No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Hawthorn Glen Nursing Center

5414 Hankins Road, Middletown, OH 45044 · For profit - Corporation · 74 certified beds · (513) 863-7775 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (513) 863-7775 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citations — no harm found (F0609, F0610) — most recent Jul 2025Resident-funds citation (F0569)Behavioral-health or dementia-care citations — no harm found (F0740, F0758)
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0569)
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (37) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
  • nursing-staff turnover (66%) runs well above the national median (45%)

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

1/5
CMS overall
1 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 2 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 1 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
5250 Newtown Dr · (513) 867-5890 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
5420 Liberty Fairfield Rd · (513) 785-7920 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
5527 Hamilton Middletown Rd · (937) 393-2448 · Call to confirm hours
Park
5591 Hankins Rd · (513) 867-5835 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
5156 Hamilton Middletown Rd · (513) 895-4444

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

Overall quality measures 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 4 of 5

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.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 2 to 1 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating1★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased5.2%5.3%15.4%typical for the state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight12.4%6.2%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.2%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%0.4%2.0%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms20.6%30.1%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury3.8%3.2%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened6.0%6.1%16.1%typical for the state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication19.6%25.5%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine53.3%94.5%95.3%worse
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.7%3.4%4.7%typical
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control17.1%21.4%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table10.8%8.8%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication3.2%1.2%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine43.6%75.6%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission15.6%24.9%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit11.4%12.9%12.0%typical

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

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.

50.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 31 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

50.9%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.8%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
66.7%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.39U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.16hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.17hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.06hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 66.7% 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 30 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.39 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 68% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 8% 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.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF50.9%CMS range 35.7–70.051.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.8%CMS range 7.4–16.410.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge66.7%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge66.7%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge56.7%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay2.6%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalizationnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.811.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.56
RN hours/ resident / day
0.62
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.97
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.14
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.39
RN hoursweekends
66.2%
Total nursing turnover
75.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 74 beds and averages 66.5 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 8 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 3.14 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.56 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.97 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.92 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.23 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.62 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 66% is well above the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

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

13
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-07-31)
11
at the previous standard inspection (2022-06-15)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

37 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 27 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Potential for harm · F2025-07-31 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based observation, staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure food was stored in a safe and sanitary manner. This had the potential to affect all residents. The facility census was 61.Findings include:Observation of the nourishment room on 07/30/25 starting at 3:08 P.M. revealed six packages of fruit, one container of cheese and a Styrofoam takeout container with unidentified food unlabeled and undated stored in the refrigerator. Interview with Director of Nursing (DON) #96 verified that the food was unlabeled and undated. Further observations in the bottom drawer of the fridge revealed two packages of raspberries, a package of cheese, and a package of bologna that were covered in a grey, fuzzy substance. The two packages of raspberries were dated 06/25. The cheese and bologna were undated. Interview with DON #96 verified the date of the raspberries and other items were undated. DON #96 also verified that the food was covered in a grey fuzzy substance. Further observations revealed five cartons of milk stored in the refrigerator door…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-07-31 · 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 interviews and record review, the facility failed to timely initiate and complete Preadmission Screening and Resident Review, (PASRR). This affected four residents (Resident #57, # 74, 35 and #5) of six residents reviewed for preadmission screening. The facility total census was 61. Findings Include: 1.Record review of Resident #57 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses for Resident #57 include hypertension, morbid obesity, diabetes, schizophrenia, depressive disorder and anxiety. Review of the Minimum Data Set, (MDS) comprehensive assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had intact cognition and required set up assistance with Activity of Daily Living skills. Review of PASRR documentation revealed no documenting of a PASRR screen prior to admission. A Level I PASRR was not completed and signed until 06/23/23. There was a Level II directed from the results of a 07/29 /25 PASRR submission due to a new diagnosis of schizoaffective and sexual behaviors on 02/22/22. 2.…

    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 · Ecited before2025-07-31 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
    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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure medications were dated, labeled, and not expired. This had the potential to affect 36 (Resident #25, Resident #32, Resident #3, Resident #19, Resident #29, Resident #1, Resident #62, Resident #18, Resident #51, Resident #63, Resident #34, Resident #9, Resident #52, Resident #45, Resident #54, Resident #50, Resident #56, Resident #71, Resident #72, Resident #39, Resident #28, Resident #73, Resident #55, Resident #76, Resident #46, Resident #20, Resident #40, Resident #41, Resident #10, Resident #11, Resident #8, Resident #30, Resident #61, Resident #17, Resident #36, and Resident #63) residents. The facility also failed to ensure medications were disposed of properly. This had the potential to affect 24 (Resident #25, Resident #32, Resident #3, Resident #19, Resident #29, Resident #1, Resident #62, Resident #18, Resident #51, Resident #63, Resident #34, Resident #9, Resident #52, Resident #45, Resident #54, Resident #50,…

    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 · D2025-07-31 · tag F0569 — isolated
    Notify each resident of certain balances and convey resident funds upon discharge, eviction, or death.
    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 facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure resident funds were disbursed to the resident's estate within 30 days as required. This affected one (Resident #75) of six residents reviewed for funds. The facility census was 61.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #75 revealed an admissions date of 06/21/24 with diagnoses including congestive heart failure, hypertension, and dementia. Resident #75 discharged from the facility on 04/30/25.Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #75 was severely cognitively impaired.Review of a Resident Funds Authorization, for Resident #75 dated 08/03/24, revealed the authorization was signed by Resident 75's responsible party. The authorization was also signed by two witnesses.Review of a check dated 07/29/25, revealed a check was written to Resident #75's estate for $35.12.Review of the Resident Funds Statement, for Resident #75 revealed the resident had a balance of $35.12…

    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 · D2025-07-31 · tag F0572 — isolated
    Give residents a notice of rights, rules, services and charges.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on resident interview, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure residents know their Resident Rights. This had the potential to affect 12 (Resident #20, Resident #23, Resident #13, Resident #55, Resident #42, Resident #14, Resident #60, Resident #57, Resident #39, Resident #63, Resident #5, and Resident #77) residents who attend the Resident Council meetings out of 61 residents. The facility census was 61.Findings include:Review of Resident Council Meeting monthly minutes from 08/24/24 to 07/25/25 revealed Resident Rights were not reviewed during Resident Council.Interview on 07/29/25 at 3:08 P.M with Resident #46, Resident #60, and Resident #13 confirmed Resident Rights were not reviewed during Resident Council and that they do not know where to find the resident rights.Interview on 07/29/25 at 3:30 P.M with Activities Director # 59 confirmed Resident Rights were not reviewed during resident council due to switching the resident council agenda forms.Review of policy titled Resident Council revealed the facility is designed to review resident rights.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-07-31 · 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 interview, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to timely complete and submit a Self-Reported Incident (SRI) as required by the Ohio Department of Health, (ODH). This affected one resident (Resident #18) of five residents reviewed for SRI reporting. The facility total census was 61. Findings Include:Record review of Resident #18 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses for Resident #18 include breast cancer, depressive disorder, and dysphagia. Review of the Minimum Data Set, (MDS) comprehensive assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had intact cognition and required moderate assistance for Activity of Daily Living skills.Review of the SRI reported on 04/11/25 to ODH, revealed the incident occurred on 04/11/25, and submitted as completed on 06/05/25. Review of the SRI investigation revealed the police were contacted on 06/05/25. Interview on 07/30/25 at 10:06 A.M., the Administrator and Director of Nursing, (DON) verified an occurrence,…

    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 · D2025-07-31 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    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 facility policy review, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate a Self-Reported Incidents (SRI). This affected two residents (Residents #18 and #32) of five residents reviewed for SRI investigations. The facility total census was 61. Findings Include: 1. Record review of Resident #18 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses for Resident #18 include breast cancer, depressive disorder, and dysphagia. Review of the Minimum Data Set, (MDS) comprehensive assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had intact cognition and required moderate assistance for Activity of Daily Living skills. Review of SRI dated 05/05/25 revealed the resident was found to have a bruise of unknown origin on her thumb. Review of staff investigations revealed no written staff statements of the incident. There were no resident interviews and non- verbal resident skin assessments. Review of SRI dated 06/29/25 revealed the resident alleged a staff person held down her…

    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 · D2025-07-31 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure care conferences were completed quarterly for Resident #43. The facility census was 61.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #43 revealed an admissions date of 07/31/23 with diagnoses including dysphagia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, major depressive disorder, and seizures.Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #43 is cognitively impaired.Review Resident #43's care conferences since admission revealed one was completed on 04/16/25.Interview on 07/31/25 at 11:26 A.M. with Director of Nursing (DON) # 96 verified that the only care conference completed for Resident #43 was on 04/16/25.Review of the facility policy titled Care Conferences, dated 01/2020 revealed care conferences will be scheduled as soon as possible after admission, routinely, and with a change in condition.This deficiency represents non-compliance investigated under Complaint Number 1388204.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-31 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to obtain an order for oxygen therapy. This affected two residents (Resident #25 and Resident #51) out of three reviewed for oxygen therapy. The facility census was 61.Findings Include:1. Review of the medical record for Resident #25, revealed an admission date of 06/27/25. Diagnoses included but were not limited to acute kidney failure, sleep apnea, and asthma.Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 15 indicates intact cognition. The resident was assessed to be independent for eating, oral hygiene, toileting, shower/bath independent, partial/moderate assistance dressing, and supervision or touching assistance for personal hygiene.2. Review of the medical record for Resident #51, revealed an admission date of 04/24/25. Diagnoses included but were not limited to acute respiratory failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and sepsis.Review 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
  • Potential for harm · D2025-07-31 · tag F0740 — failed to provide behavioral / mental-health care — isolated
    Ensure each resident must receive and the facility must provide necessary behavioral health care and 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 record review, interview, and policy review the facility failed to provide behavioral health services to one (Resident #2) of three residents reviewed for behavior health. The facility census was 61.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #2 revealed an admissions date of 11/10/21 with diagnoses including major depressive disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, and anxiety disorder. Review of Resident #2's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #2 was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #2's orders revealed the resident has a physician order on 06/23/25 for a psychiatric evaluation and treatment. Review of Resident #2's medical record revealed the resident was receiving psychiatric services in 2024 for treatment of major depressive disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder. The last time Resident #2 received these services was on 05/07/24. Interview on 07/31/25 at 9:29 AM with Director of Nursing (DON) #96 verified that Resident #2 has current orders…

    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
Show the remaining 27 citations
  • Potential for harm · D2025-07-31 · tag F0742 — isolated
    Provide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with mental disorder or psychosocial adjustment difficulty, or who has a history of trauma and/or post-traumatic stress disorder.
    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, interviews and record review , the facility failed to provide social services to maintain the resident's mental health after a traumatic incident. This affected three residents, (Residents # 18, #32 and #38) of five residents reviewed following a traumatic incident. The facility total census was 61. Findings Include: 1.Record review of Resident #18 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses for Resident #18 include breast cancer, depressive disorder, and dysphagia. Review of the Minimum Data Set, (MDS) comprehensive assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had intact cognition and required moderate assistance for Activity of Daily Living skills. Review of Resident #18 State Reported Incident (SRI) dated 04/11/25 revealed the resident alleged a man came into her room and tried to remove her outer wear pants. He ran his hand down her leg. Review of Resident #18 SRI dated 06/29/25 revealed the resident alleged a staff person held down her hand. Review of…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-07-31 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolated
    Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, staff interview, review of planned menu, substitution log, and policy review, the facility failed to follow the menu for residents ordered a puree diet. This affected five (Residents #8, 26, 43, and 55) of five residents ordered a puree diet. The facility also failed to have a dietician sign off on meal substitutions. This had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 61.Review of the puree menu for lunch on 07/30/25 revealed beef enchiladas, seasoned black beans, corn, Mexican street cornbread, snickerdoodle cookie, and coffee/tea.Observation on 07/30/25 at 11:13 A.M. revealed puree food being served was enchiladas, corn, black beans, and pie.Interview 07/30/25 at 11:17 A.M. with Dietary Director (DD) #101 verified that the residents with an order for a puree diet were being served enchiladas, corn, black beans, and pie. DD #101 verified that the Mexican street cornbread was not prepared for puree diets but was listed on the menu. DD #101 also verified that pie was substituted for the snickerdoodle cookie.Review of…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-07-31 · tag F0808 — failed to follow doctor-ordered diets — isolated
    Ensure therapeutic diets are prescribed by the attending physician and may be delegated to a registered or licensed dietitian, to the extent allowed by State law.
    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, interviews and record review, the facility failed to provide a therapeutic diet as ordered by the physician. This affected one resident (Resident # 26) of one resident reviewed for therapeutic diets. The facility total census was 61. Findings Include: Record review of Resident #26 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident received hospices services. Diagnoses for Resident #26 include hypertension, dementia, obesity, and cancer antigen. Review of the Minimum Data Set, (MDS) comprehensive assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had severely impaired cognition and was totally dependent on staff for dressing and hygiene, transfers and eating. The resident received a regular puree nectar thick liquids diet and nutritional supplement three times a day. Additionally, the resident had a physician order, the Resident may have thin liquids and pleasure food with staff supervision only. With the resident positioned upright, small sips from cup, without…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-12-05 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, review of Emergency Medical Services (EMS) report, review of emergency room (ER) records, review of hospital records, staff interviews, review of personnel record, review of job descriptions, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from accidents while being transported by the facility's bus. This affected one (#25) of the three residents reviewed for accidents. The facility census was 64. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident # 25 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged to the hospital on [DATE]. Diagnoses included major depressive disorder, cerebral infarction (stroke), dementia, anxiety, chronic kidney disease, morbid obesity, congestive heart failure (CHF), essential primary hypertension, pneumonia, and diabetes mellitus. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #25 had impaired cognition and was dependent on staff for activities of…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-13 · 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 medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure fall interventions were implemented to address the root cause of resident's falls. This affected one (#7) of three residents reviewed for falls. The census was 57. Findings included: Medical record review for Resident #7 revealed an admission date of 05/01/23. Diagnoses included stroke, aphasic, non-Alzheimer's dementia, hemiplegia, and seizure disorder. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #7 was rarely or never understood. His functional status was a setup or clean-up assistance for eating, partial/moderate assistance for toileting and transfers, and the resident was independent for bed mobility. Review of the care plan updated 07/01/24 for Resident #7 revealed an intervention dated 05/23/23 to review information on past falls and attempt to determine the root cause of the falls. Review of an unwitnessed fall note on 07/25/24 at 5:46 A.M. revealed Resident #7 was attempting…

    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 · F2022-06-15 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespread
    Have a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a Registered Nurse (RN) was present for eight consecutive hours on 04/30/22, 05/08/22, 05/27/22, 05/28/22, 06/04/22, and 06/05/22. This had the potential to affect all 51 residents residing in the facility. The census was 51. Findings include: Review of staffing sheets dated 04/30/22, 05/08/22, 05/28/22, and 06/04/22 revealed there was not an RN scheduled on any of the dates. Review of the staffing sheet for 05/27/22 revealed an RN was scheduled for only three consecutive hours. Review of the staffing sheet for 06/05/22 revealed there was not an RN scheduled on 06/05/22. Review of signed statement per the Director of Nursing (DON) dated 06/09/22 revealed the DON was present in the facility for six consecutive hours on 06/05/22. Interview on 06/09/22 at 11:00 A.M. with the DON confirmed she was present in the facility for six consecutive hours on 06/05/22 and the facility did not have an RN present for eight hours on this date. Interview on 06/08/22 at 4:20 P.M. with the Administrator confirmed the facility did…

    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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2022-06-15 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — pattern
    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 medical record review, review of staffing schedules, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered as ordered by the attending physician. This affected four (#11, #21, #26 and #13) of six residents reviewed for medications. The facility census was 51. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #11 revealed an admission date of 03/20/18 with diagnoses including spinal stenosis and schizoaffective disorder. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #11 dated 02/27/22 revealed resident was cognitively impaired and required supervision and physical assistance of one staff with activities of daily living (ADL's.). Review of the April 2022 Medication Administration Record (MAR) for Resident #11 revealed the following medications were left blank in the MAR on 04/30/22: Ativan one milligram (mg) due at 10:00 P.M., Gabapentin 100 mg due at 8:00 P.M. Review of the nurse progress notes for Resident #11 dated 04/30/22 and 05/01/22 revealed the notes contained no documentation regarding…

    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 · Ecited before2022-06-15 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — pattern
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    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 timely act on pharmacy recommendations following the monthly Medication Regimen Reviews (MRR's). This affected four (#11, #21, #32, and #13) out of five residents reviewed for MRR's. The facility census was 50. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #11's medical record revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included but were not limited to spinal stenosis of the cervical region, bipolar disorder (depressed, severe with psychotic features), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and unspecified anxiety disorder. Review of most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had moderately impaired cognition, had no behaviors, did not wander, and did not refuse care. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #11 had physician orders for hydroxychloroquine 200 milligrams (mg) by mouth daily, esomeprazole 40 mg by mouth daily, multi-vitamin by mouth once daily, vitamin D 3 1000…

    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 · Ecited before2022-06-15 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure hand hygiene was completed during meal services for residents. This affected five (#12, #30, #15, #17 and #9) randomly observed residents observed during meal service. The facility census was 51. Findings include: Observation on 06/06/2022 from 12:06 P.M. to 12:12 P.M. revealed dietary delivered meal cart to 100-Hall. State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #238 delivered a lunch tray to Resident #15 and did not sanitize hands before she retrieved the next tray from food cart. STNA #238 delivered tray to Resident #12, removed lids from dishes, opened the resident's milkshake, and left room without sanitizing her hands. STNA #238 returned to the food cart, retrieved the next tray, and delivered tray to Resident #30, and left the room without sanitizing her hands. Interview on 06/06/2022 at 12:12 P.M. with STNA #238 verified she did not sanitize or wash her hands after she delivered meal trays to Residents #15, #12, and #30. STNA #238 stated she was supposed to sanitize her hands after every tray.…

    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 · D2022-06-15 · 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

    Based on record review, observation, staff interview, review of the facility policy and review of the employee handbook, the facility failed to provide feeding assistance to residents in a dignified and respectful manner. This affected one (#13) of five facility-identified residents who were dependent on staff for assistance with eating. The census was 51. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #13 revealed an admission date of 03/05/22 with a diagnosis of unspecified dementia with behavioral disturbance. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #13 dated 03/11/22 revealed the resident had severe cognitive impairment and was totally dependent on the assistance of one staff with eating. Review of the care plan for Resident #13 dated 05/19/22 revealed the resident has an activities of daily living (ADL) self-care performance deficit related to dementia with behaviors, fibromyalgia, Alzheimer's, convulsions, restlessness and agitation and falls. The resident required extensive assistance by staff to eat. Observation on 06/09/22 at 8:12 A.M. revealed State…

    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 · D2022-06-15 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the residents code status was accurately documented on the resident's chart. This affected one (#19) out of three residents reviewed for advance directives. The facility census was 51. Findings included: Record review for Resident #19 revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnosis included atrial fibrillation, dementia, gastroesophageal reflux disease, transient ischemic attack, muscle weakness, asthma, kidney disease stage three, anemia, hypotension, and Alzheimer's disease. Review of the quarterly minimum data set (MDS) assessment, dated 04/01/22, revealed Resident #19 had impaired cognition as evidenced by her brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score of 10. Further review of the MDS assessment revealed she required extensive assistance from staff with bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toilet use, personal hygiene, and supervision from staff with eating. Further review of the hard chart for 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-06-15 · 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 medical record review, observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the facility developed care plans for resident care needs regarding resting hand splints and oxygen therapy. This affected two (#26 and #152) of 13 residents reviewed for care plans. The facility census was 51. Findings include: 1. Resident #26 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included but were not limited to unspecified hemiplegia affecting non-dominant left side, history of traumatic brain injury, unspecified cerebrovascular disease, type II diabetes, unspecified anxiety disorder, unspecified major depressive disorder, and chronic pain syndrome. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #26 was cognitively intact, no behaviors, no wandering, and did not reject care. Resident #26 was a two-person assist and required extensive assist with all ADL's. Resident #26 had functional limitation in range of motion to one side. Review of the medical record…

    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 · Dcited before2022-06-15 · 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

    Based on record review, staff interview, and facility policy, the facility failed to complete a thorough and accurate fall investigation. This affected one (#40) out of three residents reviewed for falls. The facility census was 51. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #40 revealed an admission date of 06/17/21. Diagnoses included dementia, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), amnesia, generalized anxiety disorder, and schizoaffective. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #40, dated 01/21/22, revealed the resident had impaired cognition. Resident #40 had a brief interview of mental status (BIMS) score of 99, indicating the resident chose not to respond. The resident required extensive assistance for hygiene, toileting, dressing, transfer, and bed mobility. Resident #40 required supervision for walking in the room/corridor, locomotion on/off the unit, and eating. No hallucination, delusions, or rejection of care were noted on the assessment. Review of the Morse Fall Scale Assessment for Resident #40 dated 09/01/21 revealed 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
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-06-15 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observations, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents had active physician orders to receive oxygen therapy and to ensure residents oxygen tubing was labeled and dated. This affected three (#152, #30, and #252) out of eight residents residing in the facility who received oxygen therapy. The facility census was 51. Findings include: 1. Resident #30 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included but were not limited to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), acute diastolic congestive heart failure, d unspecified acute kidney failure. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was cognitively intact, had no behaviors, did not wander, and did not reject care. Resident #30 received oxygen therapy. Resident #30 required supervision and setup assistance for eating and extensive two-staff assistance with all other Activities of Daily Living (ADL's). Review of care plan dated…

    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 before2022-06-15 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
    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 residents were free from unnecessary psychotropic medications by ensuring there was an end date for as needed (PRN) antianxiety (lorazepam) medication. This affected one (#9) of five residents reviewed for psychotropic medications. The facility census was 51. Findings include: Review of Resident #9 admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included but were not limited to Pick's disease, nondisplaced fractures of third and fifth metatarsal bones, unspecified convulsions, type II diabetes, and unspecified dementia. Review of most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #9 had severely-impaired cognition, had no behaviors, rejected care one to three days per week, and did not wander. Resident #9 was a two person assist and required extensive assistance for ADL's. Review of care plan dated 05/03/2022 revealed Resident #9 used anti-depressant and anti-anxiety medications related to depression and anxiety.…

    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 · D2022-06-15 · tag F0888 — isolated
    Ensure staff are vaccinated for COVID-19
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on the unprecedented global pandemic that resulted in the Presidential declaration of a State of National Emergency dated 03/13/20, review of Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) memorandum QSO-22-09-ALL , review of the staff Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination list/matrix, review of the facility policy and staff interview, the facility failed to implement their vaccination policy and monitor staff members to ensure that 100% (percent) of staff received the COVID-19 vaccine, have a pending request for exemption, or have been identified as appropriate for a temporary delay per Centers for Disease Control (CDC) guidance. The vaccination rate for the facility was calculated at 98.75%. The facility's census was 51. Findings include: Review of the facility staff COVID-19 vaccination matrix revealed the facility had a total of 80 employees. Further review of the COVID-19 vaccination matrix revealed the facility had 40 employees fully vaccinated for COVID-19, 1 employee (Dietary Aide #360) partially vaccinated for COVID-19, and 39 employees who had 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2019-11-06 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to have maintain accurate infection control tracking and logging. This affected nine residents ((#10, #12, #20, #34, #41, #42, #49, #50 and #152) and the had the potential to affect all 54 residents residing in the facility. Findings include: Record review of the facility's Minimum Data Set Matrix revealed nine residents (#10, #12, #20, #34, #41, #42, #49, #50 and #152) were identified by the facility as having an active infection. Review of the facility's infection control log for the last 12 months revealed there was no evidence of tracking or logging infections for the months of 09/2019 and 10/2019. Interview on 11/06/19 at 1:46 P.M. with the Administrator and the Director of Nursing (DON) verified that the facility has not been appropriately tracking and logging infections for the months of 09/2019 and 10/2019. Review of the facility's undated policy titled Infection Control Policy revealed the Unit Managers are to review the yellow order duplicates daily for infection control concerns, then log 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2019-11-06 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — widespread
    Implement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to have an Antibiotic Stewardship Program in place. This affected ten residents (#10, #17, #21, #28, #32, #34, #45, #48, #50 and #152) and had the potential to affect all 54 residents residing in the facility. Findings include: Record review of the facility's Minimum Data Set Matrix revealed ten residents (#10, #17, #21, #28, #32, #34, #45, #48, #50 and #152) were identified by the facility as receiving antibiotics. Review of the facility's infection control binder revealed there was no antibiotic tracking. Interview on 11/06/19 at 1:46 P.M. with the Administrator and the Director of Nursing (DON) verified they were supposed to be using McGreer's Definitions of Infections for Long Term Care Facilities. However, they verified there was no evidence of the program. Review of the facility's undated Antibiotic Stewardship Program policy revealed the facility is committed to improving the use of antibiotics to optimize the treatment of infections while reducing the danger of antibiotic resistance.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2019-11-06 · tag F0623 — pattern
    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 record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide a copy of the transfer or discharge notification to the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman for resident's discharges from the facility. This affected four (Resident #12, #32, #50 and #52) of four residents reviewed for discharge notification. The facility census was 54. Findings include: 1. Record review revealed Resident #12 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included hypoxemia, Alzheimer's disease, dementia in other diseases classified elsewhere and generalized anxiety disorder. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Sets (MDS) assessment, dated 08/26/19, revealed the resident to be severely cognitively impaired. Review of the progress notes revealed the resident was discharged to the hospital for a mental status change on 05/14/19. Resident #12 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. There was no evidence the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman was notified of Resident #12's discharge to the hospital…

    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 · E2019-11-06 · tag F0625 — pattern
    Notify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents received written bed hold notifications within 24 hours of their discharges from the facility. This affected four (Resident #12, #32, #50 and #52) of four residents reviewed for discharge notification. The facility census was 54. Findings include: 1. Record review revealed Resident #12 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included hypoxemia, Alzheimer's disease, dementia in other diseases classified elsewhere and generalized anxiety disorder. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Sets (MDS) assessment, dated 08/26/19, revealed the resident to be severely cognitively impaired. Review of the progress notes revealed the resident was discharged to the hospital for a mental status change on 05/14/19. Resident #12 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #12's record revealed there was no documentation that Resident #12 or Resident #12's representative were provided a written bed hold notification upon…

    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 · Ecited before2019-11-06 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — pattern
    Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents on psychotropic medications received gradual dose reductions unless contraindicated. The facility also failed to ensure as needed psychotropic medication orders were limited to 14 days or that a rationale and duration of the as needed psychotropic medication was indicated in the medical record. This affected three (Resident #2, #15 and #43) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 54. Findings include: 1. Record review for Resident #43 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included dementia with behavioral disturbance and anxiety disorder. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Sets (MDS) assessment, dated 10/05/19, revealed the resident to be severely cognitively impaired. Review of the physician orders, dated 07/23/19, revealed the resident was prescribed Ativan 0.5 milligrams (mg.) every 12 hours as needed for anxiety and agitation related to generalized…

    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 · D2019-11-06 · tag F0655 — isolated
    Create and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide residents and their representatives with a summary of the baseline care plan. This affected two (Resident #26 and #155) of four residents reviewed for baseline care plans that were admitted within the past year. The facility census was 54. Findings include: 1. Record review for Resident #26 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included dementia without behavioral disturbance, cognitively communication deficit, major depressive disorder, muscle weakness, hypertensive heart disease without heart failure, acute bronchitis, apraxia, contracture of muscle, type two diabetes mellitus, psychotic disorder with delusions due to known physiological condition, vitamin deficiency and history of falling. Review of the baseline care plan revealed the resident's baseline care plan was completed on 12/22/18. There was no documentation that a written summary of Resident #26's baseline care plan was provided to 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 · Dcited before2019-11-06 · 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, review of the facility's policy and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's fall risk was assessed and fall interventions were in place to prevent falls. This affected one (Resident #43) of two residents reviewed for accidents. The facility census was 54. Findings include: Record review for Resident #43 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included idiopathic gout, Parkinson's disease, dementia with behavioral disturbance, muscle wasting and atrophy, difficulty in walking, cognitive communication deficit and anxiety disorder. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 10/05/19, revealed the resident to be severely cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance from staff with bed mobility, transfers and toileting. Resident #43 was reported to have two or more falls with no injury and two or more falls with injury. Review of Resident #43's chart revealed no fall risk assessments completed to assess 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
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-11-06 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    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, review of facility policy and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the drug regimen review recommendations were appropriately addressed by the attending physician in a timely manner and failed to ensure the physician documented their rationale for not changing a resident's medications as indicated in a pharmacy recommendation. This affected one (Resident #44) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 54. Findings include: Record review for Resident #44 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included cognitive communication deficit, major depressive disorder, dementia in other diseases classified elsewhere and insomnia. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 10/10/19, revealed the resident to be severely cognitively impaired. Review of the physician orders revealed the resident was prescribed Seroquel 100 milligrams (mg.) at bedtime for dementia in other diseases classified elsewhere…

    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 · D2019-11-06 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
    Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, medical record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure medication error rate was less than five percent. There were 29 opportunities with two medication errors for an error rate of 6.9 percent (%). This affected one (#15) of six residents reviewed for observation of medication administration. The facility census was 54. Findings include: Medical record review for Resident #15 revealed an admission date of 05/01/18. Diagnoses included heart failure. Review of the physician orders for Resident #15 revealed there were not any current orders dated 10/01/19 through 11/05/19 for Cymbalta or Potassium. Observation of medication administration to Resident #15 on 11/05/19 at 8:35 A.M. revealed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #22 administered Cymbalta 60 milligram (mg.) and Potassium 10 milliequivalent (meq.). This was observed on the computer screen the LPN was looking at for the resident and the drugs were also included in the packet from the pharmacy which was labeled for Tuesday at 8:00 A.M. A total of 29 opportunities was observed for medication…

    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 · Dcited before2019-11-06 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure insulin vials were not expired. This affected one (Resident #1) of six residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility identified there were four residents who received insulin and resided on the 200 hallway. The facility census was 54. Findings include: Observation of administration of Novolog on [DATE] at 10:41 A.M. to Resident #1 revealed Registered Nurse (RN)) #26 took the Novolog vial out of the drawer of the medication cart to draw up insulin and upon checking the date, it said the opening date was [DATE]. The RN went to the refrigerator to pull Novolog to administer it to Resident #1 and the open date was [DATE] and the RN went to get another one which was Novolin R out of the refrigerator and it was dated [DATE]. Interview with RN #26 on [DATE] at 11:18 A.M. verified the above vials were out of date and should have been discarded after 28 or 42 days of open date. Review of the facility's policy titled…

    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 · D2019-11-06 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
    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 record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the resident code statuses documented in physician progress notes were accurate. The facility also failed to document a resident's transfer to the hospital in the medical record. This affected three (Resident #26, #32 and #44) of 16 residents reviewed for complete and accurate medical records. The facility census was 54. Findings include: 1. Record review for Resident #26 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included dementia without behavioral disturbance, hypertensive heart disease without heart failure, type two diabetes mellitus and psychotic disorder with delusions due to known physiological condition. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 10/26/19, revealed the resident to be severely cognitively impaired. Review of the resident's chart revealed the resident to have an appendix A form indicating her code status to be a Do Not Resuscitate Comfort Care (DNRCC). Resident #26'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 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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to LIONSTONE CARE — 24 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 1 of 52.5-1.5 vs chain
Health inspection 2 of 52.4-0.4 vs chain
Staffing 1 of 51.7-0.7 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.4-0.4 vs chain
The other 23 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.5★, per CMS)

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

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
LIONSTONE CARNATION OPCO HOLDINGS, LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 06/28/2024
KAZARNOVSKY, SOLOMONIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF25%since 06/28/2024
STEIN, ABBAIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF50%since 06/28/2024
CROSS RIVER BANKOrganization5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTERESTsince 06/28/2024
NORRIS, MATTHEWIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/28/2024
KLUGMAN, JACOBIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/10/2025
STEIN, SHALOMIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/10/2025
STERNBUCH, DANIELIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/10/2025
HAWTHORN GLEN PROPCO LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 06/28/2024
LIONSTONE CARNATION PROPCO HOLDINGS LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 06/28/2024
PEACE CAPITAL HOLDINGS II LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 06/28/2024
SMS 2021 TRUSTOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 06/28/2024
ANSARI, SABAIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 06/28/2024

CMS files one row per role, so the 26 rows in the source record cover these 13 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

6 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.

$5.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-15.4%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$176K
Related-party expense3% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 76%Medicare 3%Other / private 21%

About 76% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $176K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

Cost & finances

$304per resident / day
operating cost
$9,256per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$264per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Ohio Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Ohio
$9,186/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$10,389/mo
Nursing home (private)
$6,103/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 365813. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-31, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next