Presidential Post-Acute

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.

55.5% 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 166 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 53.3% 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 75 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 0.44 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 75% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 15% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 99 beds and averages 91.9 residents a day — about 93% occupied, or roughly 7 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.01 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.61 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.91 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 2.65 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.16 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.75 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 49% 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.

17 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2026-03-23 · 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 Number of residents sampled: Number of residents cited: Based on medical record review, observations, staff interviews, review of the mechanical lift manufacturer's instructions, review of the Hoyer sling owner's manual, review of the facility's investigation including witness statements, review of the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) report, review of hospital documentation, review of the death certificate, and review of the facility policies, the facility failed to ensure Resident #96 was transferred safely with a mechanical lift. This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy when Resident #96 suffered serious life-threatening injuries on [DATE] when Resident #96 was transferred using a mechanical lift and the top two straps supporting Resident #96's upper body simultaneously broke. Resident #96 fell approximately five feet from the mechanical lift sling and landed on the back of her head and neck area resulting in a fracture of the second cervical spine (C2), an epidural hematoma, age indeterminate fractures of the…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Actual harm · Gcited before2025-10-20 · 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 review of a self-reported incident (SRI), record review, facility investigation, policy review, and resident and staff interviews, and radiologist interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident #7 received proper assistance during transfers to prevent accidents. Actual Harm occurred on 07/11/25 when Resident #7 sustained a left rib fracture following an improper transfer by facility staff. This affected one (#7) of six residents reviewed for accidents. The facility census was 91.Findings include: Review of Resident #7's medical record revealed an admission date of 04/08/25. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, weakness, spinal stenosis of the lumbar region with neurogenic claudication, and adult failure to thrive. Review of Resident #7's care plan dated 04/08/25 revealed Resident #7 was at risk for falls related to functional decline, weakness, and bedbound status. Interventions included to assist with two staff members for transfers (implemented 04/09/25), and assistance 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-03-23 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — pattern
  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 the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a homelike environment. This affected four (#53, #4, #8, and #90) residents reviewed for physical environment and had the potential to affect all residents. The facility census was 89.Observation on 03/09/26 at 9:37 A.M. of Resident #53's bedroom revealed behind the bed a large, discolored area behind the bed frame with chipped paint. Further observation of Resident #4's bedroom revealed a wall with pealing wallpaper and chipped paint. Additional observation of Resident #8's bedroom revealed a large area on the wall with dry wall chipped and missing paint. Additional observation of Resident #90's bedroom revealed two holes in the wall behind the bed with visible paint chipping.Observation on 03/09/26 at 10:00 A.M. revealed throughout the facility there were areas in the hallways with chipped paint.Interview on 03/12/26 at 9:07 A.M. with the Maintenance Director (MD) #163 revealed currently the facility was not fixing issues in the resident rooms. MD #163 confirmed that Resident…

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

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-03-23 · 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, and medical record review, the facility failed to ensure Resident #49's dignity was maintained when her exposed body could be observed from the hallway during colostomy care. This affected one resident (#49) of one resident reviewed for dignity. The facility census was 89.Findings include:Review of Resident #49's medical record revealed an admission date of 10/13/25 with diagnoses including encounter for attention to colostomy, dysphagia, hypertension, anxiety disorder, spinal stenosis, depression, diaphragmatic and umbilical hernia, and overactive bladder. Review of Resident #49's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed she had intact cognition. Review of Resident #49's plan of care dated 11/20/25 revealed the resident had a colostomy and was at risk for complications related to skin integrity. Interventions included maintaining privacy while providing care.Observation on 03/09/26 at 9:36 A.M. revealed Resident #49 could be observed from the…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-03-23 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
  Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, review of the witnessed fall investigation, and policy review, the facility failed to report an incident of potential neglect to the state agency. This affected one resident (#96) of three residents reviewed for Self-Reported Incidents (SRI). The facility census was 89. Findings include:Review of Resident #96's medical record revealed an initial admission date of 10/15/21 and a re-entry date of 12/24/22. Diagnoses included hypertensive heart disease without heart failure, unspecified dementia, muscle weakness, unspecified protein calorie malnutrition, unspecified osteoarthritis, and stiffness of the right and left knees. Review of Resident #96's annual MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #96 had severely impaired cognition with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of two. Furthermore, Resident #96 was dependent for bed to chair and chair to bed transfers, toileting hygiene, shower and bathing, and personal hygiene. Review of Resident #96'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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-03-23 · 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

  Based on resident record review, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure care plans were person-centered and reflected the residents' current status. This affected three residents (#01, #23, and #49) of 25 residents reviewed for care planning. The facility census was 89.Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #01 revealed a re-admission date of 02/09/26 and diagnosis of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Review of Resident #01's care plan dated 02/06/26 revealed a focus for trauma informed care identifying the resident as being at risk for decreased psychosocial well-being, adjustment issues, emotional distress and ineffective coping skills, poor impulse control, adverse effects on function, mental, physical, social, or spiritual wellbeing related to PTSD. Review of the interventions and goals associated with the focus revealed no mention of Resident #01's history related to the PTSD diagnosis nor any triggers the resident has. Interview on 03/11/26 at 1:55 P.M. with the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed residents with a PTSD diagnosis…

  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 · D2026-03-23 · tag F0685 — isolated
  Assist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and medical record review, the facility failed to ensure vision and hearing services were arranged for Resident #49. This affected one resident (#49) of one resident reviewed for communication and sensory. The facility census was 89.Findings include:Review of Resident #49 revealed an admission date of 10/13/25 with diagnoses including encounter for attention to colostomy, dysphagia, hypertension, anxiety disorder, spinal stenosis, depression, diaphragmatic and umbilical hernia, and overactive bladder. Review of Resident #49's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed she had intact cognition. Review of Resident #49's medical record revealed no evidence she had been asked to sign a consent for ancillary services or had seen an audiologist or optometrist. Interview on 03/09/26 at 10:43 A.M. with Resident #49 revealed she wanted to see the audiologist about hearing aids. Additionally, she reported in the past she had surgery to her right eye and it was causing problems…

  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 · D2026-03-23 · tag F0691 — failed to provide colostomy / ostomy care — isolated
  Provide appropriate colostomy, urostomy, or ileostomy care/services for a resident who requires such services.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide colostomy care as ordered for Resident #49. This affected one resident (#49) of one resident reviewed for constipation and diarrhea. The facility census was 89.Findings include: Review of Resident #49's medical record revealed an admission date of 10/13/25 with diagnoses including encounter for attention to colostomy, dysphagia, hypertension, anxiety disorder, spinal stenosis, depression, diaphragmatic and umbilical hernia, and overactive bladder. Review of Resident #49's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed she had intact cognition. Review of Resident #49's plan of care dated 11/20/25 revealed the resident had a colostomy and was at risk for complications related to skin integrity. Interventions included keeping the ostomy site covered, encouraging the resident to express feelings and concerns, keeping the pouch emptied routinely, maintaining privacy while providing care, observing for signs and symptoms 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 · D2026-03-23 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
  Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review, observation, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure medications were not inappropriately crushed per physician order. This affected one (#110) resident of five residents observed for medication administration. The facility census was 89.Findings include:Review of medical record for Resident #110 revealed an admission date of 03/09/26 with diagnoses including but not limited to acute embolism and thrombosis of left axillary vein, dementia, atrial fibrillation, and hypertensive heart disease with heart failure. Review of physician orders revealed metoprolol succinate extended release (ER) 25 milligram (mg) (atrial fibrillation) give one tablet by mouth one time a day (may split- do not crush). Observation on 03/10/26 at 8:40 A.M. of medication pass revealed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN #132) placed the medications for Resident #110 into a med cup and then into a crush pouch and crushed the medications. Medications included amiodarone 200 mg, escitalopram 10 mg, metoprolol succinate ER 25 mg, pantoprazole 40 mg, furosemide 20 mg, 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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-03-23 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolated
  Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
  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 facility policy review, the facility failed to follow physician orders regarding insulin administration. This affected one resident (Resident #23) reviewed for insulin. The facility census was 89. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #23 revealed a re-admission date of 03/03/26 and diagnosis of type two diabetes. Review of Resident #23's entry Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating the resident was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #23's orders on 03/09/26 revealed an order for Insulin Lispro Injection Solution 100 Unit/Milliliters (ML) beginning 03/03/26, to inject 23 units subcutaneously before meals for diabetes. Further review of the order revealed direction to hold the insulin if the blood sugar (BS) is less than 150. Review of Resident #23's Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed insulin was given 03/05/26 at 11:30 A.M. for a BS of 107, given 03/06/26 at 6:30…

  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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-03-23 · tag F0847 — isolated
  Inform resident or representatives choice to enter into binding arbitration agreement and right to refuse.
  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, resident interviews, staff interviews, and policy review the facility failed to ensure residents understood arbitration agreements prior to signing them. This affected four (#7, #55, #62, and #68) of six residents reviewed for arbitration agreements. The facility census was 89.Findings include:1.Review of medical record for Resident #55 revealed an admission date of 01/22/26 with diagnoses including but not limited to dementia.Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of three, which indicated severe cognitive impairment.Review of Arbitration Agreement revealed the agreement was signed by the resident on 01/23/26.Interview on 03/11/26 at 1:57 P.M. with Resident #55 revealed the resident did not know what an arbitration agreement was. Resident #55 could not remember if she ate lunch today or what was for lunch. Resident #55 could not answer questions.2.Review of medical record for Resident #68 revealed an…

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

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-10-20 · 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, medical record review, review of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance, and facility policy review, the facility failed to implement enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) as physician ordered during wound care for Resident #67. This affected one (#67) of three residents reviewed for wounds. The facility identified 13 residents who had EBP in place. The facility census was 91. Findings include:Review of Resident #67's medical record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included congestive heart failure, chronic kidney disease, diabetes mellitus, and morbid obesity. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #67 had impaired cognition and required assistance from staff with transfers, bed mobility, and bathing. Review of Resident #67's care plan dated 05/07/24 revealed a care plan focus of EBP. Resident #67 required EBP during high-contact resident care activities due to the presence of wounds.…

  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

$71,295 in federal fines across 1 penalty. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.

• $71,295 — penalty dated 2026-03-23
• Medicare payment denial — starting 2026-04-16 for 36 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.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to PACS GROUP — 274 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

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.

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.

This home reported $328K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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