Altercare Newark North Inc.
151 Price Road, Newark, OH 43055 · For profit - Corporation · 75 certified beds · (740) 366-2321 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- a high number of inspection citations overall (41) — 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 (2/5)
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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 3 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
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 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 improved from 1 to 3 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.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 0.6% | 5.3% | 15.4% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.7% | 6.2% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.5% | 0.4% | 2.0% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 24.3% | 30.1% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 5.0% | 3.2% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 1.4% | 6.1% | 16.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 48.2% | 25.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 94.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 1.7% | 3.4% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 23.7% | 21.4% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 9.4% | 8.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.4% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 89.9% | 75.6% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 19.6% | 24.9% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 16.1% | 12.9% | 12.0% | worse |
‡ 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.
52.4% 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 68 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 75.7% 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 37 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 0.31 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 51% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 13% 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
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 52.4%CMS range 44.5–61.4 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.4%CMS range 7.2–16.2 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no 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 discharge | 75.7% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 73.0% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 73.0% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 setting | not 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 discharge | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 2.1% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.8%CMS range 4.7–13.4 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.96 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS 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
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 75 beds and averages 66.4 residents a day — about 89% occupied, or roughly 9 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 3.31 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.44 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.22 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.00 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.43 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.48 to 0.35 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 50% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
41 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 31 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-16 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to follow correct orders for wound care for a resident with a pressure ulcer. This affected one resident (Resident #03) of three residents reviewed for wound care. The facility census was 64.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #03 revealed an admission date of 12/17/25 with diagnoses of, but not limited to, type two diabetes, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, and chronic kidney disease.Review of Resident #03's care plan dated 12/29/25 revealed the resident had a pressure injury noted to his right heel. Listed interventions noted to observe the wound for any redness, warmth, drainage, odor, and report to physician as needed, perform current treatment as ordered and see the treatment administration record (TAR) and observe the treatment for effectiveness. An additional care plan focus dated 12/31/25 revealed the resident had a pressure ulcer/injury and was at risk for skin breakdown related to impaired mobility, diabetes, history of cellulitis, incontinence, and history 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-30 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, hospital record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, this facility failed to ensure medication was transcribed in a resident's medication administration record as ordered by the physician. This affected one (Resident #66) of the four residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 63. Review of the medical record for Resident #66 revealed and admission date of 02/24/2025 and a discharge date of 02/27/2025. Diagnosis included influenza, chronic pain, acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, and heart failure.Review of Resident #66 hospital discharge records dated 02/24/2025 revealed all ordered medication was transcribed into this resident's medication administration record correctly other than the order for Ipratropium-Albuterol 0.5-2.5 milligrams (mg)/3 milliliter (ml). The order was to take 3 ml by nebulization (a method of delivering medication in a fine mist or aerosol directly into the lungs) every 6 hours scheduled. Per review of the medication administration record while at this facility, 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.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-02-06 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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 on observation, interviews, and review of facility policy the facility failed to ensure the kitchen was maintained in a clean and sanitary manner. This had the potential to affect 68 residents of 68 who consumed food from the kitchen. The facility identified no residents who consumed nothing by mouth. The facility census was 68. Findings include: Observation on 02/03/25 from 8:00 A.M. to 8:18 A.M. and on 02/05/25 at 11:30 A.M. revealed the following concerns: a. Package of bacon in the refrigerator was open to air, unlabeled, and undated b. There was a silver cart with two surfaces holding meal trays that were covered in food splatter and food debris. The food splatter also covered the back of the cart. c. Observation of the kitchen revealed under the dishwasher revealed there were tiles missing, broken, and chipped. A large section of missing tiles had a buildup of dirt and dust. The outside of the oven hood and the wall above it revealed it was covered what appeared to be grease stains. The wall next to the oven had dark colored drip stains spanning over most of the wall. e.…
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.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-02-06 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on review of employee files, the facility tuberculosis risk assessment, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure two new employees were tested for tuberculosis. This had the potential to affect all 68 residents. Facility census was 68. Findings include: The tuberculosis risk assessment revealed a baseline skin testing for tuberculosis was performed with two-step tuberculin skin test (TST) for healthcare workers. Healthcare workers were tested upon hire and with exposure. The infection test records would be maintained in the employees file. Review of employee files revealed Staff Coordinator #106 and Activities Coordinator #115 were hired on 08/05/24. Staff Coordinator #106 and Activities Coordinator #115 did not have the two-step TST performed. Interview on 02/06/25 at 12:37 P.M. Staff Coordinator #106 verified a two-step TST was not completed for Staff Coordinator #106 and Activities Coordinator #115.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-02-06 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — patternProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview the facility failed to monitor and document on Residents #14, #21, #37, and #53's nutrition status, to implement nutrition interventions as ordered for Resident #37, and to address significant weight changes for Resident's #14, #21, and #53. This affected four residents (#14, #21, #37, and #53) of five residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility census was 68. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #53's medical record revealed an admission date of 04/18/24 with diagnoses including metabolic encephalopathy, chronic kidney disease, osteoporosis, scoliosis, unspecified dementia, generalized anxiety disorder, type two diabetes mellitus, mood disorder, and depression. Review of Resident #53's Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed a severe cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #53's plan of care dated 04/04/24 revealed she was at risk for altered nutrition related to altered mental status, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and osteoporosis. The last…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-06 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
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 interview the facility failed to notify the physician of significant weight changes for Residents #14, #21, and #53. This affected three residents (#14, #21, and #53) of five residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility census was 68. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #53's medical record revealed an admission date of 04/18/24 with diagnoses including metabolic encephalopathy, chronic kidney disease, osteoporosis, scoliosis, unspecified dementia, generalized anxiety disorder, type two diabetes mellitus, mood disorder, and depression. Review of Resident #53's Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed a severe cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #53's weight on 05/01/24 revealed a weight of 117 pounds (lbs). Review of Resident #53's weight on 06/10/24 revealed a weight of 107.5 lbs. Review of Resident #53's weight on 07/01/24 revealed a weight of 115.5 lbs. Review of Resident #53's weight on 08/01/24 revealed a weight of 94 lbs. Which was a…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-06 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure dependent residents were able to take baths/showers per preference and the facility did not develop a plan/mechanism to address constant bathing refusals. This affected one (Resident #19) of three residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs). The census was 68. Findings Include: Resident #19 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses were syncope and collapse, adult failure to thrive, cardiac arrest, anxiety disorder, type II diabetes, drug induced subacute dyskinesia, muscle weakness, need for assistance with personal care, dysphagia, cognitive communication deficit, hypertension, atherosclerotic heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), bipolar disorder, hypokalemia, osteoporosis, hemiplegia and hemiparesis, difficulty walking, congestive heart failure, repeated falls, dehydration, chronic respiratory failure, mood disorder, hyperlipidemia, cerebrovascular disease, epilepsy, suicidal…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-06 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 facility policy review, the facility failed to assess all residents after falls to determine if they remained in the safest environment as possible. This affected one (Resident #21) of five residents reviewed for accidents. The census was 68. Findings Include: Resident #21 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses were end stage renal disease, repeated falls, anemia, hypokalemia, muscle weakness, difficulty walking, type II diabetes, hyperlipidemia, obesity, obstructive sleep apnea, insomnia, anxiety disorder, benign prostatic hyperplasia, hypertension, venous insufficiency, acute respiratory failure, dysuria, chronic kidney disease. Review of his Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 11/25/24, revealed he was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #21 fall risk assessment, dated 11/18/24, revealed a score of one, which indicated he was not a fall risk. There were no other fall risk assessments completed after 11/18/24. Review of Resident #21…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-06 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement 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 interview, and medical record review the facility failed to ensure proper justification for the use of psychotropic medications. This affected one person (#5) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 68. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #5 revealed an admission date of 12/31/24 with diagnoses including rhabdomyolysis, fracture of nasal bones, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, dysphagia, chronic diastolic heart failure, hemiplegia and hemiparesis affecting left non-dominant side, cerebral infarction, and unspecified dementia. Review of Resident #5's comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed she had severely impaired cognition. Review of Resident #5's plan of care dated 01/03/25 revealed they received psychotropic medications including antidepressants, antianxiety, and antipsychotic medications. Interventions included monitoring for side effects of antianxiety and antipsychotic medication, administering…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-06 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure 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, interviews, medical record review, and review of facility policy the facility failed to ensure Resident #223's medication was secured appropriately and not left in his room. This affected one resident (#223) of one resident reviewed for accident hazards. The facility census was 68. Findings include: Review of Resident #223's medical record revealed an admission date of 01/23/25 with diagnoses including hallucinations, rhabdomyolysis, spinal stenosis, other epilepsy, alcohol abuse, and atherosclerotic heart disease. Review of Resident #223's comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed he had intact cognition. Review of Resident #223's physician orders revealed morning medications to be administered from 7:00 A.M. to 11:00 A.M. included acamprosate (psychotropic) delayed release 666 milligrams (mg), cholecalciferol (vitamin)2,000 units, culturelle (probiotic) one capsule, gabapentin (anticonvulsant) 300 mg, levetiracetam (anticonvulsant) 500 mg, multivitamin one…
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.
Show the remaining 31 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-06 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
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 interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #53 was given the diet texture as ordered. This affected one resident (#53) of five residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility census was 68. Findings include: Review of Resident #53's medical record revealed an admission date of 04/18/24 with diagnoses including metabolic encephalopathy, chronic kidney disease, osteoporosis, scoliosis, unspecified dementia, generalized anxiety disorder, type two diabetes mellitus, mood disorder, and depression. Review of Resident #53's Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed a severe cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #53's progress note dated 01/07/25 revealed the resident had been noted to be pocketing food. hospice was notified and a new order was obtained to downgrade the resident's diet from regular texture to mechanical soft. Review of Resident #53's physician order dated 01/07/25 revealed the resident was to receive a mechanical soft diet.…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-01-08 · tag F0773 — isolatedProvide or obtain laboratory tests/services when ordered and promptly tell the ordering practitioner of the results.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, staff interview, review of facility contracts, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to obtain laboratory tests as ordered by the physician. This affected one (Resident #24) of three residents reviewed for laboratory services. The facility census was 66 residents. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #24 revealed an admission date of 10/21/24 with diagnoses including dementia, anxiety disorder, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, atherosclerosis of aorta, urinary tract infection, and mood disorder. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #24 dated 10/28/24 revealed the resident had severe cognitive impairment. Review of the progress note for Resident #24 dated 12/09/24 revealed the resident had bilateral edema in her extremities. The nurse contacted the physician and obtained an order for the following stat (immediate) laboratory blood tests: complete blood count (CBC), complete metabolic panel (CMP). Review of the physician's orders for Resident #24 revealed an order dated 12/09/24 for a stat CBC…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-24 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, facility Self-Reported Incident (SRI) review, video recording review, interviews, and facility policy review, this facility failed to ensure residents were not recorded without their consent or knowledge. This affected one (Resident #300) of the four residents reviewed for respect and dignity. The facility census was 66. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #300 revealed an admission date of 07/19/2025 with a discharge date of 09/26/2024. Diagnoses included burns to the left and right foot, osteomyelitis of the vertebra, sacral, and sacrococcygeal region, and Parkinson's disease. Review of Resident #300's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 out of 15 indicating an intact cognition for daily decision-making abilities. Resident #300 was noted to experience delusions and rejection of care at times. Review of the facility Self-Reported Incident #252058 dated 09/19/2024…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-06 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure physicians orders were transcribed and blood sugars were obtained as ordered. This affected one (Resident #64) of five medical records reviewed. The census was 62. Findings included: Review of Resident #64's medical record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] at 2:45 P.M. with diagnoses that included fracture of the right lower leg with surgical repair. anemia, anxiety, laceration of liver, right talus fracture, and diabetes. Review of the hospital transfer order dated 07/05/24 revealed orders for finger stick blood sugars before meals and at bedtime. Review of the facility physicians orders, treatment and medication administration record revealed no documented evidence the orders were transcribed or finger stick blood sugars were obtained. On 08/06/24 at 2:54 P.M., interview with the Director of Nursing verified the order for the finger stick blood sugars sugars before meals and at bedtime was not carried over and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-06 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the medical record and staff interview, the facility failed to provide treatment as ordered for Resident #62. This affected one resident (#62) out of three residents reviewed for wound care. The facility census was 60. Findings include: Review of the closed medical record revealed Resident #62, was admitted on [DATE] and discharged to the hospital on [DATE] with diagnoses including infection following a procedure, chronic respiratory failure, type II diabetes, cellulitis of left lower limb, and chronic kidney disease. Review of the after-visit summary revealed Resident #62 was at the hospital from [DATE] through 05/02/24 for a postoperative wound infection. The hospital discharge orders revealed Resident #62 was ordered a wound vacuum system to the left upper anterior thigh/groin to be changed every Monday and Thursday for two weeks. A contact layer such as an oil emulsion gauze was to be placed at the base of the wound followed by black foam. The wound vacuum was to be at 125 millimeters 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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-11-08 · tag F0807 — failed to offer suitable drinks — patternEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides drinks consistent with resident needs and preferences and sufficient to maintain resident hydration.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of resident council minutes, observations, staff interviews, and resident and family interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents had adequate fluids available per the resident's preferences. This affected seven residents (#14, #18, #22, #26, #28, #35, and #50). The facility census was 60. Findings include: Review of the resident council minutes dated 08/16/23 revealed the residents were helping themselves to ice from the ice chests in the hallways. The ice chest was removed, and residents had to ask for ice. The resident council minutes dated 09/13/23 revealed residents had concerns with ice water not getting passed each shift. Staff education was provided. During the initial tour of the facility on 11/06/23 from 7:19 A.M. to 7:36 A.M. revealed there were several residents who did not have fluids within their reach. Resident #19 was the only resident observed with ice water. Interview on 11/06/23 at 11:15 A.M. with State Tested Nursing Aide (STNA) #22 revealed fresh water was passed twice a shift. Interview on 11/06/23 at 2:47 P.M. with a family member 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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-08 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and resident and staff interview, the facility failed to administer medications to the residents as physician ordered. This affected two (Residents #34 and #61) of three residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 60. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #34's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on on 10/13/23. Diagnoses included urinary tract infection (UTI), type II diabetes mellitus, chronic heart failure, wound to left lower leg, and peripheral vascular disease. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #34 was cognitively intact. Review of the progress note dated 10/13/23 at 3:26 P.M. revealed Resident #34 was admitted to the facility. Review of the physician orders dated 10/13/23 revealed Resident #34 had physician orders to receive the following medications: cephalexin (antibiotic) 500 milligrams (mg) four times daily; carvedilol (to treat high blood pressure and heart…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-07 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure pressure ulcer prevention interventions were implemented for residents with known pressure ulcers as per their physician's orders and plan of care. This affected two residents (#3 and #52) of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. Findings include: 1. A review of Resident #3's medical record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, dementia with behavioral disturbances, low back pain, obesity, restlessness and agitation, and muscle weakness. A review of Resident #3's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) completed on 08/16/23 revealed the resident had unclear speech and rarely/ never made herself understood. She was sometimes able to understand others. She had short and long term memory impairment. Her cognitive skills for daily decision making was severely impaired. She did not display any behaviors during the seven day assessment period, nor was she…
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.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2022-12-07 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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 on observation, facility staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to store food in a sanitary manner. This had the potential to affect all residents as the facility identified all residents receive food from the kitchen. The facility also failed to store food items correctly in the secured unit which had the potential to affect all residents who lived on the secured unit. The total facility census was 47. Findings Include: 1. Observation of the reach in refrigerator in the main kitchen on 12/04/22 at 8:55 A.M. revealed there was a large plastic container labeled vegetable soup dated 11/26, one 112 ounce open can of vanilla pudding covered with plastic wrap dated 11/17/22 -11/21/11. In the refrigerator were also two pitchers of milk, one pitcher of sweet tea, and one pitcher of orange cool aid that were undated and unlabeled. Interview with Dietary Worker (DW) #309 on 12/04/22 at 9:00 A.M. it was confirmed the reach in refrigerator had a large plastic container labeled vegetable soup dated 11/26, an open can of vanilla pudding covered with plastic wrap 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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-12-07 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide 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, interview and facility policy review the facility failed to implement appropriate infection and control practices. This had the potential to affect one (Unit One) of three units. Unit One housed 21 of 47 residents residing in the facility. Findings included: Observation on 12/06/22 at 8:14 A.M. revealed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #331 washing his hands and donning (putting on) gloves for finger stick blood sugar check of Resident #42. He then collected his equipment of a glucometer (a device to measure blood glucose level), a lancet, a, test strip, alcohol wipes and Novolog pen for the Resident #42. LPN #331 laid the glucometer on Resident #42's bed and then cleaned Resident #42's finger, punctured the finger for a drop of blood and obtained a finger stick blood sugar of 99. No insulin was needed for this blood glucose reading. LPN #331 then put the lancet and the test strip he had just used on Resident #42 in one of his gloved hands, removed his glove over the lancet and test strip, put the first glove removed with lancet and test strip in his other hand…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2022-12-07 · tag F0553 — failed to let residents help plan their care — isolatedAllow resident to participate in the development and implementation of his or her person-centered plan of care.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, resident, and facility staff interview and policy review the facility failed to have quarterly care conference meetings for two (#17 and #32) of two residents reviewed for care planning. The total facility census was 47. Findings Include: 1.Record review revealed Resident #17 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include but are not limited to cerebral palsy, dementia, and anxiety disorder. Review of the most recent annual minimum data set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had cognitive impairment, had hallucinations and delusions during the review period. Resident #17 had trouble falling asleep or staying asleep two to six days of the review period. Resident #17 required extensive assist for bed mobility, dressing, toileting, and hygiene, and limited assist with eating and locomotion on the unit, and was dependent on staff for transfers. Resident #17 had documented care conference meetings in 2022 on 11/14/22, 04/11/22, and 01/11/22. The medical…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2022-12-07 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and facility document review the facility failed to ensure resident privacy curtains were clean. This affected two Residents (#37 and #41) of 47 residents reviewed for environment. The facility census was 47. Findings included: Observation on 12/04/22 at 9:51 A.M. of Resident #37's privacy curtain revealed multiple dark soiled areas noted on the edge of the curtain used to pull it closed for privacy and approximately 24 inches from the bottom of the curtain. The soiled areas were easily noted when the privacy curtain was open. Resident #41 was Resident #37's roommate. Observation on 12/05/22 at 9:10 A.M. of Resident #37's privacy curtain with the same multiple dark soiled areas as noted on 12/04/22. Observation on 12/05/22 at 9:55 A.M. of Resident #37's privacy curtain with the same multiple dark soiled areas as noted on 12/04/22 with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #338. She verified the privacy curtain was soiled and unsanitary. On 12/05/22 at 10:07 A.M. an interview with Maintenance Coordinator (MC) #332 revealed privacy curtains were only washed…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2022-12-07 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and facility staff interview the facility failed to accurately code minimum data set (MDS) 3.0 assessments for one (#2) of one resident reviewed for insulin. The total facility census was 47. Findings include: Review of Resident #2's medical record revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that include but are not limited to end stage renal disease, weakness, unsteadiness on feet, congestive heart failure and pain in right knee. Review of the quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed the resident is cognitively intact had delusions and verbal behaviors one to three days of the review period. Resident #2 had the following medications coded as administered during the review period, seven days of injections, zero days of insulin injections, seven days of antidepressant and diuretic medications. Review of the 10/12/22 quarterly MDS revealed the resident had seven days of injections coded and zero days of insulin provided to the resident. Review of the 09/30/22 quarterly MDS…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2022-12-07 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, record review and facility policy review the facility failed to develop care plans completely and timely upon admission. This affected two residents (#39 and #42) of three residents reviewed for urinary catheter/urinary tract infection and two residents reviewed for behavior and emotional needs. The facility census was 47. Findings included: 1. Review of Resident #39's record revealed she was admitted on [DATE] with the diagnoses of muscle weakness, type two diabetes mellitus without complications, major depression disorder, and urinary tract infection. Review of Resident #39's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed she was cognitively independent and entered the facility with a urinary/Foley catheter (a flexible tube that drains urine from the bladder to a urine bag). Review of Resident #39's care plan, dated 10/28/22, revealed a care plan for her having an alternation in elimination related to a Foley catheter. This care plan was developed 27 days after admission. On…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-12-07 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review the facility failed to update care plans timely. This affected one resident (#37) of one resident reviewed for anticoagulant use. The facility census was 47. Findings included: Review of Resident #37's medical record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses of type two diabetes mellitus without complications, pressure ulcer of sacral region (Stage 4), muscle weakness, major depressive disorder, and generalized anxiety. Review Resident #37's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed she was cognitively impaired and had received an anticoagulant (medication used to prevent blood clots) for the seven lookback days. Review of Resident #37's physician order dated 09/27/22 revealed an order for Enoxaparin (an anticoagulant medication) 40 milligram/0.4 milliliters subcutaneous once every morning which was discontinued on 11/04/22. After 11/04/22 Resident #37 no longer had an order for an anticoagulant. 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-12-07 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure a care planned nutritional intervention for weight loss was followed. This affected one resident (#39) of four residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility census was 47. Findings included: Review of Resident #39's record revealed she was admitted on [DATE] with the diagnoses of muscle weakness, type two diabetes mellitus without complications, major depression disorder, and urinary tract infection. Review of Resident #39's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed she was cognitively independent, needed supervision and setup only for eating and no dental concerns, oral concerns, or swallowing difficulties. Review of Resident #39's weights revealed on 10/03/2022, the resident weighed 143.0 pounds and on 11/29/2022, the resident weighed 136.6 pounds which was a -4.48% weight loss. Review of Resident #39's care plan dated 10/04/22 revealed she was at risk for altered nutrition and the goal was…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-12-07 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide 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 observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident #13's oxygen was in place and being administered as ordered. This affected one (Resident #13) of two residents reviewed for respiratory care. The facility census was 47. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #13 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and emphysema. Resident #13 had a physician order for continuous oxygen at three liters per nasal cannula. An observation on 12/06/22 at 8:17 A.M. revealed Resident #13 was sitting in a wheelchair in the dining room on the secure unit. The resident had her head down and eyes closed. The resident's oxygen tubing was observed hanging over the handle on the back of the wheelchair. At the time of the observation, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #307 verified Resident #13's oxygen tubing was not in place and was located where the the resident could not have placed it. LPN #307 also verified Resident #13…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2022-12-07 · tag F0699 — isolatedProvide care or services that was trauma informed and/or culturally competent.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review and facility policy review the facility failed to proper assess residents for trauma-informed care. This affected one resident (#42) of two residents reviewed for behavioral/emotional services. The facility census was 47. Findings included: Review of Resident #42's medical record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses of dehiscence of amputation stump, acquired absence of left leg below the knee, muscle weakness, infection following a procedure, major depressive disorder, schizoaffective disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and suicidal ideations. Review of Resident #42's admission minimum data set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed he was cognitively independent and had an active diagnosis of PTSD. Review of Resident #42's care plans revealed no care plan for his PTSD. Review of Resident #42's Clinical admission Documentation dated 09/28/22 revealed Resident #42 was admitted with no psychiatric diagnosis.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-12-07 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — isolatedMake sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure a resident room and bathroom was free of pests. This affected two residents (#9 and #32) of 47 residents residing in the facility. Findings included: Observation on 12/04/22 at 10:58 A.M. of Resident #9 sitting in his room with a back scratcher which he was using as a fly swatter. There were several small flying insects observed to be flying around the room. An interview at the time with Resident #9 revealed flies had been in his room and bathroom for about two months. He reported that he has informed the facility of the problem, and nothing is getting done. Observation on 12/04/22 at 11:00 A.M. of Resident #9's bathroom, which he shared with Resident #32, of approximately 20 to 30 small flying insects on the walls, sink, toilet and floor. There was also a small red fruit fly trap on the bathroom counter. Observation on 12/05/22 at 9:00 A.M. of Resident #9's bathroom with an increase from the day before of flying insects, approximately 30 to 40 insects. Observation on 12/05/22 at 9:50 A.M. 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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2020-01-13 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure residents who were dependent on staff for personal care received the assistance they needed for nail care, the removal of unwanted facial hair and/or the application of glasses. This affected two residents (#36 and #48) of two residents reviewed for communication-sensory and two residents (#15 and #38) of four residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL) care. Findings include: 1. A review of Resident #15's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included Huntington's disease (an inherited disease that causes the breakdown of nerve cells in the brain affecting functional abilities and results in movement, thinking and psychiatric disorders), unspecified psychosis, major depressive disorder, muscle weakness, lack of coordination and chronic fatigue. A review of Resident #15's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, an assessment tool used by the facility to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2020-01-13 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — patternProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, activity calendar review and interview the facility failed to ensure cognitively impaired residents on the secured unit were being offered preferred activities and offering scheduled activities after 6:00 P.M This affected two resident (#36 and #365) of two residents reviewed for activities and had the potential to affect all residents on the secured unit (Resident #2, #4, #8, #11, #13, #14, #16, #18, #19, #21, #22, #26, #27, #28, #29, #30, #31, #32, #34, #37, #39, #40, #41, #48, #50, #51, #53, #54, #55, #56, #58, #59, #60 and #366) on the evening shift. Findings include: 1. Medical record review revealed Resident #36 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including unspecified dementia, cognitive communication deficit and muscle weakness. Review of Resident #36's activity assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was religious, had a history of drawing/coloring and required engagement for activity involvement due to cognitive impairments. Activity time…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2020-01-13 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — patternDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure pneumococcal immunizations were offered and/or provided to residents. The facility also failed to ensure written procedures were in place to identify who and when pneumococcal vaccines would be offered (in accordance with Centers for Disease Control (CDC) guidelines). This affected five residents (#11, #20, #23, #34 and #60) of five residents reviewed for pneumococcal immunizations. Findings include: Review of Resident #11, Resident #20, Resident #23, Resident #34 and Resident #60's medical records revealed vaccination records were maintained as part of the medical record. Each resident reviewed was noted to have a vaccination authorization form. The form included influenza and pneumococcal vaccines (both PCV-13 and PPSV-23). The records identified each of the residents had either consented or refused the influenza vaccines. However, the pneumococcal vaccine section for each of the above five residents were blank. The record identified no evidence any education was provided to the residents/families, in order to make…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2020-01-13 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — patternMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure the environment was maintained in a safe, clean and sanitary manner. This affected nine residents (#12, #15, #20, #23, #35, #38, #45, #60, and #62) of 24 residents whose rooms were observed. Findings include: 1. On 01/06/20 at 12:29 P.M., an observation of Resident #38 and #35's room revealed the tile floor between the two beds and in front of the bathroom had a blackish-gray colored substance on the floor where the tiles met. The substance was dried and looked like grime buildup or adhesive that had worked it's way up between the tile cracks. Resident #38's tilt and space wheelchair in her room was observed to have a padded cushion on her footrests that was torn. The wall next to Resident #38's bed was observed to have scuff marks in it. The drywall had some covering over it but the covering had not been painted and was scuffed by the bed being raised and lowered while against the wall. Resident #35's wall by her bed also had scuff marks on it. On 01/13/20 at 12:42 P.M., a follow up observation of Resident #38 and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2020-01-13 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #35 was treated in a dignified manner when a notice was posted in the resident's room in plain view that provided information regarding her care. This affected one resident (#35) of two residents reviewed for dignity. Findings include: A review of Resident #35's medical record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included dementia, senile degeneration of the brain, above knee amputations of the bilateral lower extremities, and overactive bladder. A review of Resident #35's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, an assessment tool used by the facility to identify a resident's level of care for reimbursement purposes, dated 11/21/19 revealed the resident's cognition was severely impaired. The assessment revealed the resident was totally dependent on two staff for transfers and was always incontinent of her bowel and bladder. On 01/06/20 at 1:45 P.M., an observation of Resident #35…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2020-01-13 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #12's call light was within reach and accessible for the resident to use. This affected one resident (#12) of 20 residents whose care plans were reviewed. Findings include: A review of Resident #12's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included muscle weakness, lack of coordination, unsteadiness on her feet, and repeated falls. A review of Resident #12's quarterly MDS 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident did not have any communication issues. She was able to make herself understood and was able to understand others. Her cognition was moderately impaired. She was not known to have any behaviors nor was she known to reject care. She required supervision with set up help for transfers, walking in her room and toilet use. Balance issues were noted with surface to surface transfers, moving from a seated to standing position, walking, turning around and with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2020-01-13 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as 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 2. Medical record review revealed Resident #56 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including unspecified dementia with behavioral disturbance, schizoaffective disorder and major depressive disorder. Review of the electronic physician progress note, dated 01/30/19 revealed a new delusional disorder diagnosis for Resident #56. Review of Resident #56's PAS/RR dated 02/16/19 revealed diagnoses including mood disorder and schizoaffective disorder. There was no evidence delusional disorder was captured on the PAS/RR. On 01/09/20 at 11:25 A.M., interview with Administrator #24 verified Resident #56's PAS/RR dated 02/16/19 was inaccurate as it did not include the resident's diagnosis of delusional disorder. Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure Preadmission Screening and/or Assessment Resident Review(PAS/RR and/or PASARR) documentation was accurate and submitted as required. This affected two residents (#34 and #56) of four residents reviewed for PASRR. Findings include: 1.…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2020-01-13 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #48's care plan was revised to reflect the use of eyeglasses. This affected one resident (#48) of two residents reviewed for communication-sensory. Findings include: Medical record review revealed Resident #48 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including mild macular degeneration and unspecified dementia. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #48 was severely impaired for daily decision-making and had adequate vision with the use of eyeglasses. Review of Resident #48's electronic physician's orders dated January 2020 revealed Resident #48 was to wear glasses. Review of the care plan titled At Risk for Impaired Vision revised 12/02/19 revealed no evidence the care plan included macular degeneration or that the resident wore glasses. On 01/09/20 at 8:49 A.M., observation revealed Resident #48 was in his bed, awake and was not wearing glasses. At the time…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2020-01-13 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to implement a comprehensive and individualized bowel protocol for Resident #418 when the resident did not have a bowel movement recorded for eight days. This affected one resident (#418) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medication use. Findings include: A review of Resident #418's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included osteomyelitis (infection involving the bone), Stage III pressure ulcer (a full thickness skin loss potentially extending into the subcutaneous tissue layer) of the sacral region, muscle weakness, and chronic back pain. A review of Resident #418's physician's orders revealed the use of Norco (an opioid narcotic analgesic that contains Hydrocodone and Acetaminophen) 10- 325 milligrams (mg) by mouth (po) every four hours as needed for pain and Methadone (opioid narcotic analgesic) 10 mg three times a day on a scheduled basis for pain. To help with constipation that…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2020-01-13 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #12's fall prevention interventions, including the use of a call light was in place as per the resident's plan of care. This affected one resident (#12) of three residents reviewed for accidents. Findings include: A review of Resident #12's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included muscle weakness, lack of coordination, unsteadiness on her feet, and repeated falls. A review of Resident #12's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident did not have any communication issues. She was able to make herself understood and was able to understand others. Her cognition was moderately impaired. She was not known to have any behaviors nor was she known to reject care. She required supervision with set up help for transfers, walking in her room and toilet use. Balance issues were noted with surface to surface transfers, moving from a seated…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2020-01-13 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
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 and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #58's admission bladder assessment was accurate. This affected one residents (#58) of 20 residents whose assessments and care plans were reviewed. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #58 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including renal insufficiency and history of urinary incontinence. Review of the Point of Care History level of control with bladder function dated 12/16/19 revealed Resident #58 was incontinent of urine twice. Review of the New admission Bladder Observation dated 12/16/19 revealed Resident #58 was continent of bladder. On 01/13/20 at 1:50 P.M., interview with Registered Nurse #81 verified Resident #58's admission bladder assessment was inaccurate.
- No harm found · C2020-01-13 · tag F0575 — widespreadPost a list of names, addresses, and telephone numbers of all pertinent State agencies and advocacy groups and a statement that the resident may file a complaint with the State Survey Agency.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, required state/local information posting review and interview the facility failed to ensure required postings included all required contact information including local and state agency information. This affected three resident (#9, #17 and #25) of three residents who participated in resident council and had the potential to affect all 68 residents residing in the facility. Finding include: On 01/07/20 between 3:16 P.M. and 3:49 P.M., interview with Resident #9, #17 and #25 revealed they were unaware of where the Ombudsman contact information was posted or what the role of the Ombudsman was. The residents also stated they were not aware they had the right to formally complain to the State agency regarding care they were receiving. On 01/07/20 at 3:50 P.M., observation revealed the surveyor was unable to locate the posting of the state Ombudsman information, local or state contact information, or the posting on how to file a complaint to the State agency on the 100 hall or secured unit. On 01/07/20 between 3:55 P.M. and 4:10 P.M., observation 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.
“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.
- 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.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to ALTERCARE — 22 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 3 of 5 | 3.3 | -0.3 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.7 | -0.7 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.3 | -0.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
The other 21 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.3★, 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 / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TSG NURSING CENTERS, INC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 02/01/2018 |
| GERALD F SCHROER DYNASTY TR UA 12312009 FBO ANDREW M SCHROER | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/01/2018 |
| GERALD F SCHROER DYNASTY TR UA 12312009 FBO GERALD F SCHROER JR | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/01/2018 |
| GERALD F SCHROER DYNASTY TR UA 12312009 FBO MATTHEW SCHROER | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/01/2018 |
| GERALD F SCHROER DYNASTY TR UA 12312009 MARGARET S GOODMAN | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/01/2018 |
| SUSANNE SCHROER DYNASTY TRUST U/A | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/01/2018 |
| THE SCHROER GROUP, INC. | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/01/2018 |
| MOCK, DOUGLAS | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 09/20/2021 |
| FILM, GEORGE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 02/01/2018 |
| GOODMAN, JOHN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 02/01/2018 |
| JOHNSON, KATHY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 02/01/2018 |
| NUTTER, ORIAN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 10/01/2020 |
| ALTERCARE OF OHIO, INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 02/01/2018 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 13 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
8 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $356K 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
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
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.
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 365481. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-02-06, 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.