16 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 2.91 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.50 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.61 to 0.20 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 54% 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 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.

29 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 17 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · Gcited before2026-01-05 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, medical record review, staff and representative interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive and individualized pressure ulcer prevention program to ensure monitoring and assessments were completed timely and appropriately for pressure ulcers and wound care was completed as ordered. This affected two residents (#5 and #61) of three reviewed for pressure wounds. The facility census was 57. Actual Harm occurred beginning on 11/04/25 to Resident #5, who was cognitively impaired, at risk for pressure ulcer development and required staff assistance for activities of daily living care, when the resident was identified to have moisture associated skin damage (MASD) to the coccyx that went unassessed and unmonitored resulting in a decline of the wound. On 12/29/25 the skin impairment was assessed by Wound Nurse Practitioner (NP) #201 to be a Stage III (a wound characterized by full-thickness tissue loss. Subcutaneous fat may be visible, but…

  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
• Actual harm · G2025-04-21 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on closed record review, review of a facility fall investigation, interviews and review of the facility policies, the facility failed to ensure adequate, individualized and effective fall risk interventions were in place to prevent a fall with injury for Resident #60, a resident at risk for falls. This affected one resident (#60) of three residents reviewed for falls. The facility census was 51. Actual Harm occurred on 03/10/25 when Resident #60 sustained an unwitnessed fall out of bed resulting in a fractured left arm, a laceration to the right side of her forehead, and a bruise to her right cheek. Prior to the incident, the resident had been having behaviors which staff identified as terminal agitation. The facility failed to ensure adequate, individualized and effective fall risk interventions were in place prior to the fall with injury to meet the resident's total care and safety needs. Findings include: Review of the closed medical record for Resident #60 revealed an admission date of 11/25/20 and 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2026-01-05 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespread
  Have a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
  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 CASPER Report 1705D (Staffing Report) for quarter three of fiscal year 2025 ([DATE]- [DATE]), review of facility nursing schedules, facility daily staffing report postings, and interview with staff, the facility failed to ensure eight consecutive hours of registered nursing coverage per day. This had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 57. Findings include:Review on [DATE] of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) CASPER Report 1705D for quarter three of fiscal year 2025 ([DATE]- [DATE]) revealed no Registered Nurse (RN) coverage for more than eight consecutive hours on [DATE], [DATE], [DATE], [DATE], [DATE], and [DATE].Review on [DATE] of the facility daily nursing schedules revealed no RN assigned/scheduled or present working on [DATE], [DATE], [DATE], [DATE], [DATE], and [DATE]. Further review revealed all the infraction dates were on a Saturday or Sunday.Review on [DATE] of the facility's required daily staffing report postings…

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

  Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2026-01-05 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespread
  Dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to maintain a clean and sanitary dumpster area. This had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 57.Findings include:Observation on 12/29/25 at 8:26 A.M. with Dietary Manager (DM) #74 revealed significant unbagged debris mostly consisting of used gloves surrounding the dumpster. There were also various furniture items and housewares piled up along the fence surrounding the dumpster. Interview on 12/29/25 at 8:28 A.M. with Dietary Manager #74 confirmed the area was not kept clean and free of debris. Review of the facility policy Waste Disposal (undated) revealed trash bags would be sealed prior to removing them from the facility. Trash would be deposited into a sealed container outside the premises.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-01-05 · tag F0800 — pattern
  Provide each resident with a nourishing, palatable, well-balanced diet that meets his or her daily nutritional and special dietary needs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents receiving puree diet were served the appropriate portion size and complete menu items. This affected five residents (#5, #6, #8, #9, and #11) of five identified as receiving a puree diets. The facility census was 57. Findings include:Observation on 12/30/25 at 11:00 A.M. with [NAME] #70 revealed the puree ham, green beans, and potato casserole (main menu) were served with a number 10 scoop with an ivory handle (approximately three to four ounces) and the puree Sheppard's pie (alternate menu) was served with a number 10 scoop with an ivory handle. [NAME] #70 confirmed her scoop sizes for the lunch service. Observation on 12/30/25 from 11:13 A.M. to 12:05 P.M. revealed there was no puree bread served to Residents #5, #6, #8, #9, and #11. Interview on 12/30/25 at 12:06 P.M. with [NAME] #70 confirmed she had not served puree bread and there was not puree bread available on the steamtable to serve. Review of the facility menu revealed lunch on 12/30/25 was ham, green beans, 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-05 · 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

  Based on review of medical records, review of facility policies, self-reported incident review, and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to investigate and self-report an alleged incident of verbal abuse. This affected one (#3) of one residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 57.Findings include:Review of the medical record of Resident #3 revealed admission to facility on 09/18/20 with diagnoses of Parkinson's disease (progressive disease affecting balance and fine motor skills), depression, atrial fibrillation (irregular heart rate), anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, high blood pressure, and chronic constipation.Review of Resident #3's most recent quarterly minimum data set (MDS) assessment completed on 09/25/25 revealed a brief interview for mental status score of 7 out of 15 indicating moderate cognitive impairment and a depression score of 12 indicating moderate depression. No hallucinations or delusional behaviors noted. Resident #3 required substantial assistance with bathing, transferring, and mobility. Further review revealed Resident #3…

  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 · D2026-01-05 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
  Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on review of medical records, facility policy review, self-reported incident review, and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to investigate an alleged incident of staff to resident verbal abuse. This affected one (#3) of one resident reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 57.Findings Include: Review of the medical record of Resident #3 revealed admission to facility on 09/18/20 with diagnoses of Parkinson's disease (progressive disease affecting balance and fine motor skills), depression, atrial fibrillation (irregular heart rate), anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, high blood pressure, and chronic constipation. Review of Resident #3's most recent quarterly minimum data set (MDS) assessment completed on 09/25/25 revealed a brief interview for mental status score of 7 out of 15 indicating moderate cognitive impairment and a depression score of 12 indicating moderate depression. No hallucinations or delusional behaviors noted. Resident #3 required substantial assistance with bathing, transferring, and mobility. Further review revealed Resident #3…

  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 · D2026-01-05 · tag F0641 — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
  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, and interview, the facility failed to ensure comprehensive assessments were complete and accurate. This affected four (#4, #5, #22, and #43) of 22 residents reviewed for accurate comprehensive assessments. Findings include:1. Review of Resident #43's medical record revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including depression, Alzheimer's disease and repeated falls. Review of Resident #43's physician orders revealed an order dated 11/26/25 for cefdinir oral capsule 300 milligrams (mg) give one capsule by mouth two times a day for an urinary tract infection (UTI). Review of Resident #43's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] (with a seven-day look back from 11/27/25 to 12/03/25) revealed the resident exhibited moderate cognitive impairment, was on an hypnotic and not on an antibiotic. Review of Resident #43's medication administration records (MARs) and treatment administration records (TARs) revealed the last…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-01-05 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
  Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews the facility failed to ensure residents had accurate care plans. This affected two residents (#10 and #45) of 22 residents reviewed for accurate care planning.Findings include:1. Review of Resident #45's medical record revealed the resident was initially admitted on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including muscle weakness, history of falling, and acquired absence of the right leg below the knee.Review of Resident #45's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident exhibited intact cognition.Review of Resident #45's fall care plans revealed an intervention dated 11/10/25 for dycem to the recliner for safety. The care plans did not reflect the dycem to the wheelchair.Review of Resident #45's physician orders revealed an order dated 11/10/25 for dycem to the wheelchair; and an order dated 12/24/25 for dycem to the recliner. No directions were specified for the order.Interview on 12/29/25 at 4:15 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-05 · 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 observation, record review, and interviews the facility failed to ensure a resident had interventions in place for monitoring of congestive heart failure. This affected one resident (#17) of one resident reviewed for congestive heart failure (CHF). Findings include: Review of Resident #17's medical record revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including chronic pulmonary edema and chronic CHF.Review of Resident #17's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had debility and cardiorespiratory conditions that included chronic pulmonary edema and heart failure.Review of Resident #17's care plan for nutrition/hydration related to CHF and pulmonary edema revealed an intervention dated 12/15/25 for daily weights as ordered for CHF monitoring. Review of Resident #17's physician orders revealed an order dated 12/13/25 for daily weights due to CHF.Review of Resident #17's weights from 12/13/25 to 12/30/25 revealed Resident #17 was missing daily…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-01-05 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
  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, and interview, the facility failed to honor resident food preferences. This affected two residents (#17 and #43) of three residents reviewed for nutrition. Findings include:1. Review of Resident #17's medical record revealed the resident was initially admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including chronic pulmonary edema, congestive heart failure, and muscle weakness. Review of Resident #17's admission MDS 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident exhibited intact cognition. Review of Resident #17's nutrition care plan revealed an intervention dated 12/11/25 to provide substitutions for any food/fluid dislikes. Review of Resident #17's physician orders revealed an order dated 12/15/25 for four ounces of a nutritional supplement twice a day for decreased meal intake. Observation on 12/30/25 at 7:52 A.M. of Resident #17 revealed she received breakfast. She received milk, juice, orange juice, and water on tray with eggs and toast. A Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) brought…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-05 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure appropriate enhanced barrier precaution signage was in place and appropriate isolation gowns were used when completing wound care. This affected two (#5 and #61) of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcer wounds.Findings include:1. Review of the medical record for Resident #5 revealed an admission date of 11/06/15 and diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, diabetes mellitus, idiopathic progressive neuropathy, venous insufficiency, obesity due to excess calories, generalized muscle weakness, oropharyngeal phase dysphagia, and anxiety disorder. Review of the Medicare Minimum Data Set (MDS) quarterly assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #5 had Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 01 indicating severe cognitive impairment. Review of the physician's order dated 12/23/25 revealed order to cleanse open area to coccyx with normal saline (NS), pat dry, apply calcium alginate and cover with foam dressing daily and PRN.…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.

• Medicare payment denial — starting 2026-01-27 for 11 days

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 7 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

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