Welcome Nursing Home

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.

38.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 45 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 44.4% 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 27 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 0.20 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 23% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% 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 99 beds and averages 90.4 residents a day — about 91% occupied, or roughly 9 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.09 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.61 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.47 is at or above 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 3.56 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.30 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.75 to 0.26 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 28% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

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

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.

22 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 12 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · F2026-03-05 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — widespread
  Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, medical record review, staff interview, review of the pharmacy refrigerated medication list, review of manufacturer guidelines, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure safe medication handling and proper labeling of multi-use vials. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure medications were not left unattended, affecting one (#71) resident with the potential to affect the direct safety risk of 14 residents (#09, #10, #15, #16, #25, #28, #29, #39, #41, #70, #77, #81, #89, #91) who were identified by the facility as being cognitively impaired, independently ambulatory, and residing on the 200 hall. The facility census was 91. Findings include: 1.Observation on 03/03/26 at 7:30 A.M. of the medication storage room located behind the east nursing station revealed a 1 milliliter (mL) vial of Tubersol PPD (Mantoux) 10 multi-use vial, lot number 4CA12C1, with a manufacturer expiration date of 02/2028, was opened and not labeled with the date it was first used. 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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-03-05 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — pattern
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, staff interview, product label review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the resident environment was free from improperly stored hazardous chemicals. This had the potential to affect 14 residents (#9, #10, #15, #16, #25, #28, #29, #39, #41, #70, #71, #81, #89, and #91) identified by the facility as cognitively impaired and independently mobile. The facility census was 91. Findings include: Observation on 03/02/26 at 2:29 P.M. revealed a 10.1-ounce tube of 3M Fire Barrier Sealant Caulk in a caulk gun, approximately three-quarters used, sitting on a handrail in the common area of hall 200. The chemical was within reach of residents and in an area where residents frequently mobilize. Review of the product label for 3M Fire Barrier Sealant Caulk indicated: May irritate eyes, nose, and throat. Avoid eye contact. Do not swallow. Wash thoroughly after handling. Keep out of reach of children. Interview on 03/02/26 at 2:30 P.M. with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #375 verified the chemical caulk tube was unsecured on the handrail in the 200 hall…

  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 · D2026-03-05 · 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 medical record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure an advance directive was in the medical record for Resident #80 and further failed to ensure the advance directive forms for Residents #28 and #97 were signed by the physician. This affected three (#28, #80, and #97) of 91 residents reviewed for advance directive. The facility census was 91.Findings include:1. Review of the medical record for Resident #28 revealed an admission date of [DATE]. Diagnoses included unspecified dementia, unspecified atrial fibrillation, and sleep apnea.Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #28 had impaired cognition. Further review of the MDS revealed Resident #28 required supervision for bathing and was independent for toileting.Review of the care plan dated [DATE] revealed Resident #28 had chosen to be a Do Not Resuscitate Comfort Care - Arrest (DNRCC - A). Interventions included for the advance directive to be in the medical…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-03-05 · 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

  Based on observation, medical record review, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure physician notification when a significant change in condition occurred for one resident (#66) when a lumen of the resident's peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) line (a central venous catheter that provides access to the large veins near the heart through a peripheral vein in the arm) was occluded, preventing administration of a physician-ordered intravenous antibiotic (Meropenem). This affected one (#66) of three residents (#14, #53, and #66) receiving intravenous therapy. The facility census was 91. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #66 revealed an admission date of 08/18/25 with diagnoses including chronic osteomyelitis of the ankle and foot, pressure ulcer of the left heel, type 2 diabetes mellitus, congestive heart failure, atrial fibrillation, peripheral vascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, obesity, generalized muscle weakness, and dependence on a wheelchair. Review of Resident #66's most recent…

  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 · D2026-03-05 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
  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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, medical record review, resident interview, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a homelike environment. This affected three (#52, #64 and #66) of three residents reviewed for a homelike environment. The facility census was 91.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #64 revealed an admission date of 12/12/25 with diagnoses including bilateral osteoarthritis of the knees, weakness, generalized muscle weakness, abnormalities of gait and mobility, cognitive communication deficit, pneumonia, hypertension, pain in the right and left knee, shortness of breath, hyperlipidemia, hypothyroidism, personal history of malignant neoplasm of the thyroid, lymphedema, neuralgia and neuritis, alcohol dependence, and stage three chronic kidney disease (CKD3).Review of Resident #64's Medicare 5-Day Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating the resident was cognitively…

  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 · D2026-03-05 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  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, review of a facility self-reported incident, and review of facility policy the facility failed to protect residents from abuse. This affected two (#100 and #41) of two residents reviewed for abuse with the ability to affect all residents. The facility census was 91.Findings include: 1.Review of Former Resident (FR) #100's medical record revealed an admission date of 03/20/21 and a discharge date of 09/04/25. Diagnoses included osteoarthritis, pelvis fracture, protein malnutrition, obsessive compulsive disorder, scoliosis, and kyphosis. Review of FR #100's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed she had an intact cognition and was dependent on staff for all activities of daily living except eating. Review of Self-Reported Incident #259280 dated 04/12/25 revealed a confused male resident with dementia entered FR #100's room and refused to leave when asked. The male resident became agitated after FR #100 continued to tell him to leave. The male…

  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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-03-05 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
  Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
  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, review of the self-reported incident (SRI), staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to timely report an allegation of abuse to the state agency. This affected one (#41) of two residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 91. Findings include:Review of Resident #41's medical record revealed an admission date of 03/27/24. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, cognitive communication deficit, major depressive disorder, and hyperlipidemia. Review of Resident #41's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #41 had severely impaired cognition with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 03. Furthermore, Resident #41 was dependent for showers/bathing and required substantial or maximal assistance for toilet hygiene. Review of Resident #41's care plan dated 02/11/26 revealed Resident #41 had a behavior problem and would become physically aggressive during care. Interventions included to administer medications as…

  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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-03-05 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
  Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
  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, review of facility self-reported incidents (SRIs), and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure thorough investigations were conducted for allegations of abuse and injuries of unknown origin. Specifically, the facility failed to complete all required investigative steps to determine the cause of the incidents and whether abuse, neglect, or mistreatment occurred. This affected three (#41, #43, and #100) of five residents reviewed for SRI's. The facility census was 91. Findings include:1.Review of Resident #41's medical record revealed an admission date of 03/27/24. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, cognitive communication deficit, major depressive disorder, and hyperlipidemia. Review of Resident #41's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #41 had severely impaired cognition with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 03. Furthermore, Resident #41 was dependent for showers/bathing and required…

  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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-03-05 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
  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 record review, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to have the focus interventions in place within the care plan for one (#100) resident who was identified at risk for fractures. This affected one (#100) of two residents reviewed for care planning. The facility census was 91. Findings include:Review of Former Resident (FR) #100's medical record revealed an admission date of 03/20/21 and a discharge date of 09/04/25. Diagnoses included osteoarthritis, protein malnutrition, scoliosis, and kyphosis.Review of Resident #100's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had an intact cognition and was dependent on staff for all activities of daily living except eating. Review of FR #100's most recent care plan revealed it was absent of documentation regarding osteoarthritis and fragility of bones. Review of a FR #100's intradisciplinary team note dated 9/11/25 revealed on 09/03/25 the resident complained of right leg pain after two staff members pulled 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 Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-03-05 · 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 interview, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure access to hand hygiene supplies for a resident utilizing a bedside commode (BSC). This affected one (#64) of three residents reviewed for hand hygiene. The facility census was 91. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #64 revealed an admission date of 12/12/25 with diagnoses including bilateral osteoarthritis of the knees, weakness, generalized muscle weakness, abnormalities of gait and mobility, cognitive communication deficit, pneumonia, hypertension, pain in the right and left knee, shortness of breath, hyperlipidemia, hypothyroidism, personal history of malignant neoplasm of the thyroid, lymphedema, neuralgia and neuritis, alcohol dependence, and stage three chronic kidney disease (CKD3). Review of Resident #64's Medicare 5-Day Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15,…

  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

“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

CMS files one row per role, so the 28 rows in the source record cover these 14 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

8 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

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