Ahc Of Landerhaven LLC

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.

66.8% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 202 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 56.8% 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 234 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 1.37 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 99% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 24% 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 46 beds and averages 40.7 residents a day — about 88% occupied, or roughly 5 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 5.49 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.30 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.91 is at or above 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 4.87 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.74 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.48 to 0.84 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 79% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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.

15 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · D2025-09-19 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
  Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record reviews, review of a Self-Reported Incident (SRI), interviews and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure nursing staff reported an allegation of abuse in a timely manner. This affected two residents (#51 and #52) of three residents reviewed for abuse reporting. The facility census was 41.Findings included: Review of the Self-Reported Incident (SRI) submitted by the facility on 08/12/25 at 9:43 A.M. and closed on 08/15/25 at 5:31 P.M. submitted for an allegation of sexual abuse revealed it involved Resident #51 and Resident #52. Review of the closed medical record for Resident #51 revealed an admission date of 07/31/25. Diagnoses included strain of right quadriceps muscle, spinal stenosis and chronic kidney disease. Resident #51 was moderately cognitively impaired.Review of the closed medical record for Resident #52 revealed an admission date of 08/09/25 and a discharge date of 08/12/25. Diagnoses included dementia, urinary tract infection, alcohol use, chronic kidney disease and contusion to head. Resident #52 was cognitively impaired and had…

  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 · E2025-06-23 · tag F0645 — pattern
  PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
  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 Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) Level I screen was completed after a resident remained in the facility longer than 30 days as required. This affected four residents (#6, #16, #30 and #35) of four residents reviewed for PASRR. The facility census was 40. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included fracture of the left leg, schizophrenia and dementia. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #6 was severely cognitively impaired and required assistance of one staff person for completing his activities of daily living (ADLs). Review of census records for Resident #6 revealed Resident #6 was admitted to the facility on a hospital exemption indicating Resident #6's expected length of stay at the facility was less then 30 days and Resident #6 was exempt 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 Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-23 · 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 and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were treated in a dignified manner. This affected three residents (#22,#150, and #151) of three observed for dignified treatment. The facility census was 40. Findings include: Review of Resident #22's medical records revealed an admission date of 05/27/25. Diagnoses included diabetes, right arm fracture and falls. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #22 had intact cognition and required supervision with eating and moderate assistance with toileting. Review of Resident #150's medical records revealed an admission date of 06/09/25. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's, dementia and falls. Review of Resident #150's MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed the assessment was still recorded as in progress. Review of Resident #151's medical records revealed an admission date of 06/14/25. Diagnoses included right femur fracture, falls and dementia. Review of Resident #151's MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed…

  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 · Dcited before2025-06-23 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure timely care and assistance was provided to Resident #146 who experienced a change in condition. This affected one resident (#146) of two reviewed for changes in condition. The facility census was 40. Findings include: Review of Resident #146's medical records revealed an admission date of 06/06/25. Diagnoses included Parkinson's Disease. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #146 had intact cognition. Review of progress note dated 06/09/25 timed 2:22 P.M., authored by Registered Nurse (RN) #508, revealed Resident #146 had called nine-one-one (911) to summon emergency services herself because she was short of breath and no one had answered her call light. The progress note further stated RN #508 was on a break and did not get a chance to transfer Resident #146. Review of progress note dated 06/12/25 timed 7:37 P.M. authored by RN #239 revealed Resident #246 was readmitted to the facility…

  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 · D2025-06-23 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to timely implement pressure ulcer treatment and interventions. This affected one resident (#152) of two residents reviewed for wounds. The facility census was 40. Findings include: Review of hospital paperwork dated 05/29/25, prior to Resident #152's admission to the facility, revealed Resident #152 presented to the emergency department due to pain in the buttocks secondary to stage two decubitus ulcers (partial thickness loss of skin bedsores). Measurements were not included in the hospital paperwork. Resident #152 had recently been placed on antibiotics by her primary care physician related to the bedsores. Review of Resident #152's medical records revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including stage two pressure ulcer to the left buttock. Review of facility admission skin grid dated 06/03/25, unable to determine author of assessment revealed Resident #152 had a discolored…

  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 · D2025-06-23 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
  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 facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure timely incontinence care was provided. This affected two residents (#150 and #152) of two residents observed for incontinence care. The facility census was 40. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #150's medical records revealed an admission date of 06/09/25. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's, dementia and urinary tract infections. Review of the baseline care plan dated 06/09/25 revealed Resident #150 was incontinent of bowel and bladder. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #150 had impaired cognition. Resident #150 was incontinent of bowel and bladder. Review of physician orders for June 2025 revealed to toilet resident upon rising, before and after meal, at bedtime and as needed. Interview on 06/16/25 at 9:33 A.M. with Resident #150's private companion revealed Resident #150 had not received incontinence care since approximately 2:00 A.M. Observation 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 · D2025-06-23 · 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 observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were provided with water as requested and required. This affected one resident (#22) of three residents reviewed for hydration. The facility census was 40. Findings include: Review of Resident #22's medical records revealed an admission date of 05/27/25. Diagnoses included right arm fracture, diabetes, and history of falls. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #22 required supervision with eating. Interview on 06/16/25 at 9:17 A.M. with Resident #22 revealed she had not been receiving ice water daily and stated she usually did not even receive it once a day, even if she requested. Observation at time of interview revealed an empty water pitcher on Resident #22's sink. Interview on 06/17/25 at 10:41 A.M. with Resident #22 revealed she had still not received any ice water and stated she had been asking for a few days, and stated she had obtained water from…

  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 before2025-06-23 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure appropriate infection control techniques were used for a resident on enhanced barrier precautions. This affected one resident (#152) of two observed for infection control precautions. The facility census was 40. Findings include: Review of Resident #152's medical records revealed an admission date of 06/03/25. Diagnoses included stage two pressure ulcer to the left buttock. Review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #152 had intact cognition. Resident #152 required substantial assistance with toileting and was incontinent of bowel and bladder. Review of current physician orders for June 2025 revealed Resident #152 was on Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) due to pressure ulcer. Observation on 06/16/25 at 10:00 A.M. revealed a sign posted outside of Resident #152's room that stated EBP and the use of gown and gloves was required prior to entering. Observation of incontinence care on 06/16/25 at 10:55…

  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 · E2024-08-27 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — pattern
  Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
  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 the facility policy the facility did not ensure medical records were maintained in an accurate manner including treatments were documented per the treatment administration record (TAR) as ordered. This affected three residents (#9, #14, and #23) out of nine medical records reviewed for accuracy. The facility census was 22. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #9 revealed an admission date of 07/30/24 with diagnoses including dementia, acute respiratory failure, Parkinson's disease, congestive heart failure, and pressure ulcers to his sacral region, mid back, and right heel. Review of the undated care plan for Resident #9 revealed he had actual impaired skin integrity related to pressure injuries to his left heel, back, and coccyx and an arterial ulcer to his left toe. Interventions included an air mattress to the bed, encourage and assist to reposition at least every two hours, and treatments as ordered. Review of the admission Minimum…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-08-27 · 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 interview, observation, record review, review of Self-Report Incident (SRI) review, and review of the facility policy revealed the facility did not ensure Resident #9 had a thorough comprehensive care plan with interventions regarding his refusals of care and/ or dementia care. This affected one resident (#9) out of nine resident care plans reviewed. The facility census was 22. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #9 revealed an admission date of 07/30/24 with diagnoses including dementia, acute respiratory failure, Parkinson's disease, congestive heart failure, and pressure ulcers to his sacral region, mid back, and right heel. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #9's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score indicated he had moderate cognitive impairment as his BIMS score was a nine out of 15. He required substantial to moderate staff assist with dressing, bathing, and personal hygiene. He was dependent on staff assist…

  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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to ADVANCED HEALTH CARE — 26 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 11 rows in the source record cover these 8 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

This home reported $1.0M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 23% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in OH