Mason Health 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.

45.6% 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 43 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 44.0% 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 25 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 0.45 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 76% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 6% 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 53 beds and averages 39.4 residents a day — about 74% occupied, or roughly 14 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 3.95 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.70 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.23 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 3.42 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.17 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.82 to 0.39 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 62% is well above 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.

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

16 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 6 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · F2025-05-12 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — widespread
  Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
  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 medications in the medication cart were labeled and stored in proper containers. This affected all of the residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 38 residents. Findings include: Observation on 05/12/25 at 9:00 A.M of the nurse two medication cart on the skilled care hallway revealed there were 19 loose pills of various shapes and colors in the bottom of the medication cart. Interview on 05/12/25 at 9:00 A.M. with Registered Nurse (RN) #221 confirmed there were 19 loose pills of various shapes and colors in the bottom of the nurse two medication cart on the skilled care hallway. RN #221 confirmed she was not able to identify the 19 pills nor to whom the 19 pills were prescribed. Observation on 05/12/25 at 9:26 A.M of the nurse two medication cart on the long-term care hallway revealed there were 92 loose pills of various shapes and colors in the bottom of the medication cart. Interview on 05/12/25 at 9:26 A.M with RN #221 confirmed there were 92 loose pills 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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-05-12 · tag F0640 — isolated
  Encode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of 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 medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were completed and transmitted within 14 days. This affected two (Residents #401 and #402) of six residents reviewed for assessments. The facility census was 38 residents. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #401 revealed an admission date of 03/29/25 with diagnoses including cellulitis of the left finger, asthma, and type two diabetes mellitus and a discharged from the facility on 04/21/25. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #401 dated 04/04/25 revealed the resident was cognitively intact and required staff assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs.) Review of the discharge return anticipated (DRA) MDS assessment for Resident #401 dated 04/19/25 revealed the MDS was in progress and had not been transmitted. Review of the progress note for Resident #401 dated 04/19/25 timed at 11:42 A.M. revealed the resident's representative…

  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 · F2023-06-01 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record reviews, staff interviews, observations and policy reviews, the facility failed to ensure infection control logs were completed for tracking trends and patterns, complete tuberculous testing for newly hired employees, develop and follow a Legionella water management policy, and ensure hand sanitation was followed during resident care. This had the potential to affect all 31 residents. The facility census was 31. Findings include: 1. Review of the Infection Control Logs dated January, February, and April 2023 revealed the logs lacked tracking of the disease organism isolation type identification, and culture dates. For months January, March and April 2023, there was no organism mapping of the organism location in the facility. March 2023 logs revealed there were no date of infections, signs and symptoms appeared, date of culture, or isolation type. Review of the Infection Control Logs revealed no entries of infections for May 2023. Interview on 06/01/23 at 1:20 P.M., with the Director of Nursing…

  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 · F2023-06-01 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — widespread
  Implement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record reviews, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to monitor antibiotic use appropriately as part of an antibiotic stewardship plan. This had the potential to affect all 31 residents. The facility census was 31. Findings include: Review of documents dated January, February, March, April, and May 2023, provided by the Director of Nursing, (DON), revealed there was no documentation and analysis of appropriate indications for the use of antibiotics. Interview on 06/01/23 at 1:20 P.M., the Director of Nursing, (DON) stated the facility uses the McGeer monitoring criteria for the antibiotic stewardship program. The DON had no evidence of how the facility was monitoring antibiotic medications using the McGeer criteria. The DON verified there was no documentation of an antibiotic stewardship program. Review of the undated policy titled, Antibiotic Stewardship -Orders for Antibiotics, revealed antibiotics will be prescribed and administered to residents under the guidance of facility's antibiotic stewardship program, including appropriate indications for use.…

  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 · E2023-06-01 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — pattern
  Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, resident interview, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure care conferences were held on a regular basis. This affected four (#01, #07, #12, and #23) of five residents reviewed for care conferences. The facility census was 31. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record of Resident #01 revealed an admission [DATE]. Diagnoses included cerebral palsy, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, dementia without behavioral disturbance, anxiety, and depression. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed the resident had intact cognition. The resident required supervision for all activities of daily living (ADLs). Interview on 05/30/23 at 11:52 A.M., with Resident #01 stated she could not recall having any recent care conferences. Review of the medical record revealed the most recent care conference was held 07/19/22. Interview on 06/01/23 at 1:24 P.M., with Social Service (SS) #280 verified Resident #01's last 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-06-01 · tag F0623 — isolated
  Provide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal 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 medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the Ombudsman was notified of hospital transfers. This impacted one (#25) of one resident reviewed for hospitalization. The facility census was 31. Findings include: Review of the medical record of Resident #25 revealed an admission date of 02/23/23. The resident transferred to the hospital on [DATE], readmitted on [DATE], transferred to the hospital on [DATE], readmitted [DATE], transferred to the hospital on [DATE], readmitted [DATE], and transferred to the hospital on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE]. Diagnoses included cerebral infarction, tracheostomy status, gastrostomy status, chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, contractures of left hand, right elbow, right hand, dysphagia, acute kidney failure, severe sepsis with septic shock, pneumonia, essential hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and unspecified disorder of thyroid. Review of the medical record revealed no evidence of the Ombudsman being notified of Resident #25'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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-06-01 · tag F0624 — isolated
  Prepare residents for a safe transfer or discharge from the nursing home.
  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 and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a discharge summary was completed upon discharge from the facility. This affected one (#28) of two residents reviewed for discharge. The facility for census was 31. Findings include: Review of the medical record of Resident #28 revealed an admission date of 02/28/23. The resident transferred to another skilled nursing facility on 03/30/23. Diagnoses included malignant neoplasm of prostate, gout, chronic viral hepatitis C, obstructive sleep apnea, type 2 diabetes mellitus, morbid obesity, essential hypertension, gastro-esophageal reflux disease, and hypothyroidism. Review of the comprehensive minimum data set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had intact cognition. Review of the Multidisciplinary Discharge summary dated [DATE] revealed the documentation was incomplete. Social Services and Nursing completed their sections on 03/28/23 and 03/30/23, respectively. Therapy, dietary, and activity sections were not…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-06-01 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  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, resident interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident who required assistance was provided assistance with hair washing. This affected one (#7) of 13 residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs). The facility census was 31. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #7 revealed an admission date of 04/19/22, with diagnoses including cerebral infarction, Diabetes Mellitus (DM), lymphedema, major depressive disorder, anemia, and venous insufficiency. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #7 dated 05/11/23 revealed resident was cognitively intact and required extensive assistance of staff with ADLs. Review of the care plan for Resident #7 dated 06/16/22 revealed resident was resistive to care related to preference of taking bed baths. Residents would refuse showers and state she had a bad experience at another nursing facility with her showers. Interventions included the following: allow resident to…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-06-01 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a pressure ulcer was adequately monitored. This affected one (#25) of one resident reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility census was 31. Findings include: Review of the medical record of Resident #25 revealed an admission date of 02/23/23. The resident transferred to the hospital on [DATE], readmitted on [DATE], transferred to the hospital on [DATE], readmitted [DATE], transferred to the hospital on [DATE], readmitted [DATE], and transferred to the hospital on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE]. Diagnoses included cerebral infarction, tracheostomy status, gastrostomy status, chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, contractures of left hand, right elbow, right hand, dysphagia, acute kidney failure, severe sepsis with septic shock, pneumonia, essential hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and unspecified disorder of thyroid. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident's cognition could…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-06-01 · 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 record review, observation, staff interview, and review of policy, the facility failed to ensure fall prevention/management interventions were in place for a resident assessed at risk for falls. This affected two (#9 and #24) of three residents reviewed for accidents. The facility census was 31. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #9 revealed an admission date of 04/13/23, with diagnoses including: cerebral infarction, diabetes mellitus (DM), alcoholic cirrhosis of the liver, traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage, aphasia, dysphagia, hypertension (HTN), hyperlipidemia, spinal stenosis, and major depressive disorder. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #9 dated 04/20/23 revealed resident was cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance of one staff with bed mobility and ambulation and extensive assistance of two staff with transfers. Review of the fall risk assessment for Resident #9 dated 04/14/23 revealed resident was at risk for falls. 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 4 rows in the source record cover these 2 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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 $268K 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