Northfield Village Retirement Community

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

56.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 101 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 57.1% 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 56 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 0.55 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 85% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 52% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy at close to weekday levels right through the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 70 beds and averages 55.5 residents a day — about 79% occupied, or roughly 14 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.57 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.75 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 3.01 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.79 on weekdays — 21% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.90 to 0.38 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 56% is well above the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 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.

18 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 8 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-12-30 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
  Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on closed record review, facility policy review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure accurate documentation of skin tear treatments were completed for Resident #51. This affected one (Resident #51) of three residents review for wound treatments. The facility census was 50. Finding include: Review of the closed medical record for Resident #51 revealed an admission date of 11/13/24. Diagnoses included end stage renal disease, anxiety, anemia, fracture of right femur, dependence on dialysis and depression. The resident was discharged from the facility on 12/04/24. Review of the care plan dated 11/13/24 revealed Resident #51 Resident had a skin tear to the left forearm due to limited mobility. Interventions included to monitor for signs of infection and provide wound treatments. Review of the admission assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #51 had intact cognition and had a skin tear to the left forearm. Record review Resident #51's physician's orders revealed an order dated 11/21/24 for 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-03-13 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain a clean and sanitary kitchen area. This had the potential to affect all residents receiving meals from the kitchen. The facility identified two Residents(#6 and #33) who do not receive food by mouth. The facility census was 56. Findings include: Observations on 03/10/24 at 8:15 A.M. of facility kitchen revealed in the walk-in cooler there was three plastic containers with lids containing Salisbury steaks, carrots, and hard-boiled eggs without a label or date, two metal pans covered with foil containing unidentified pureed substances without a label or date and a tray of uncovered fruit cups without a label or date. There was a splatter of food residue on the wall behind coffee machine and a dried coffee spill on floor in front of coffee machine. There was dark brown grease build up on the walls and floors behind and below dish machine area. There was dark brown grease build up and food debris observed below a rack containing plastic wares in dish machine area. There was dark brown grease build up 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-03-13 · tag F0645 — isolated
  PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to complete a state specific Pre-admission Screen and Resident Review (PASRR) form within thirty days of admission as required. This affected one (Resident #61) of two residents (Residents #41 and #61) reviewed for PASRR. The facility census was 56. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #61 revealed an admission date of 01/22/24. Diagnoses included but were not limited to post traumatic stress disorder, tinea unguium, diabetes mellitus and vitreous degeneration. Review of the Medicare Minimum Data Set (MDS) admission assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #61 was dependent on staff for most activities of daily living (ADLs). Further review of the medical record revealed no evidence a State of Ohio PASRR form was completed as required for Resident #61. A PASRR form was in the medical record from the state of Kentucky dated 01/22/24. Interview on 03/11/24 at 1:43 P.M. with Licensed Social Worker #873 verified an Ohio PASRR…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-03-13 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, medical record and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure preventative interventions were in place for treatment of pressure injury of left heel. This affected one Resident (#39) of three reviewed for pressure injuries. The facility census was 56. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #39 revealed admission date of 12/23/23 and diagnoses including polyneuropathy, diabetes mellitus, left ankle and foot osteomyelitis, moderate protein calorie malnutrition, peripheral vascular disease, and congestive heart failure. Review of the plan of care dated 12/23/23 revealed Resident #39 had impaired skin integrity related to pressure injury to left heel. Interventions included to elevate heels off surface of mattress. Review of Medicare Minimum Data Set (MDS) admission assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #39 was dependent on staff for rolling left and right, sitting to lying, and lying to sitting. Resident #39 was at risk of developing pressure…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-03-13 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
  Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview the facility failed to provide an appropriate diagnosis for the use of an antipsychotic. This affected one resident (Resident #45) out of five residents (#18, #39, #45, #50, and #271) reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 56. Findings include: Review of Resident #45's medical record revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE]. Diagnoses included but were not limited to restlessness and agitation, dysphagia, diabetes mellitus, and Alzheimer's disease. Review of Resident #45's Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident exhibited moderate cognitive impairment, no behaviors were noted and required substantial assistance for activities of daily living (ADLs). Further review of the MDS revealed Resident #45 received an antipsychotic and there was no indication as to why in section N of the assessment. Review of Resident #45's physician orders for March 2024 revealed an order for divalproex sodium (anticonvulsant also used to…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-03-13 · tag F0772 — isolated
  Have an agreement with an approved laboratory to obtain services, if on-site laboratory services aren't provided.
  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, interviews, and review of information from the Medscape website, the facility failed to ensure laboratory tests were completed as ordered for Resident #271 and Resident #64. This affected two residents (Resident #271 and Resident #64) of 21 residents whose medical records were reviewed for laboratory test results. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #271 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included left foot amputation, osteomyelitis, diabetes, right leg above the knee amputation, and peripheral vascular disease. Review of the physician's orders dated 02/28/24 revealed Resident #271 had an order for Vancomycin (antibiotic) 1000 milligrams every 12 hours until 03/22/24 dated 02/28/24. Review of the physician's orders dated 02/29/24 revealed Resident #271 had an order for a Vancomycin trough every Monday and fax the results to the physician (trough concentrations are recommended for therapeutic monitoring of Vancomycin. Trough…

  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.

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-21 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
  Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the accuracy of Resident #18's wound type in the medical record. This finding affected one (Resident #18) of four residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. Findings include: Review of Resident #18's medical record revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including altered mental status, other chronic pain and emphysema. Review of Resident #18's Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident exhibited moderate cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #18's Wound Assessment form dated 01/15/24 revealed the resident had an in-house acquired suspected deep tissue injury (SDTI) pressure wound to the left heel (unable to determine a pressure ulcer stage at this point) acquired 01/12/24 which measured 4.0 centimeters (cm) length by 2.0 cm width by 0 cm depth. Review of Resident #18's Wound Assessment form dated 01/18/24 revealed the resident had a venous stasis ulcer non-pressure wound to the left…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-11-16 · tag F0573 — isolated
  Let 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 closed record review, review of court records, review of facility policy and interviews, the facility failed to timely release requested resident records for Resident #49. This affected one resident (#49) of three reviewed for timely release of medical records. The facility census was 50. Findings include: Review of the closed medical record for Resident # 49 revealed an admission date of 08/13/21 with diagnoses including congestive heart failure, chronic kidney disease, primary hypertension, and malignant neoplasm of the bladder. The resident was discharged on 10/05/21 to his home with his wife. Review of a document from the Summit County Probate Court titled Order Authorizing Release of Descendant's Medical Records, dated 02/10/23, revealed the court had authorized the release of Resident #49's medical records to Resident #49's wife. Review of the facility documentation of a fax dated 03/02/23 revealed a medical records request was signed by Resident #49's wife and faxed to the facility medical records director which included a letter requesting the records, a copy 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-02-17 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
  Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure a well-maintained and homelike environment. This affected four residents (Resident's #8, #9, #33 and #37) of 42 residents observed during the annual survey. The facility census was 42 residents. Findings include: Observation on 02/14/22 at 9:45 A.M. with Resident #8 revealed large gouges in the wall behind her bed exposing the wall material beneath the paint. An area of water damage was noted above the heater in Resident #8's room. Interview with Resident #8 at the time of observation revealed she did not know how long these areas had been present. Observation on 02/14/22 at 10:07 A.M. with Resident #9 revealed large gouges in the wall behind her bed. Interview with Resident #9 at the time of observation revealed she had asked staff to do something about it and someone would come in the room to spray for ants, but no one would repair her wall. Observation on 02/14/22 at 11:10 A.M. with Resident #33 revealed a large area behind the bed had been spackled but not repainted and an area above the heater was chipped away…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2022-02-17 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — pattern
  Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, taste test, and Diet and Nutrition Manual review the facility failed to serve pureed foods at a smooth consistency for safe swallowing. This affected five residents (Resident's #5, #10, #23, #24 and #40) who were prescribed a pureed diet of 42 residents who consumed meals from the facility's kitchen. The facility census was 42. Findings include: 1. Observation on 02/15/22 at 12:15 P.M. of the lunch meal revealed that the pureed stuffed peppers and pureed peas and carrots had lumps, skins, and did not appear smooth. The pureed stuffed peppers and peas and carrots were tasted. The mixture was not smooth and not of proper consistency. Interview with Dietary Manager (DM) #363 verified the consistency of the pureed stuffed peppers and pureed peas and carrots. 2. Observation on 02/15/22 at 3:00 P.M. of the puree preparation revealed [NAME] #338 was preparing pureed chicken tenders for dinner meal. Taste test of puree chicken tenders revealed chunks of breading. The mixture was not smooth and not of proper consistency. Interview with DM #363 verified 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to VRC MANAGEMENT — 5 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 9 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

2 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 $859K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 12% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

Cost & finances

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

What families pay in OH