Marion Nursing & Rehab

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.

Therapy staffing: not reported. This home filed no therapist hours at all in its payroll data for this quarter. That is a gap in what it reported, and we do not read it as an absence of therapy — the homes that file nothing here include ones that discharged hundreds of Medicare rehab patients in the very same period, who plainly received therapy from someone. Because we cannot tell a home that under-reports from one that genuinely provides little, this home is left out of the comparison above rather than scored at zero. Ask it directly how many therapist hours a rehab resident gets, and on which days.

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 99 beds and averages 70.6 residents a day — about 71% occupied, or roughly 28 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 3.47 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.54 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.22 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 3.13 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.61 on weekdays — 13% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.65 to 0.28 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 39% 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.

27 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 16 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · Lcited before2023-12-18 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on Nursing Home Guidance from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), medical record review, observation, interview with residents, interview with facility staff, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to appropriately implement the isolation procedures and use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) to prevent the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus (COVID-19) among facility residents. This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy and the potential for serious life-threatening harm, negative health outcomes, and/or death when the facility staff failed to require 13 residents (#19, #21, #42, #46, #47, #51, #55, #56, #59, #61, #62, #64, and #65) who were positive for COVID-19 to remain in isolation from the onset of the outbreak on 11/25/23. As of 12/12/23, 20 residents were identified as COVID-19 positive (Residents #02, #03, #05, #06, #07, #10, #19, #21, #31, #43, #45, #46, #47, #50, #51, #57, #58, #60, #61, and #62). These 20 residents are located throughout the facility since the facility does not have a dedicated COVID-19 unit. The facility also allowed six residents (#01, #04,…

  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 · D2026-05-14 · tag F0628 — isolated
  Provide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure the bed hold included pricing information and also failed to provide a reason for transfer/discharge notices to the resident/representative and the Ombudsman. This affected three Residents (#77, #78, and #79) of three reviewed for discharge planning.Findings include:1. Review of the medical record for Resident #77 revealed an admission date of 03/22/26. Diagnoses included toxic effect of metals, diabetes, acute kidney failure, and muscle weakness. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #77 was cognitively impaired and required staff assistance for activities of daily living. Review progress notes dated 03/17/26 revealed the resident was being transferred by staff and had seizure like activity. He was lowered to the ground and labs were obtained and identified a lithium toxicity level. The physician ordered intravenous (IV) fluids to be started and to recheck labs in six…

  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 · E2026-02-23 · tag F0641 — pattern
  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, review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Resident Assessment Instrument, review of facility policy, and interview, the facility failed to ensure all resident assessments were accurate and coded correctly in the MDS database. This affected six residents (#3, #21, #28, #44, #53, and #62) out of 24 residents reviewed for MDS assessments. The census was 67.Findings include:1.Record review for Resident #3 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses for Resident #3 included congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, obesity, depression, diabetes type two, and anxiety. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) quarterly assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had intact cognition, required two staff assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) and was receiving supplemental oxygen therapy, but was not coded for any type of mechanical ventilation. Review of the MDS quarterly assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was coded…

  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 · D2026-02-23 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review, interview, and review of facility policies, the facility failed to ensure a residents advanced directives status were addressed timely and accurate in the medical record. This affected one (Resident #59) out of 27 residents reviewed for advanced directives. The facility census was 67.Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #59 revealed an admission date of 08/22/25 with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, emphysema, encephalopathy, malignant neoplasm, fibromyalgia and dementia.Review of Resident #59's physician orders dated 08/22/25 through 02/10/26 showed a Full Code status.Review of Resident #59's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment completed on 11/12/25 showed the resident was cognitively intact.Review of Resident #59's care conference notes dated 12/04/25 showed the resident requested to change her code status from Full Code to Do Not Resuscitate Comfort Care (DNRCC).Review of Resident #59's signed DNRCC form dated 02/03/26 showed the resident elected DNRCC Arrest (A) which directs providers to treat…

  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 · D2026-02-23 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's splint noncompliance was recorded in their care plan. This affected one (Resident #57) out of 17 residents records reviewed for comprehensive care plans. The facility census was 67. Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #57 revealed an admission date of 02/08/19 with diagnoses of cerebral infarction, muscle weakness, cognitive communication deficit, reduced mobility, contracture of the right hand, hemiparesis and hemiplegia following cerebral infarction.Review of the care plan dated 11/14/25 revealed the resident had a need for a splint or brace program and was dependent on staff for application and removal. Interventions included assessing for pain, assessing for progress and need, explaining the procedure before performing it and applying a soft splint to the right hand to be worn daily as tolerated. The care plan noted no documentation regarding the residents refusal of the splint…

  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 · D2026-02-23 · 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 observation, record review, review of hospital notes, review of facility timeline, interview, and review of facility policies and procedures, the facility failed to follow interventions to prevent a fall. This affected one resident (#3) out of three residents reviewed for falls. The facility also failed to ensure the safety and security of Resident #75 who was admitted to the memory care unit and was an elopement risk. This affected one resident (#75) of three reviewed for elopement. The facility census was 67.Findings include: 1. Record review for Resident #3 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses for Resident #3 included congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, obesity, depression, diabetes type two, and anxiety. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had intact cognition, required two person assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) and was a fall risk. Review of Resident #3's care…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-23 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
  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 interview, record review, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure weight measurements were verified after a significant weight change. This affected one (Resident #22) out of four residents reviewed for weight loss. The facility census was 67. Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #22 revealed an admission date of 10/06/23 with diagnoses including acute and chronic respiratory failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), morbid obesity, hypertensive heart disease with heart failure, acute pulmonary edema, peripheral vascular disease and shortness of breath.Review of the care plan dated 12/17/24 revealed the resident was at risk for altered nutritional and hydration status with interventions to administer medications as ordered, monitor for malnutrition, obtain laboratory (lab) and diagnostic work as ordered, provide prescribed diet and have the dietitian evaluate and make recommendations.Review of the annual Minimum Data Set 3.0 assessment completed…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-02-23 · 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

  Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure supplemental oxygen was administered per physician order. This affected one (Resident #22) out of five residents identified as receiving oxygen administration. The facility census was 67.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #22 revealed an admission date of 10/06/23 with diagnoses including acute and chronic respiratory failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), morbid obesity, hypertensive heart disease with heart failure, acute pulmonary edema, peripheral vascular disease and shortness of breath. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set 3.0 assessment completed 12/18/25 revealed the resident was cognitively intact and was receiving oxygen therapy. Review of the physician order dated 12/31/25 revealed the resident was ordered oxygen at 3 liters per minute by nasal cannula continuous inhalation. Review of care plan dated 02/03/26 revealed the resident had oxygen therapy related to COPD. Interventions included to give medications as ordered 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-02-23 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolated
  Provide timely, quality laboratory services/tests to meet the needs of residents.
  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 execute timely laboratory orders. This affected one resident (Resident #48) of two residents reviewed for laboratory services. The facility census was 67.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #48 revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] and had diagnoses including Huntington's disease, overactive bladder, and spinal stenosis of the lumbar region.Review of Resident #48's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment submitted 01/22/26 revealed the resident had severe cognitive impairment.Review of Resident #48's progress notes written by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #239 on 12/19/25 at 6:04 P.M. stated that Resident #48 was engaging in unusual behaviors. Examples included cleaning walls with tissue paper and attempting to put lotion on a sandwich. The progress note stated LPN #239 contacted Certified Nurse Practitioner (CNP) #616 and orders were received to check for a urinary tract infection (UTI).Review of Resident #48's…

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

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-04-21 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — widespread
  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

  Based on observation, staff interview, and review of a job description, the facility failed to ensure the doorbell to the front entrance of the facility was functional. This had the potential to affect all 77 residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 77. Findings include: Observation on 04/21/25 at 8:32 A.M. revealed the doorbell to the front door of the facility was missing a cover plate. The button on the doorbell was pushed twice and the doorbell would not ring and made no sound. There was no sign posted with the facility telephone number to obtain assistance to enter the building. Interview on 04/21/25 at 8:52 A.M., the Administrator revealed on 04/16/25 a nurse notified her the facility telephones and internet were not working and were out for a few hours until fixed. The Administrator revealed she was unaware if the doorbell to the facility was functioning. The Administrator revealed she had been at the facility for about six months and never checked to see if the doorbell was functioning. Observation and interview on 04/21/25 at 9:02 A.M. with the…

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

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-04-21 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — pattern
  Make sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
  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, resident and staff interview, review of a job description, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the call light system was functioning for all residents and timely repairs were made to the system. This affected 23 of 77 facility residents including nine (#1, #11, #16, #28, #40, #50, #55, #62, and #71) residents with no functioning call light and an additional 14 (#18, #22, #26, #34, #37, #47, #53, #56, #58, #60, #63, #70, #75, and #76) residents with intermittent functioning call lights. The facility census was 77. Findings include: Interview on 04/21/25 at 8:52 A.M., with the Administrator revealed there were a few rooms on the north end of the facility where the call lights were not working and would have to check how long they had not been working. The Administrator revealed the residents were given hand bells and revealed she had gotten a couple of quotes for repair and replacement of the call light system. The Administrator revealed the staff had increased the frequency 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

$40,053 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $40,053 — penalty dated 2023-12-18

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

The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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