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

Twilight Gardens Nursing And Rehabilitation

196 W Main St, Norwalk, OH 44857 · For profit - Corporation · 94 certified beds · (419) 668-2086 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (419) 668-2086 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 14 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record

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.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
257 Benedict Ave · (419) 668-1101 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
84 Whittlesey Ave · (419) 668-3024 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
117 Whittlesey Ave · (419) 668-9344 · Call to confirm hours
Park
103 Jefferson St · (419) 668-9122 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 3 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 3 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased2.8%5.3%15.4%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight7.0%6.2%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.2%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.9%0.4%2.0%typical
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms13.2%30.1%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.4%0.1%0.1%worse
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury3.8%3.2%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened1.3%6.1%16.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication44.9%25.5%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine89.0%94.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.9%3.4%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control22.3%21.4%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table4.0%8.8%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.2%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine44.6%75.6%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission27.2%24.9%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit22.8%12.9%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.911.731.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days5.861.801.80worse

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.

48.8% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 31 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

48.8%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.9%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
62.2%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.26U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.13hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.12hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.02hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 62.2% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 37 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.26 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 39% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 18% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF48.8%CMS range 34.0–66.251.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.9%CMS range 8.0–15.310.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge62.2%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge70.3%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge56.8%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay1.5%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened1.5%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.0%CMS range 3.8–11.47.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.941.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

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

Staffing

1.53
RN hours/ resident / day
0.51
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.32
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.36
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
1.27
RN hoursweekends
54.9%
Total nursing turnover
60.7%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 94 beds and averages 76.8 residents a day — about 82% occupied, or roughly 17 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 4.36 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.53 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.32 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 3.79 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.59 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.64 to 1.27 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 55% 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

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-03-19)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2025-04-24)

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

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

14 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · E2026-03-19 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — pattern
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    What the surveyor found here — 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 residents were included in care plan conference meetings. This affected four (#24, #50, #9, #13) of four residents reviewed for care planning. The facility census was 77. 1.Review of the medical record for Resident #24 revealed an admission date of 02/04/26. Diagnoses included depressive disorder, anxiety, type two diabetes mellitus, and chronic kidney disease. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had moderate cognitive impairment. Further review of the MDS assessments revealed the resident discharged to the hospital on [DATE] and readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of the resident's assessments from 02/04/26 through 03/19/26 revealed no documentation the resident had a care plan conference and no documentation the resident was invited to attend a care plan conference. Interview on 03/18/26 at 1:26 P.M. with Resident #24 revealed she had not…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-03-19 · tag F0655 — isolated
    Create and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to initiate a baseline care plan. This affected one (#24) of four residents reviewed for care planning. The facility census was 77. Review of the medical record for Resident #24 revealed an admission date of 02/04/26. Diagnoses included depressive disorder, anxiety, type two diabetes mellitus, and chronic kidney disease. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had moderate cognitive impairment. Review of the resident's assessments revealed no documentation a baseline care plan was initiated upon admission. Interview on 03/19/26 at 8:25 A.M. with the Director of Nursing (DON) verified Resident #24 had no baseline care plan in place within 48 hours of admission. Further interview with the DON revealed the baseline care plan task was listed on the resident's admission checklist for the clinical staff to complete.Review of the facility policy, Care Plans-Baseline, revised…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-19 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    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, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure personal protective equipment (PPE) was worn while providing care to a resident with physician orders for enhanced barrier precautions (EBP). This affected one (#50) of three residents reviewed for infection control. The facility census was 71. Review of the medical record for Resident #50 revealed an admission date of 02/24/26. Diagnoses included acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, dependence on renal dialysis, dependence on ventilator status, gastrostomy status, and urinary incontinence. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had severe cognitive impairment. The resident was dependent on staff for toileting and personal hygiene. The resident was always incontinent of bladder. Review of a physician order dated 02/26/26 revealed Resident #50 had an order for enhanced barrier precautions. 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-01-22 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
    Immediately 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 record review, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to notify a family member when a Resident (#22) was transferred to the hospital emergency department. This affected Resident #22 on two separate occasions. This had the ability to affect all residents. The facility census was 77.Findings include:Review of Resident #22's medical record revealed an admission date of 07/09/25. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure, and chronic renal failure.Review of Resident #22's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed she had a low cognitive function. Resident #22 was dependent on staff for activities of daily living.Review of Resident #22's most recent care plan revealed the resident had a behavior problem evidenced by being physically and verbally abusive toward staff and refusing treatments.Review of Resident #22's contact information revealed she was her own responsible party. Daughter #1 was the resident's first emergency contact and her…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2025-04-24 · 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, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure the facility kitchen was maintained in a sanitary manner. This had the potential to effect all residents who eat food from the facility kitchen. The facility identified eight (#1, #22, #65, #71, #73, #75, #129, and #132) residents who do not consume anything by mouth. The facility census was 74. Findings Include: Observation on 04/12/25 at 9:15 A.M. revealed the epoxy on the concrete floor in front of the walk-in freezer was peeling and water was pooling between the lifted epoxy and the concrete floor. Observation on 04/12/25 at 9:17 A.M. revealed an unidentified dark brown-black substance covering the wall to the right of the walk-in freezer door. Concurrent observation revealed an unidentified dark brown-black substance on the wall to the left of the walk-in freezer. An interview on 04/12/25 at 9:25 A.M. with Dietary Supervisor #430 verified the above findings. Review of the facility policy titled, Sanitization, with a revision date of 10/2008, revealed the food service area shall…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-24 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, medical record review, resident and staff interview, and facility policy, the facility failed to complete nail care for a dependent resident. This affected one (#34) of two residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs). The facility census was 74. Findings included: Review of Resident #34's medical record revealed an admission date of 12/10/24. Diagnoses included traumatic hemorrhage of the brain, acute respiratory failure with respirator dependence, diabetes mellitus, and congestive heart failure. Review of Resident #34's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had a moderately intact cognitive function and required moderate to partial assistance was required with personal hygiene. Review of Resident #34's care plan revealed the resident had an ADLs self-care performance deficit related to the disease process. The resident required staff assistance to complete ADLs tasks daily. Observation on 04/21/25 at 11:42 A.M. revealed Resident #34 was…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-04-24 · 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

    Based on medical record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure pressure ulcer treatments were completed as ordered. This affected one (#14) of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility census was 74. Findings Include: Review of Resident #14's medical record revealed an admission date of 02/28/25 with diagnoses including infection and inflammatory reaction due to a indwelling urethral catheter, need for assistance with personal care, generalized muscle weakness, chronic osteomyelitis, acute kidney failure, malignant neoplasm of the bladder, anxiety, stage four pressure ulcer (full-thickness skin and tissue loss) of the right buttock, stage four pressure ulcer of the left buttock, neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder, hypertension and and stage four pressure ulcer of the right hip. Resident #14 was discharged on 04/04/25. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 02/28/25, revealed Resident #14 was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #14's physician order dated 02/25/25 to 03/05/25 for the left buttock pressure ulcer…

    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 before2025-04-24 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure pharmacy recommendations were reviewed by the physician timely. This affected two (#34 and #40) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 74. Findings included: 1. Review of Resident #34's medical record revealed a most recent admission date of 12/10/24. Diagnoses included traumatic hemorrhage of the brain, acute respiratory failure with respirator dependence, diabetes mellitus, and congestive heart failure. Review of Resident #34's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had a moderately intact cognition. The resident was identified as receiving antianxiety, antidepressant, anticoagulant, antibiotic, and diuretic medications. Review of Resident #34's medical record revealed a physician's order dated 07/17/24 for the antianxiety medication lorazepam one (1) milligram (mg) twice daily for anxiety. The order was discontinued on 12/17/24.…

    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 · E2023-10-19 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — pattern
    Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to follow the dietitian approved menu for 20 (Residents #12, #19, #23, #34, #36, #38, #45, #47, #64, #65, #66, #73, #81, #233) and failed to provide the approved pureed menu to seven (Residents #3, #14, #17, #40, #48, #57, #70) who received a pureed diet. The facility census was 73. Findings include: Observation on 10/17/23 at 11:02 A.M. of Food Service Director (FSD) #200 making pureed seasoned cream of rice revealed when asked what seasonings were added to the cream of rice, FSD #200 stated she usually just adds butter and was unsure of what seasoned cream of rice meant on the spreadsheet. FSD #200 confirmed she had not used the recipe to prepare the seasoned cream of rice. Observation on 10/17/23 at 11:10 A.M. of FSD #200 making the pureed pork stir fry revealed FSD #200 used a six-ounce scoop to scoop out nine servings to puree. When FSD #200 was asked if the menu spreadsheet had the food items combined, she stated no. FSD #200 stated on 10/11/23, the menu had sweet and sour pork with Asian blend vegetables…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-10-19 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, resident interview, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to provide shaving services to two (Residents #1 and #4) and failed to provide showers as scheduled to Resident #4. This affected two (Residents #1 and #4) of three resident reviewed for showers and shaving. The facility census was 73. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included cerebral palsy, acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, and muscle weakness. Resident #1 was observed to have a tracheostomy (a surgically-created airway in the front of the neck, into the trachea, in which a tube is placed to provide a patent airway) and was dependent on a mechanical ventilator for breathing. Review of Resident #1's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #1 was able to make himself understood, which included the ability to express ideas and wants. Resident…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-10-19 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure the physician provided rationale for the continuation of a medication after a pharmaceutical recommendation. This affected one (Resident #5) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 73. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #5 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included but were not limited to COVID-19, type II diabetes mellitus, dysphagia, depression, muscle weakness, history of falling, mild intellectual disabilities, cognitive communication deficit, restlessness and agitation, and insomnia. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #5 was severely cognitively impaired and required limited assistance of one staff for bed mobility and transfers. Review of Resident #5's prescribed medications list for 06/01/23 through 10/18/23 identified a current order for insulin lispro solution…

    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 · D2023-10-19 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
    Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, medical record review, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered with an error rate of less than five percent. A total of two errors were observed during 34 opportunities, for a medication error rate of 5.88%. This affected two (Residents #55 and #41) of four residents reviewed during medication administration. The facility census was 73. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #55's medical record revealed an original admission date of 07/24/23. Medical diagnoses included metabolic encephalopathy, sepsis, urinary tract infection, acute urinary retention, and type II diabetes mellitus. Resident #55 was hospitalized from [DATE] to 10/14/23. Review of Resident #55's physician's orders revealed an order dated 10/14/23 for Meropenem (an antibiotic) 1000 mg twice daily by intravenous (IV) route, to treat a urinary tract infection (UTI). The medication was scheduled to be administered at 8:00 A.M. and 8:00 P.M. Observation 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-10-19 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolated
    Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to establish parameters for Resident #232's blood pressure medication, resulting in mediction not being administered. This affected one resident (Resident #232) of five residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 73. Findings include: Review of Resident #232's medical record revealed an admission date of 09/29/23. Diagnoses included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting right dominant side, hypotension, gastrostomy, Crohn's disease, Alzheimer's dementia, and history of liver cirrhosis. Review of the physician order dated 09/29/23 timed at 10:00 P.M. for Resident #232, revealed an order for Midodrine hydrochloride (blood pressure medication) tablet 10 milligram given via Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEF- feeding tube) tube three times a day for diagnosis of hypertension. No parameters were listed when to hold. Further review of the medical record revealed no documentation the physician was consulted on when to hold…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-10-19 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    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, facility document review, facility policy review, and review of the current Center's for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance, the facility failed to ensure staff wore the appropriate Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) when caring for COVID-19 positive residents. This affected three (Resident #52, #5, #29) of three residents reviewed for COVID-19. In addition, the facility failed to ensure staff maintained appropriate infection control during tube feed administration for Resident #1. This affected one (Resident #1) of two residents reviewed for tube feeding. The facility census was 73. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #52 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses at the time of survey included but were not limited to COVID-19, muscle weakness, schizophrenia, lack of coordination, shortness of breath, anxiety, and type II diabetes mellitus. Review of the nursing progress notes revealed the resident tested positive for COVID-19…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to CCH HEALTHCARE — 33 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 4 of 52.5+1.5 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.4+1.6 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 52.5+0.5 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 53.9+0.1 vs chain
The other 32 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.5★, per CMS)
1 of 5Carver Living CenterDurham, NC 1 of 5Countryside Manor Nursing And Rehabilitation LLCFremont, OH 1 of 5Harrison Pavilion Care CenterCincinnati, OH 1 of 5Meadowbrook Care CenterCincinnati, OH 1 of 5Smoky Mountain Health And Rehabilitation CenterPigeon Forge, TN 1 of 5The Greens at GastoniaGastonia, NC 1 of 5Valley Nursing and Rehabilitation CenterTaylorsville, NC 1 of 5Weakley Rehabilitation And Nursing CenterDresden, TN 2 of 5Cedars Of Lebanon Care CenterLebanon, OH 2 of 5Clovernook Health Care And Rehabilitation CenterCincinnati, OH 2 of 5Louisville Gardens Care CenterLouisville, OH 2 of 5Ridgewood Living & Rehabilitation CenterWashington, NC 2 of 5Solon Pointe At Emerald RidgeSolon, OH 2 of 5The Greens at HickoryHickory, NC 2 of 5The Greens at LincolntonLincolnton, NC 2 of 5The Greens at ViewmontHickory, NC 2 of 5Willow Ridge Of NCRutherfordton, NC 3 of 5Flint Ridge Nrsg & Rehab CtrNewark, OH 3 of 5Lincoln Crawford Care CenterCincinnati, OH 3 of 5Meadow Wind Health Care CenterMassillon, OH 3 of 5Northcrest Rehab And Nursing CenterNapoleon, OH 3 of 5Pineville Rehabilitation and Living CenterPineville, NC 3 of 5Scarlet Oaks Nursing And Rehabilitation CenterCincinnati, OH 3 of 5The Greens at HendersonvilleHendersonville, NC 3 of 5The Greens at Pinehurst Rehabilitation & Living CePinehurst, NC 3 of 5The Greens at Spruce PinesSpruce Pine, NC 4 of 5Cedarview Care CenterLebanon, OH 4 of 5Sunrise Nursing Healthcare LLCAmelia, OH 4 of 5The Greens at Maple LeafStatesville, NC 4 of 5The Greens at WeavervilleWeaverville, NC 5 of 5Locust Ridge Healthcare LLCWilliamsburg, OH 5 of 5The Greens at CabarrusConcord, NC

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

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
TWILIGHT NURSING HOLDINGS, LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 06/01/2019
CHOMESH 2 LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 05/03/2023
STARLIGHT HEALTHCARE LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 05/03/2023
WOLMARK, RACHELIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 05/03/2023
WOLMARK, YEHUDAIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 05/03/2023
WOODWARD, CURTISIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 03/07/2023
STERN, JACOBIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 06/01/2019

CMS files one row per role, so the 8 rows in the source record cover these 7 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.

$11.6M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+14.1%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.3M
Related-party expense13% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 76%Medicare 9%Other / private 15%

About 76% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $1.3M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 13% 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

$371per resident / day
operating cost
$11,278per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$432per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

What families pay in OH

Paying with Medicaid

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

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

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

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 365517. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-19, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

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

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

What to do next