Carecore at Gaymont

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.

54.5% 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 57 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 15.6% 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 32 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 0.26 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 36% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 9% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 88 beds and averages 77.1 residents a day — about 88% occupied, or roughly 11 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 3.30 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.53 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.86 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 3.03 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.41 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.59 to 0.36 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

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

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

Inspection trend

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

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.

21 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 10 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2024-04-25 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
  Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, medical record review, resident interview, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive, effective, and individualized nutritional program to ensure nutritional recommendations were addressed timely, nutritional interventions were implemented as recommended, and/or to recognize and address severe resident weight loss. Actual Harm occurred when Resident #122, who was admitted with an unplanned significant weight loss and tested positive for COVID -19 two days after admission, experienced a severe weight loss of 17.6% pounds, within 21 days of admission. Upon admission on [DATE], Resident #122 weighed 75 pounds and on 04/25/24 Resident #122 weighed 61.8 pounds. The nutritional recommendations for Resident #122 that were made on 04/09/24 were not implemented and Resident #122 did not receive the recommended supplements of a frozen nutritional treat twice a day. This affected one (#122) of two residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-04-25 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — pattern
  Make sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the medical record, observation, resident interview, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure resident rooms were timely cleaned and maintained in good repair. This affected four (#11, #53, #38, #21) of six residents reviewed for environment. The facility census was 70. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #11 had an admission date of 01/07/11. Diagnoses included type two diabetes mellitus and hypertension. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had impaired cognition. Observation on 04/22/24 at 7:47 A.M., in Resident #11's room revealed the cord on the call light cord had a frayed area exposing the inner wire. Further observation revealed the resident's window shade was broken and there were several stained areas on the tile floor. Interview on 04/22/24 at 2:54 P.M., State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #142 verified the stains on Resident #11's floor and the frayed call light cord.…

  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.

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-04-25 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolated
  Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, resident interview, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure call lights were in reach of residents. This affected two (#51 and #122) of 19 residents reviewed for call lights. The facility census was 70. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #51 revealed an admission date of 02/08/22. Medical diagnoses included end stage renal disease (ESRD), cerebral infarction (stroke), anxiety and depression. Review of Resident #51's Minimum Data Set (MDS) quarterly assessment, dated 03/28/24, revealed the resident had a cognitive impairment but was noted as able to understand others and make herself understood. Review of Resident #51's care plan, dated 03/17/22, revealed the resident to have an assisted daily living (ADL) self-care performance deficit related to chronic kidney disease, cognitive impairment, and depression. The care plan included interventions which included placing the call light within reach. Observation and interview on…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-04-25 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
  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, resident interview, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's preference for showers was honored. This affected one (#4) of one resident reviewed for choices. The facility census was 70. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #4 revealed an admission date of 12/10/21. Diagnoses included chronic kidney disease, hypertension, and systolic heart failure. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had intact cognition. The resident was dependent on staff for bathing/showers. Review of the task documentation for scheduled bathing revealed the resident had received bed baths on 03/27/24 and 04/10/24. The resident received showers on 03/30/24, 04/03/24, 04/06/24, 04/13/24, 04/17/24, and 04/20/24. Review of the nurses notes dated 03/27/24 through 04/11/24 revealed no documentation the resident had refused her shower or wanted a bed bath instead of a shower on 03/27/24 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-04-25 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the medical record, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's code status was consistent throughout the medical record. This affected one (#53) of one resident reviewed for advanced directives. The facility census was 70. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #53 had an admission date of [DATE]. Diagnoses included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction, hypertension, type two diabetes mellitus, and peripheral vascular disease. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had intact cognition. Review of the plan of care initiated [DATE] revealed the resident's code status was Do Not Resuscitate Comfort Care-Arrest (DNRCC-A) meaning providers would treat patient as any other without a DNR order until the point of cardiac or respiratory arrest at which point all interventions would cease and the DNR Comfort Care protocol would be implemented. Review of the undated…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-04-25 · 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 observations, medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident with a pressure ulcer was provided pressure ulcer prevention interventions. This affected one (#122) of two resident identified by the facility with pressure ulcers. The facility census was 70. Findings include: Review of Resident #122's medical record revealed an admission date of 04/03/24, with medical diagnoses including stroke, protein calorie malnutrition, anemia, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Review of Resident #122's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #122 had cognition impairment with a Brief interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12. Resident #122's height was four feet eight inches and the weight listed was 75 pounds. The assessment additionally revealed Resident #122 had a stage III pressure ulcer (Full thickness tissue loss. Subcutaneous fat may be visible but bone, tendon or muscle is not exposed, granulation…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-04-25 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff and resident interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents receiving supplemental oxygen had complete physician's orders for oxygen administration. This affected three (#45, #62, and #224) of three residents reviewed for respiratory care. The facility identified 13 residents who required the use of supplemental oxygen. The facility census was 70. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #45 revealed an admission date of 02/24/24. The resident was hospitalized from [DATE] to 04/19/24, for a spontaneous pneumothorax (collapsed lung). Medical diagnoses included malignant neoplasm of the lung and/or bronchus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), malnutrition, and weakness. Review of Resident #45's care plan, dated 02/27/24, revealed the resident to have impaired respiratory status related to COPD and cancer of the bronchus or lung. The interventions for the respiratory focus did not include an intervention of…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-04-25 · tag F0847 — isolated
  Inform resident or representatives choice to enter into binding arbitration agreement and right to refuse.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on staff interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to comply with the requirements for binding arbitration agreements of allowing up to 30 days to rescind the agreement and allow for a neutral arbitrator according to policy This affected three (#04, #37, and #52) of three residents reviewed for binding arbitration. The facility identified ten residents who had signed the facility's binding arbitration agreement. The facility census was 70. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #04 had an original admission date of 04/23/20 and a re-admission date of 12/10/21. Diagnoses included chronic kidney disease, hypertension, and systolic heart failure. Review of a form titled Arbitration Agreement, dated 04/24/20, revealed Resident #04 signed the form as agreeing to the facility's binding arbitration agreement on 04/24/20. The agreement stated any need to involve arbitration to resolve disputes would be completed by a listed arbitration firm and made no mention that the resident could select a neutral arbitrator. The form additionally…

  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 · Ecited before2024-03-01 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — pattern
  Make sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy the facility failed to ensure resident room ceilings were maintained in good repair. This affected five residents (#25, #45, #50, #59, #72) of six residents reviewed for the physical environment. The facility census was 71. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #50 revealed an admission date of 03/05/21 with diagnoses including schizophrenia and dementia. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #50 dated 01/10/24 revealed the resident had severe cognitive impairment. Review of the medical record for Resident #25 revealed an admission date of 09/03/22 with diagnoses including dementia and type two diabetes mellitus. Review of the annual MDS assessment for Resident #25 dated 12/19/23 revealed the resident had severe cognitive impairment. Observation on 03/01/24 at 10:37 A.M. in the shared room of Residents #25 and #50 revealed an area approximately two feet by one and half feet on the ceiling with 50 or more discolored brown circular…

  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.

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2021-11-18 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — widespread
  Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, staff interview, and review of the facility's recipes, the facility failed to ensure food was prepared in a way that was flavorful and palatable. This had the potential to affect all 71 residents who received food from the kitchen. Findings include: Observation on 11/15/21 at 1:04 P.M. revealed a test tray had the following items on the tray: cranberry juice, tapioca pudding, citrus grilled chicken, green beans, and mashed potatoes with gravy. The foods items located on the test tray appeared appetizing in nature. Evaluation on 11/15/21 at 1:04 P.M. of the food items on the test tray revealed the mashed potatoes with gravy and green beans were without flavor and bland. Mashed potatoes and green beans appeared to have no seasonings or condiments added to the tray for flavor. Observation and interview on 11/15/21 at 1:05 P.M. revealed Dietary Staff (DS) #219 evaluated the test tray. DS #219 confirmed the mashed potatoes with gravy and green string beans were absent of seasonings and/or flavor. Interview on 11/15/21 at 1:10 P.M. with DS #233 revealed during lunch…

  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 · Fcited before2021-11-18 · 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 observations, policy review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to store food and kitchen equipment in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This had the potential to affect all 71 residents who receive food from the kitchen. Findings include: 1. Observation on 11/15/21 at 8:30 A.M., during initial tour of the kitchen, with Dietary Manager (DM) #261 revealed three bags of cereal (Cornflakes, Cheerios, and [NAME] Krispies) opened and undated on the bottom shelf in the dry storage area located near the rear of the kitchen adjacent to the walk-in refrigerator and freezer. Interview on 11/15/21 at 8:30 A.M. with the DM #261 confirmed three bags of cereal (Cornflakes, Cheerios, and [NAME] Krispies) were opened and undated. Observation on 11/15/21 at 8:32 A.M. revealed DM #261 removed the three bags of cereal from the shelf to seal and date. Observation on 11/15/21 at 11:38 A.M., during follow-up tour of the kitchen, revealed one bag of cereal (Cornflakes) opened on the bottom shelf in the dry storage area located near the rear of the kitchen…

  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.

Who owns this facility

The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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 $1.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 15% 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