Loveland 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.

51.9% 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 75 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 50.0% 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 28 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 0.39 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 67% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 3% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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 89 beds and averages 74.1 residents a day — about 83% occupied, or roughly 15 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.70 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.35 is below 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 3.44 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.81 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.39 to 0.26 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 56% 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 fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

23 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 12 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2026-05-06 · 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

  THE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCY REPRESENTS AN INCIDENCE OF PAST NON-COMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY. Based on record review, review of outside provider office notes, review of hospital records, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure wound care treatments were implemented for a resident. This resulted in Actual Harm on 08/08/25 when the facility failed to implement the orthopedic surgeon's orders for treatment to Resident #2's left ankle surgical wound. Subsequently, Resident #2 was admitted to the hospital for an infection to the left ankle surgical wound, which was treated with debridement, placement of a wound vac, and intravenous (IV) antibiotics. This affected one (Resident #2) of three residents reviewed for surgical wounds. The facility census was 75 residents. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #2 revealed an admission date of 06/16/25 with diagnoses including open reduction and internal fixation of bimalleolar left ankle fracture, chronic kidney disease, and diastolic congestive heart failure. Resident #2 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-04-17 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to properly label and store food as well as ensure expired products were disposed of. The facility also failed to maintain clean equipment. This had the potential to affect all 73 residents who receive food from the kitchen. The facility census was 73. Findings include: 1. Observations on 04/14/25 from 8:00 A.M. to 8:15 A.M., in the kitchen, revealed a shallow pan with croutons, covered not dated and a pan with rolls covered with plastic wrap not dated. Observation of the ice machine outside of the kitchen had a scoop in an attached container. The container holding the scoop had a yellow sludge on the bottom with stagnant water. The container had no holes for drainage. Interview on 04/15/25 at 8:20 A.M., with Dietary Staff #106 confirmed the undated food and condition of the ice scoop. 2. Observation of the kitchen on 04/16/25 at 8:55 A.M., with the Dietary Director (DD) #18 revealed there were 11 undated chocolate cakes, 1 undated pitcher of iced tea, 2 undated pitchers of lemonade, and 1 stick 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2025-04-17 · 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 review of policy, the facility failed to ensure the garbage cans in the kitchen food preparation area garbage receptacles were covered to prevent cross contamination and pest control. This had the potential to affect all 73 residents who receive food from the kitchen. The facility census was 73 residents. Findings include: Observation on 04/16/25 at 9:05 A.M., revealed the kitchen garbage receptacle by the primary handwashing sink and the garbage receptacle on the opposite side of the dishwashing sink next to a prep-area counter were not covered. Interview on 04/16/25 at 9:06 A.M., with Dietary Director #18 confirmed the garbage receptacles in the kitchen food preparation areas were not covered with lids. Review of the undated policy titled, Garbage Cans stated the facility should cover the garbage cans when not in use.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-11-07 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff treated residents with dignity and respect when providing feeding assistance. This affected one (Resident #20) of four residents sampled for feeding assistance. The facility census was 74. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #20 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included unspecified cerebral infarction, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, schizoaffective disorder-bipolar type, unspecified anxiety disorder, and unspecified protein calorie malnutrition. Review of the most recent minimum data set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #20 had moderately impaired cognition, had verbal behaviors, did not wander, and did not reject care. Resident #20 was impaired on one side and required partial, moderate assistance with eating. Review of the care plan dated 01/21/20 revealed Resident #20 had and activities of daily living (ADL) self-care deficit.…

  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 · D2024-11-07 · 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 observations, interview, medical record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were bathed according to personal preference. This affected one (Resident #10) of five residents sampled for bathing. The facility census was 74. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #10 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included unspecified hepatic failure, unspecified staphylococcus disease, type II diabetes, unspecified protein calorie malnutrition, unspecified depression, acute on chronic diastolic congestive heart failure, unspecified psoriasis, unspecified chronic kidney disease, alcoholic cirrhosis of the liver with ascites, and unspecified homelessness. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was cognitively intact, had no behaviors, did not reject care, and did not wander. Resident #10 required set up assistance with oral hygiene, and substantial/maximum assistance with bathing. Review 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-11-07 · tag F0655 — isolated
  Create 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure resident care plans were comprehensive and reflected all resident care needs. This affected one (Resident #10) of nine residents sampled for care plans. The facility census was 74. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #10 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included unspecified hepatic failure, unspecified staphylococcus disease, type II diabetes, unspecified protein calorie malnutrition, unspecified depression, acute on chronic diastolic congestive heart failure, unspecified psoriasis, unspecified chronic kidney disease, alcoholic cirrhosis of the liver with ascites, and unspecified homelessness. Review of care plan dated 10/16/24 revealed Resident #10 had no care plan for psoriasis or discomfort related to itching. During an interview on 11/06/24 at 9:47 A.M. Resident #10 stated he felt like he needed help with his psoriasis. It was all over his body. The resident stated he had an order…

  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 · D2024-11-07 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolated
  Ensure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were given assistance with or access to daily oral care. This affected one (Resident #10 ) of five residents sampled for activities of daily living (ADL) assistance. The facility census was 74. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #10 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included unspecified hepatic failure, unspecified staphylococcus disease, type II diabetes, unspecified protein calorie malnutrition, unspecified depression, acute on chronic diastolic congestive heart failure, unspecified psoriasis, unspecified chronic kidney disease, alcoholic cirrhosis of the liver with ascites, and unspecified homelessness. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was cognitively intact, had no behaviors, did not reject care, and did not wander. Resident #10 required set up assistance with oral hygiene, and substantial/maximum 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-11-07 · 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 observations, interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents assessed for fall risk had fall preventions interventions in place according to the care plan. This affected one (Resident #62) of six residents sampled for falls. The facility census was 74. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #62 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included unspecified anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, and unspecified malignant neoplasm. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had moderately impaired cognition, had no behaviors, did not reject care, and did not wander. Review of the care plan dated 10/22/21 revealed Resident #62 had potential for injuries related to falls. Interventions included anti-rollbacks to wheelchair, assist in positioning for comfort as needed, Dycem to wheelchair when in use, encourage non-skid footwear, instruct on use 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-07 · 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, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff sanitized hands when providing feeding assistance to multiple residents. This affected two Residents #65 and #72 of four residents sampled for feeding assistance. The facility census was 74. Findings include: 1. Review of most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #72 was cognitively intact, had no behaviors, did not wander, and did not reject care. Resident #72 required set-up assistance for eating. Review of care plan dated 04/30/22 revealed Resident #72 had an activities of daily living (ADL) self-care deficit. Interventions included supervision assistance with eating with set up help only in the Geri-chair. If the resident was eating in bed, then staff must assist. 2. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #65 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included unspecified Alzheimer's disease, unspecified protein calorie malnutrition, and major depressive disorder. Review…

  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
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-26 · 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, medical record review, staff interview and policy review the facility failed to ensure enhance barrier precautions (EBP) were initiated for incontinence and wound care for a resident who had an open wound. This affected one (#13) of three residents reviewed for incontinence care and wound care. The census was 74. Findings included: Medical record review for Resident #13 revealed an admission date of 06/09/22. Medical diagnoses included progressive neurological disorder, dementia, and Alzheimer's. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #13 was severely cognitively impaired. Functional status was supervision or touching for eating, dependent for toileting, bed mobility, and transfers. She was always incontinent for bladder and had a colostomy. Review of the progress notes dated 08/10/24 revealed a reoccurring open area to the coccyx identified as a stage two was discovered and a treatment was put into place. Review of the physician orders from 08/10/24…

  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
• Potential for harm · D2024-08-26 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — isolated
  Make 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 record review, observation, staff interview and policy review the facility failed to ensure a homelike environment was provided for the residents. This affected three (#13, #32 and #75) of three residents reviewed for environment. The facility also failed to ensure a room was cleaned on a regular basis. This affected one (#75) of one reviewed for cleansing of the room. The census was 74. Findings included: Observation of Resident #13's room on 08/20/24 at 9:18 A.M. revealed cobwebs in the window sills and thick black substance, scuff marks on the walls, and holes where pictures used to hang, and holes with nails sticking out of the wall. The bathroom floor was sticky, and room walls have black marks on them. The curtains in the room on the windows were dusty and wrinkled. On the inside bathroom door there is a substance that ran down the door that had dried. Observation of Resident #32's room on 08/20/24 at 9:50 A.M. revealed throughout the room there were holes in the walls with nails sticking out 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.

  Environmental 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.

Who owns this facility

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

This home reported $1.6M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 17% 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. 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