Avenue At North Ridgeville
6200 Lear Nagle Road, North Ridgeville, OH 44039 · For profit - Corporation · 103 certified beds · (440) 412-7100 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- it has 2 actual-harm citations
- inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (39) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $68,390 in federal fines (most recent 2024-04-09)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- its last standard health inspection was over 3 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions
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 | 1 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 4 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 2 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 | 6.6% | 5.3% | 15.4% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.6% | 6.2% | 5.4% | worse |
| 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 | 0.3% | 0.4% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 80.4% | 30.1% | 6.5% | worse 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 | 5.6% | 3.2% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 6.6% | 6.1% | 16.1% | typical for the state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 27.2% | 25.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.8% | 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 | 25.6% | 21.4% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 8.8% | 8.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 84.7% | 75.6% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 21.4% | 24.9% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 13.2% | 12.9% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.70 | 1.73 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.25 | 1.80 | 1.80 | better |
‡ 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.
58.3% 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 92 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 77.8% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 45 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 0.53 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 84% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 23% 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 | 58.3%CMS range 47.9–69.0 | 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 | 9.6%CMS range 5.8–13.5 | 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 | 77.8% | 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 | 77.8% | 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 | 64.4% | 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 | 93.7% | 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 | 3.2% | 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 | 1.6% | 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 | 6.3%CMS range 3.7–10.7 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.25 | 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 103 beds and averages 96.9 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 6 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 3.69 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.59 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.94 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 3.41 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.81 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.67 to 0.37 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 47% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 3 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
39 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 26 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2024-02-15 · 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 THIS IS AN INCIDENCE OF PAST NON-COMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY. Based on observation, interviews with staff and local police officers, review of medical records, review of the facility's investigation, review of data from the Weather Underground website, and review of the facility policy for elopement, the facility failed to ensure one resident (Resident #38) with diagnoses of dementia, mild cognitive impairment, age related cognitive decline, multiple sclerosis (MS) and lack of coordination did not walk away from the facility unsupervised and without staff knowledge. This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy and the potential for serious life-threatening harm, injury and/or death when on 07/30/23 at 5:38 P.M., Resident #38 exited through the front door, without staff knowledge, after following another resident's family member out the door which required a code to be entered to exit. Resident #38 was subsequently located in a shopping plaza parking lot after the police received 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.
- Actual harm · Gcited beforedisputed · IDR2026-06-29 · 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, staff interviews, review of hospital paperwork, review of Emergency Medical Service (EMS) run report, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure timely care and services following Resident #105's change in condition and failed to implement Resident #4's skin treatments as ordered. Actual harm occurred on 05/30/26 when Resident #105, who had a history of stroke and mild cognitive impairment, was observed to have a change in his cognitive and physical status without prompt assessment and response to Resident #105's change in condition. Facility staff noted possible slurred speech earlier on 05/30/26, but the resident was not assessed or treated until a left facial droop was identified at 11:00 A.M. Resident #105 was hospitalized with an acute stroke experiencing severe dysphagia requiring nothing by mouth (NPO) status and a nasogastric (NG) tube placement, loss of alertness and orientation, and new neurological deficits. This affected two residents (Resident #4 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.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2024-04-09 · 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 family and staff interviews, record review, review of hospital records, review of facility policy, and review of facility fall investigations, the facility failed to ensure Resident #100 received adequate and timely care and treatment following an unwitnessed fall with major injury. Actual Harm occurred on 03/03/24 following an unwitnessed fall at 7:00 P.M. when the facility failed to adequately identify the resident's injury, treat the resident's pain, and timely obtain an x-ray for Resident #100, who, over the next few days, exhibited signs of pain (including verbal complaints of pain, facial grimacing and winching in pain during care and with movement). The Nurse Practitioner (NP) was notified of Resident #100's pain on 03/05/24 at 5:40 P.M. and ordered bilateral arm x-rays due to pain. The ordered x-rays were not obtained until the afternoon of 03/07/24, and results indicated a left arm fracture. The resident was subsequently transferred to the hospital on [DATE] at 4:40 P.M. for treatment where 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 · F2026-06-29 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — widespreadProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, resident and staff interview, review of facility call light tracking records, review of complaint intakes, and review of Resident Council meeting minutes, the facility failed to have adequate staffing to meet the care needs of all residents. This directly affected seven (#41, #14, #51, #93, #77, #101, #31) of seven residents reviewed for staffing and had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 89. Findings include:1. Review of Resident #41's medical record revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, muscle weakness and unsteadiness on feet. Review of Resident #41's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident exhibited intact cognition, was frequently incontinent of bladder and always incontinent of bowel. Review of Resident #41's care plans revealed an intervention revised on 09/04/25 for the resident would like to get up out 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 · F2026-06-29 · tag F0835 — failed to run the facility competently — widespreadAdminister the facility in a manner that enables it to use its resources effectively and efficiently.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, resident interviews, staff interviews, review of Resident Council meeting minutes, and review of the facility handbook, the facility failed to ensure staff did not utilize their personal phones in resident care areas of the facility. This had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 89.Findings include:Interview on 06/22/26 at 10:01 A.M. with Resident #51 revealed staff were often utilizing their personal cell phones while working in the facility. Resident #51 reported that on one occasion, a staff member told the resident they were being rude by interrupting the staff member who was on the phone with their boyfriend at the time.Interview on 06/22/26 at 12:42 P.M. with Resident #66 revealed staff were often seen walking by the resident's room while on their cell phones.Interview on 06/22/26 at 12:57 P.M. with Resident #82 revealed staff members working in the facility were often seen using personal cell phones. Resident #82 reported staff often walked by their room while on their phone.Interview on 06/22/26 at 4:12…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-29 · tag F0562 — isolatedProvide immediate access to any 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, observation, staff interview, family interview, and employee handbook review, the facility failed to ensure resident family members and other individuals were able to contact facility staff members via telephone. This directly affected one resident (Resident #93) of one resident reviewed for resident access. The facility census was 89.Findings include:Review of the medical record revealed Resident #93 was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included Parkinson's disease, bipolar disorder, insomnia, anxiety, depression, other hallucinations, lack of coordination, panic disorder, tremors, and muscle weakness.Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE], revealed the resident was cognitively intact. The resident was dependent on assistance from staff for the activities of daily living.During an interview on 06/23/26 at 3:00 P.M., Resident #93's family member reported that when attempting to contact the facility in the evening or at night via…
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 beforedisputed · IDR2026-06-29 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident #41's PureWick incontinence device was implemented per the physician's order. This finding affected one (Resident #41) of three residents reviewed for incontinence care. Findings include: Review of Resident #41's medical record revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and unspecified dementia.Review of the email to the hospital dated 01/19/26 at 4:02 P.M. revealed the Power-of-Attorney (POA) had concerns about returning and would like to address them at a care conference shortly after readmission. The concerns included the PureWick system which she was aware that the facility was unable to accommodate at any of the buildings and possibly not getting the proper medications at the proper times.Review of an email from the facility to Ombudsman #737 on 02/26/26 at 9:34 P.M. revealed the team shared that it was communicated to the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-29 · 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 observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered as ordered. This affected three (#77, #93 and #101) of four residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 89.Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #101 revealed an admission date of 12/23/25 with diagnoses including cerebral infarction, chronic respiratory failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), congestive heart failure, anxiety, atrial fibrillation, chronic kidney disease, Review of the admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was cognitively intact and was dependent on staff for bathing, transfers, dressing and toileting. Review of the physician order revealed evening medication included Atorvastatin 80 milligrams (mg), Famotidine 20mg, Fluoxetine 20 mg, Topirate 100mg. Morning medications including Metoprol 25 mg and Omeprazole 40 mg. Review of the Medication Administration Record for December 2025 revealed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-12-17 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, interview and review of manufacturer's instructions for use, the facility failed to ensure mechanical lift (Hoyer) devices were properly maintained to promote safe transfers. This had the potential to affect 31 residents (#3, #4, #6, #8, #10, #12, #13, #26, #27, #30, #33, #35, #36, #37, #38, #43, #44, #46, #47, #61, #65, #68, #70, #73, #80, #82, #84, #85, #87, #91, and #96) who were identified to require a mechanical lift for transferring. The facility census was 100.Review of the medical record for Resident #84 revealed an admission date of 08/10/21 with diagnoses to include quadriplegia, anxiety disorder and hypothyroidism. Review of the comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #84 was cognitively intact and was dependent for activities of daily living. Observation and interview of three Hoyer lifts on 12/16/25 at 6:01 A.M. with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #359 verified that the right wheel did not move to allow the legs 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 · E2025-12-17 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — patternEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
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, review of the medical record, staff interview, resident interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered per physician orders resulting in a medication error exceeding five percent. 41 opportunities were observed with six medication errors, resulting in a medication error rate of 14 percent. This affected four (#37, #80, #84, #89) of four residents observed for medication administration. The facility census was 100. 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #89 revealed an admission date of 03/25/25. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hypertension, dementia, and adjustment disorder.Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had intact cognition. Review of the 12/2025 physician orders revealed the resident had morning medication orders with a scheduled time of 7:00 A.M. for Spiriva Respimat Inhalation Solution 1.25 microgram (mcg)/actuation (act) one inhalation in morning, 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 · D2025-12-17 · 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 review of the medical record, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure resident representatives were notified of medication changes. This affected two (#95, #43) of three residents reviewed for changes in condition. The facility census was 100. 1.Review of the medical record for Resident #95 revealed an admission date of 05/06/21. Diagnoses included type two diabetes mellitus, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar disorder, atrial fibrillation, hypertension, and dysphagia.Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had impaired cognition. Review of a physician order dated 05/05/25 revealed the resident had an order for metformin 500 milligrams (mg), give one tablet daily for type two diabetes mellitus. Review of the nurses' notes dated 05/05/25 through 05/28/25 revealed no documentation the resident's representative was notified of the new orders for the metformin.Interview on 12/15/25 at 3:30 P.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) verified…
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 before2025-12-17 · 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 and record review, the facility failed to ensure that care plans were revised to reflect Resident #95's allergies and Resident #103's morning arise time. This affected two residents #95 and # 103. The facility's census was 100. 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #103 revealed an admission date of 04/01/22 and readmission date of 01/08/24 with a discharge date of 07/10/25. Diagnoses included type Alzheimer's disease, atrial fibrillation, and major depressive disorder. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had severely impaired cognition and required moderate assistance for activities of daily living. Review of the concern dated 05/22/25 revealed that Resident #103's daughter requested that she stay in bed longer before getting resident up for the day. Review of Resident #103's care plan dated 04/30/25 revealed Resident #103 was an early morning get up for increased safety. The care plan was not revised regarding Resident #103's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-17 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the medical record, staff interview, resident interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure an external catheter system for incontinence care was provided per physician orders. This affected one (#43) of three residents reviewed for incontinence care. The facility census was 100. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #43 had an admission date of 01/23/25. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hypertension, gastroesophageal reflux disease, and dementia.Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had intact cognition. The resident was frequently incontinent of bladder and always incontinent of bowel. The resident was dependent for transfers and required substantial/maximal assistance for toileting.Review of Resident #43's admission referral and admission physician orders revealed the resident was admitted directly from another nursing facility. Further review of the referral admission orders current as 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.
Show the remaining 26 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-17 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the medical record, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident allergy was identified for a physician ordered medication during the monthly medication regimen review. This affected one (#95) of three residents reviewed for medication allergies. The facility census was 100.Review of the medical record for Resident #95 revealed an admission date of 05/06/21. Diagnoses included type two diabetes mellitus, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar disorder, atrial fibrillation, hypertension, and dysphagia.Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had impaired cognition. Review of Resident #95's allergy alert profile dated 05/26/21 revealed the resident had allergies to metformin, Depakote, Geodon, Lexapro, Pravachol, Seroquel, and Zetia. On 08/27/24 an allergy to Ativan was added. The allergy to metformin was noted as unknown severity.Review of Resident #95's care plan revealed the resident had allergies to Abilify,…
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 before2025-12-17 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the medical record, staff interview, pharmacist interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident was not administered a medication with a noted allergy without clarification from the physician. This affected one (#95) of three residents reviewed for medication allergies. The facility identified 67 residents with medication allergies. The facility census was 100.Review of the medical record for Resident #95 revealed an admission date of 05/06/21. Diagnoses included type two diabetes mellitus, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar disorder, atrial fibrillation, hypertension, and dysphagia.Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had impaired cognition. Review of Resident #95's allergy alert profile dated 05/26/21 revealed the resident had allergies to metformin, Depakote, Geodon, Lexapro, Pravachol, Seroquel, and Zetia. On 08/27/24 an allergy to Ativan was added. The allergy to metformin was noted as unknown severity.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 before2024-05-10 · 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 observation, medical record review, hospital documentation review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure surgical wound and wound drainage care was provided as ordered by a physician following re-admission to the facility. This affected one (#52) of three residents reviewed for wounds. The facility census was 93. Findings include: Review of Resident #52's medical record identified admission to the facility occurred on 11/16/23 with medical diagnoses including bipolar disorder, urine retention, multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer's disease, and neoplasm of the genital organs. Further review of the medical record revealed Resident #52 required hospitalization from 04/29/24 through 05/07/24 for a scrotal abscess that required incision and drainage surgery. Review of Resident #52's hospital discharge documentation dated 05/07/24 revealed physician orders, under the section for drain and tube care, for the resident to have a nurse change the Kerlix dressing (antimicrobial rolled dressing) twice a day…
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 · D2024-05-10 · 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 — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, medical record review, hospital documentation review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure resident re-admission and skin assessments were accurate. This affected one (#52) of three residents reviewed for wounds. The facility census was 93. Findings include: Review of Resident #52's medical record identified admission to the facility occurred on 11/16/23 with medical diagnoses including bipolar disorder, urine retention, multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer's disease, and neoplasm of the genital organs. Further review of the medical record revealed Resident #52 required hospitalization from 04/29/24 through 05/07/24 for a scrotal abscess that required incision and drainage surgery. Review of Resident #52's hospital discharge documentation dated 05/07/24 revealed physician orders, under the section for drain and tube care, for the resident to have a nurse change the Kerlix dressing (antimicrobial rolled dressing) twice a day with wet to dry and maintain a Penrose drain (a soft,…
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 before2024-04-09 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — patternHonor 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, staff interview, record review, policy review, and review of a self-reported incident, the facility failed to ensure Resident #89 was treated with respect and dignity during care. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure privacy and dignity was provided to Resident #02 while toileting, and failed to ensure indwelling urinary catheter drainage bags were covered in a dignified manner for Residents #39 and #56. This affected four (Residents #89, #02, #39, and #56) of seven residents reviewed for activities of daily living and dignity. The facility census was 96. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #89 revealed an admission date of 03/23/24. Medical diagnoses included congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, iron deficiency anemia, and muscle weakness. Review of Resident #89's Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 admission assessment dated [DATE], revealed the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating intact…
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 · D2024-04-09 · tag F0637 — isolatedAssess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff and resident interview, and record review, the facility failed to complete a Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 significant change assessment for a resident who sustained a significant decline in functional abilities following a fall with upper extremity fracture. This affected one (Resident #20) of ten residents reviewed for accuracy of assessments. The facility census was 96. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #20 revealed an admission date of 06/02/22. Medical diagnoses included Sjogren syndrome, lack of coordination, muscle weakness, and a displaced fracture of the surgical neck of the left humerus. The resident sustained a fall with a left humerus fracture at the facility on 02/22/24. Review of an incident report dated 02/22/24 at 5:35 P.M. revealed Resident #20 sustained a fall after attempting to get up unassisted to walk to the bathroom. The resident landed on her left shoulder and did not hit her head. The nurse on duty was present outside of Resident #20's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-09 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a baseline care plan was developed and a summary provided to Resident #100 and/or their representative. The facility also failed to ensure a summary of Resident #111's baseline plan of care was provided to the resident and/or their representative. This affected two (Residents #100 and #111) of four residents reviewed for care planning. The facility census was 96. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #100 revealed an admission date of 03/03/24. Medical diagnoses included cerebrovascular accident (stroke) with residual right sided weakness, type II diabetes mellitus, and frequent falls. Resident #100 was transferred to a local hospital on [DATE] and did not return to the facility. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 Medicare 5-day and discharge return not anticipated assessment, dated 03/07/24, revealed Resident #100 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of a 00, indicating severely…
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 before2024-04-09 · 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, staff and resident interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident care plans were updated to reflect individualized and necessary components of the residents' care. This affected two (Residents #20 and #94) of ten residents reviewed for care plans. The facility census was 96. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #20 revealed an admission date of 06/02/22. Medical diagnoses included Sjogren syndrome, lack of coordination, muscle weakness, and a displaced fracture of the surgical neck of the left humerus. The resident was recorded to have had a fall with fracture with an overnight hospitalization from 02/23/24 to 02/24/24. The resident had a second hospitalization for pneumonia from 02/27/24 to 03/03/24. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 Medicare 5-day assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #20 to have a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of eight, indicative of moderately impaired cognition. Review of the incident report…
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 before2024-04-09 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, resident interview, and policy review, the facility failed to remove an indwelling urinary catheter as ordered and failed to provide justification for the continued use of the indwelling urinary catheter. This affected one (Resident #20) of one resident reviewed for urinary catheters. The facility census was 96. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #20 revealed an admission date of 06/02/22. Medical diagnoses included Sjogren syndrome, lack of coordination, muscle weakness, and a displaced fracture of the surgical neck of the left humerus. The resident sustained a fall with a left humerus fracture at the facility on 02/22/24. Review of an incident report dated 02/22/24 at 5:35 P.M. revealed Resident #20 had a hospitalization for pneumonia from 02/27/24 to 03/03/24. The resident returned to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #20's interdisciplinary progress notes revealed a noted dated 03/03/24 at 12:30 P.M. indicating Resident #20 had an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-02-15 · tag F0729 — widespreadVerify that a nurse aide has been trained; and if they haven't worked as a nurse aide for 2 years, receive retraining.
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 personnel file review, the facility failed to ensure all State Tested Nursing Assistants met the competency verification requirements. This had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 102. Findings include Interview on [DATE] at 12:00 P.M. with State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #240 revealed she had worked with Dietary Aide (DA) #200 numerous times and DA #200 performed tasks of an STNA. DA #200 had been at the facility for approximately a year and a half and had not taken the STNA certification test. Telephone interview on [DATE] at 1:50 P.M. with STNA #230 revealed DA #200 had been employed at the facility for a long time and was allowed to work as and STNA without having taken the STNA certification test. STNA #230 stated the Administrator was aware DA #200 was not state tested and allowed DA #200 to continue to work as an STNA. Telephone interview on [DATE] at 2:29 P.M. with DA #200 revealed she had been employed at the facility for…
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 before2023-11-28 · 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 medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure care conferences were held in a timely manner and residents or their representatives were included in their care conferences. This affected one (#105) of three residents reviewed for care planning. The facility census was 103. Findings include: Review of Resident #105's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included chronic kidney disease, dementia, muscle weakness, insomnia, and muscle weakness. The resident expired in the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #105's Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessments dated [DATE], [DATE], and [DATE], revealed the resident was assessed with severe cognitive impairment. Further review of Resident #105's medical record revealed the resident's daughter was his power of attorney for care and finances. Review of Resident #105's plan of care, initiated on [DATE], revealed the resident had the right to make lifestyle choices. Interventions included…
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 before2023-11-28 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered as ordered resulting in a significant medication error. This affected one (#104) of three residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 103. Findings include: Review of Resident #104's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included type II diabetes mellitus, presence of cardiac pacemaker, cerebral infarction, depression, heart disease, weakness, and shortness of breath. Review of Resident #104's plan of care, dated 11/11/22, revealed the resident had diabetes with a goal of no complications. Interventions included blood sugar to be checked as ordered and medications as ordered. Review of Resident #104's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 08/30/23, revealed the resident was assessed as cognitively impaired and required assistance of one staff member for a majority of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-10-17 · 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 interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's central line intravenous (IV) catheter was maintained per the facility policy. This affected one (#87) of two residents reviewed for having IV catheters. The facility census was 68. Findings include: Review of Resident #87's medical record revealed the resident was originally admitted on [DATE] and had a readmission on [DATE] with diagnoses including acute cholecystitis, hemiplegia, and diabetes. Review of the physician orders for Resident #87's dated 06/07/23, revealed the resident had a [NAME] vascular central intravenous (IV) access catheter to the chest wall. The orders revealed no other documentation for the central line to be maintained and/or cared for by staff. Review of the hospital's discharge notes for Resident #87 dated 08/08/23, revealed the resident was discharged to the facility with a double lumen central line catheter in her right upper chest wall and to continue the IV care per nursing protocol. Review of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-18 · 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 observations, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents had treatment orders for wounds and failed to ensure dressing changes were completed as ordered. This affected two (Residents #50 and #96) of three sampled residents. The facility census was 72. Findings include: 1. Record review revealed Resident #96 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnosis including sepsis from a pressure ulcer, end stage renal disease, diabetes, pulmonary embolism, colostomy, gastrostomy and tracheostomy. Review of Wound Physician #370's progress notes revealed he evaluated Resident #96's wounds in the facility on 07/21/23 at 7:25 A.M. The notes documented Resident #96 was admitted the day prior, 07/20/23, with physician orders for a wound vacuum to the sacral area. Wound Physician #370 documented the wound vacuum would be contraindicate, due to eschar, bleeding and possible bone involvement. There was an order to pack the coccyx wound with Dakin's soaked gauze (3 rolls) for a wet…
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 · D2023-09-18 · tag F0777 — isolatedProvide or obtain x-rays/tests 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure X-ray results were communicated to the physician. This affected one (Resident #97) of three sampled residents. The facility census was 72. Findings include: Record review revealed Resident #97 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including metabolic encephalopathy, congestive heart failure, atrial fibrillation and history of falling. Review of the progress notes dated 07/27/23 at 6:26 A.M. documented the nurse was notified by the State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) that Resident #97 was found on lying on the right side on the floor near the bathroom. Resident #97 was complaining of pain to the right wrist. The physician was notified and an X-ray was ordered for the wrist. Review of the X-Ray report dated 07/27/23 at 9:47 P.M. revealed Resident #96 had an acute nondisplaced fracture of the distal radius with intra-articular extension to the radiocarpal joint. Carpal alignment remains normal. There is adjacent soft tissue…
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 · F2023-02-22 · 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, interview, review of weekly cleaning logs, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to maintain a clean and sanitary kitchen area. This had the potential to affect 61 residents who received meals in the facility. The facility identified Resident #37 as receiving nothing by mouth. The facility census was 62. Findings include: Observation of the kitchen during the initial tour with Dietary Manager (DM) #518 on 02/13/23 at 6:35 P.M. revealed three large bins with brown sugar, white sugar, and flour all containing a scoop lying in the bin. The under tray line freezer across from the fryer contained a bag of chicken breasts which was open. There was spilled food and food particles in the back of freezer. The under tray line cooler revealed tray of uncovered open hot dogs without a label/date. The walk-in cooler revealed uncovered prepared dish of cottage cheese with no label or date. Observation of walk-in freezer revealed open bags of fish and burgers and two dished up uncovered bowls of ice cream with no label or date. Observation under the three…
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 before2023-02-22 · 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
Based on record review, observation, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were treated with dignity at meal service. This affected one resident (#35) observed during meal service. The facility identified one resident who required pureed meals. The facility census was 62. Findings include: Review of Resident #35's medical record revealed an admission date of 02/12/22. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, psychotic disorder with delusions, dysphasia, and aphasia. Review of Resident #35's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 01/03/23, revealed the resident had a low cognitive function. The resident required an extensive assist with eating. Review of Resident #35's most recent care plan revealed the resident was downgraded to a puree and honey thick liquid diet. Review of Resident #35's physician order dated 01/05/23 revealed the resident was to be fed for all meals and snacks due to aspiration prevention. On 12/12/22 a regular, pureed diet was ordered. Observation on 02/14/23 at 8:28 A.M. revealed all residents in the memory care unit were…
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 · D2023-02-22 · tag F0573 — isolatedLet each resident or the resident's legal representative access or purchase copies of all the resident's records.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of a medical record request document, staff interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to provide copies of the medical record within two working days one (#166) of one resident reviewed for medical record requests. The facility census was 62. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #166 revealed an admission date of 01/12/23 and a discharge date of 01/18/23. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, history of myocardial infarction, type two diabetes mellitus, hypertension atrial flutter, systolic heart failure, malignant neoplasm of part of the right bronchus or lung, and hyperlipidemia. Review of a medical record request document revealed medical records were requested by Resident #166 on 02/02/23. Interview on 02/16/23 at 11:31 A.M. the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed the facility had received a letter from the resident requesting medical records within the next 30 days. The DON stated the record request had been forwarded to their corporate office. The DON revealed the medical records had not yet been sent…
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 · D2023-02-22 · 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 medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to complete a comprehensive care plan for urostomy care. This affected one (#62) of one resident reviewed for urostomy care. The facility census was 62. Findings include: Review of medical record revealed Resident #62 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including obstruction of duodenum (part of the intestine), malignant neoplasm of the bladder, type II diabetes mellitus, and malignant neoplasm of lower lobe bronchus or lung. The resident had a urostomy and provided all the care for the ostomy. Review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident # 62 was cognitively intact. Resident #62 required supervision for toileting. The assessment revealed Resident #62 had an ostomy. Review of care plan dated 01/23/23 revealed Resident #62 had no care plan addressing urostomy care, monitoring, or ensuring adequate supplies. Interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #531 on 02/15/23 at 4:51 P.M. verified Resident #62's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-02-22 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolatedEnsure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
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, family interview and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide appropriate communication tools for one (#9) out of one resident reviewed for communication needs. The census was 62. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #9 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type, diabetes mellitus type 2, convulsions, intellectual disabilities, and schizophrenia. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 11/21/22, revealed Resident #9 had severe cognitive impairment and no verbal communicative ability. Resident #9 was determined to require extensive assistance from one to two persons for bed mobility, locomotion, dressing, eating and personal hygiene. Resident #8 was totally dependent for toileting and transfers. Review of the care plan dated 12/09/22, revealed Resident #9 had a cognitive loss. Interventions included staff anticipation of needs. The care plan revealed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-02-22 · 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
Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure wound treatments were completed per physician orders. This affected one (#1) of one resident reviewed for wounds. The facility census was 62. Findings include: Medical record review revealed Resident #1 had an admission date of 05/26/21. Diagnoses included transient cerebral ischemic attack, Type two diabetes mellitus with diabetic nephropathy, mild protein calorie malnutrition, schizoaffective disorder bipolar type, anxiety disorder, dysphagia, major depressive disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, atrial fibrillation, and hypertension. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 11/15/22, revealed the resident had impaired cognition. Review of a skin assessment, dated 02/10/23, revealed the resident had a diabetic ulcer on the right heel measuring 0.3 centimeters (cm) in length by 0.4 cm in width by 0.1 cm in depth. The wound had no odor, no exudate, no tunneling and no undermining. The wound bed was 100 percent pink tissue. 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 · D2023-02-22 · tag F0685 — isolatedAssist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, staff interview, and family interview, the facility failed to replace a resident's missing glasses. This affected one (#22) of two residents reviewed for missing items. The facility census was 62. Findings include: Review of Resident #22's medical record revealed an admission date of 03/15/22. Diagnoses included vascular dementia, cerebrovascular disease, amyloidosis, chronic kidney disease stage three, and spinal stenosis. Review of Resident #22's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 01/19/23, revealed the resident had a low cognitive function. The resident had no noted behaviors. Resident #22 required an extensive assistance for all activities of daily living except eating which was supervised. Review of Resident #22's most recent care plan revealed the resident will have optimal visual ability due to glaucoma and required glasses. Interventions included the resident was to be encouraged to wear the glasses, to have the glasses readily available and the glasses were to be kept clean. Review of Resident #22's medical and social service notes…
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 · D2023-02-22 · 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 medical record review, staff interview, and observation, the facility failed to change oxygen tubing for the oxygen concentrator and tubing for the aerosol nebulizer for one (#8) of three residents reviewed for respiratory therapy. The facility census was 62. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #8 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included hypertension, heart disease, heart failure, respiratory failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The care plan dated 12/17/22 revealed Resident #8 was at risk for respiratory issues related to his diagnoses of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and cardiac diseases. Interventions included to administer oxygen as ordered. Observation on 02/14/23 at 2:07 P.M. of Resident #8's room revealed the oxygen tubing for the oxygen concentrator was dated for 02/05/23 . The tubing connected to the nebulizer was dated 01/26/23. The resident was currently utilizing the oxygen tubing attached t o the concentrator via a nasal…
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 before2023-02-22 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review medical records, review of guidelines from the National Library of Medicine/National Institute of Health, observation, staff interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered per physician orders. This affected three (#166, #26, #22) of seven residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 62. 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #166 revealed an admission date of 01/12/23 and a discharge date of 01/18/23. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, history of myocardial infarction, type two diabetes mellitus, hypertension atrial flutter, systolic heart failure, malignant neoplasm of part of the right bronchus or lung, and hyperlipidemia. Review of the five day Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 01/17/23, revealed the resident had intact cognition. Review of a nurses noted dated 01/12/23 at 2:34 P.M. revealed Resident #166 was admitted to the facility from the hospital. Review of physician orders for 01/18/23 revealed the resident was ordered MS Contin 15 extended…
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 · D2023-02-22 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop 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 review of immunization documentation, staff interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a resident was offered a pneumococcal vaccination. This affected one (#10) of five residents reviewed for immunizations. The facility census was 62. Findings include: Medical record review revealed Resident #10 had an admission date of 07/26/21. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease with late onset, depression and dementia. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 01/17/23, revealed the resident had impaired cognition. Review of the immunization record revealed no documentation the resident had been offered or had refused a pneumococcal immunization. Interview on 02/16/23 at 11:38 A.M., Registered Nurse (RN) #609 verified there was no documentation in the medical record the resident had been offered or had refused a pneumococcal immunization. Review of the facility policy titled Influenza and Pneumococcal Immunization Policy, last revised 10/2022, revealed based upon assessment and the physician's recommendations, the resident will be…
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.
- No harm found · C2024-09-04 · tag F0732 — widespreadPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure daily staffing information was posted on 08/29/24. This had the potential to affect all 92 residents in the facility. Findings include: On 08/29/24 at 11:38 A.M., observation of the daily staffing information posted at the front desk revealed it was dated 08/27/24. Further observation revealed the staffing information for 08/28/24 was tucked behind the sheet for 08/27/24 and there was no staffing information available for 08/29/24. Interview at the time of observation with the Administrator verified the posted staffing information was dated 08/27/24 and the staffing information for 08/29/24 was not available.
“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.
“Disputed” is CMS’s own flag, not our reading: the CMS deficiency file records whether the home has formally contested a citation, and we reproduce that. IDR is Informal Dispute Resolution, run by the state survey agency that wrote the citation; IIDR is Independent Informal Dispute Resolution, a separate process before an outside entity, available when CMS has proposed a civil money penalty. They are different processes and we mark them differently. Two things to hold at once. A disputed citation is still a citation — it was written by a surveyor, it stands on the record unless and until it is changed, and we neither hide it nor discount it. And we cannot tell you how the dispute came out: CMS publishes that a citation is under dispute, not the outcome, so a tag marked here may since have been upheld, reduced, or deleted, and an unmarked tag may have been disputed and resolved before this file was cut. Ask the home what it disputed and why — it is entitled to tell you, and the answer is often the most informative thing on this page.
- 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
$68,390 in federal fines across 2 penalties. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.
- $58,351 — penalty dated 2024-04-09
- $10,039 — penalty dated 2024-02-15
- Medicare payment denial — starting 2024-05-03 for 10 days
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to PROGRESSIVE QUALITY CARE — 11 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 | 2 of 5 | 2.7 | -0.7 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 2.0 | -1.0 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 1.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
The other 10 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.7★, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PROGRESSIVE NORTH RIDGEVILLE PARTNERS, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 06/21/2018 |
| MIKE FLANK TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | 13% | since 09/09/2022 |
| COLONNA, JULIAN | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER | 25% | since 06/15/2018 |
| COLONNA, VITO | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER | 25% | since 06/15/2018 |
| FLANK, EITAN | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | 8% | since 06/15/2018 |
| FLANK, LIAT | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER | 8% | since 06/15/2018 |
| FLANK, MATAN | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER | 8% | since 06/15/2018 |
| FLANK, SHAUL | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER | 8% | since 06/15/2018 |
| SAUSEN, JOEL | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 8% | since 06/21/2018 |
| SHILLER, DANIEL | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/15/2018 |
| PROGRESSIVE QUALITY CARE INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/13/2025 |
| BHIMANI, JAYANTILAL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/08/2020 |
| DORSEY, KATHRYN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/09/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 26 rows in the source record cover these 13 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
3 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $1.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 14% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
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 366477. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2023-02-22, 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.