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

Tranquility Of Richmond Heights

562 Richmond Road, Richmond Heights, OH 44143 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 60 certified beds · (216) 291-8585 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (216) 291-8585 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0600) — cited Jan 2024
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

In its favor
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Jan 2024
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (31) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
  • nursing-staff turnover (77%) runs well above the national median (45%)

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.

2/5
CMS overall
2 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 2 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 1 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★★ 5/5 CMS
Urgent care / clinic
621 Richmond Rd · (440) 449-5361 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
Walgreens0.4 mi
751 Richmond Rd · (440) 442-3368 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Elvis Mtz0.1 mi
3770 Perine Street · (216) 288-1892 · Call to confirm hours
Park
26789 Highland Rd · (216) 383-6312 · 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 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 5 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 2 to 1 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 rating1★
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 increased23.1%5.3%15.4%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight6.0%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 infection0.0%0.4%2.0%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms10.9%30.1%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury2.5%3.2%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened19.7%6.1%16.1%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication20.3%25.5%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.1%94.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.3%3.4%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control27.5%21.4%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table2.4%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 vaccine79.5%75.6%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission11.6%24.9%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit8.3%12.9%12.0%better

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

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

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

50.4% 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 69 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

50.4%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
45.5%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.34U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.11hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.12hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.11hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 45.5% 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 22 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 0.34 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 57% 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.

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 SNF50.4%CMS range 36.8–58.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.2%CMS range 8.5–16.710.7%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 discharge45.5%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 discharge40.9%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 discharge45.5%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 identified96.3%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 settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final 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 stay0.0%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 worsened0.0%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 hospitalization7.1%CMS range 3.6–11.37.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.191.02Oct 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

0.54
RN hours/ resident / day
0.66
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.59
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.79
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.28
RN hoursweekends
77.3%
Total nursing turnover
76.5%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 60 beds and averages 54.1 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 6 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.79 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.54 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.59 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 3.61 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.87 on weekdays — 7% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.65 to 0.28 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 77% is well above 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

7
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-05-28)
8
at the previous standard inspection (2023-05-18)

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.

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

  • Potential for harm · D2025-07-14 · tag F0627 — isolated
    Ensure the transfer/discharge meets the resident's needs/preferences and that the resident is prepared for a safe transfer/discharge.
    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, review of the police report, interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to appropriately discharge Resident #55. This affected one (Resident #55) out of three residents discharged from the facility. The facility census was 54 residents.Findings include: A review of Resident #55's clinical record revealed an admission date of 06/23/25 with diagnoses including cellulitis of the left lower limb, cerebral palsy, high blood pressure, major depression and genetic intellectual disability. Resident #55 was discharged from the facility on 07/07/25. A review of Resident #55's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #55 was moderately cognitively impaired and needed assistance with bathing, dressing and personal care. Resident #55's plan of care initiated on 06/23/25 indicated a self-care deficit related to intellectual disability. Interventions on the care plan included encourage Resident #55 to participate in planning day-to-day care, evaluate 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-14 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
    Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to document concerns regarding Resident #37's care in the facility. This affected one (Resident #37) out of three residents reviewed with concerns. The facility census was 54.Findings include: A review of Resident #37's clinical record revealed an admission date 06/18/25 with diagnoses including fractured pelvis and left arm, anemia, anxiety, dementia, depression, neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder and schizophrenia. Resident #37's physician order dated 06/30/24 revealed an appointment was scheduled with the orthopedic physician for after-care of bone fractures. Resident #37's progress note dated 06/30/25 indicated Resident #37 was transported to an appointment at 12:24 P.M. and returned to the facility following an orthopedic appointment at 3:27 P.M. A review of Resident #37's discharge information from the hospital dated 06/18/25 indicated a follow-up appointment was scheduled on 06/30/25 at 12:30 P.M. with the orthopedic physician's office for X-rays. An interview with Resident #37's niece 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 Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-05-28 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespread
    Dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain the dumpster area in a sanitary manner. This had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 48. Findings include: Observation on 05/18/25 at 8:25 A.M. with Dietary Manager (DM) #419 revealed the lid to the dumpster was open and the enclosure to the dumpster was left open. There was significant debris surrounding the dumpster inside the enclosure including cups, plastic wrap, gloves, and food wrappers. Interview on 05/18/25 at 8:25 A.M. with DM #419 confirmed findings of the dumpster area and indicated the maintenance director was responsible for maintaining the dumpster area.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-05-28 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    10. Interview on 05/21/25 at 2:22 P.M. with Maintenance Director #609 confirmed he was unable to provide a Legionella risk assessment or a water management plan. Maintenance Director #609 confirmed there was a Centers for Disease Control (CDC) toolkit available to them in their maintenance system for use to develop a risk assessment and plan, but he had not done so yet. Maintenance Director #609 indicated he did check water temperatures every Friday on each hall. Interview on 05/212/25 at 3:48 P.M. with the Administrator confirmed she was unable to locate any additional information regarding a Legionella risk assessment or water management plan. Review of facility policy Water Management Program undated revealed it was the policy of the facility to establish water management plans for reducing the risk of legionnaires and other opportunistic pathogens in the water system. A risk assessment would be conducted by the water management team annually to identify where Legionella could grow and spread. Review of CDC Toolkit for Controlling Legionella in Common Sources of Exposure…

    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 · E2025-05-28 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — pattern
    Develop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure education on immunization risk and benefits were provided and failed to obtain written consent for influenza and pneumococcal immunizations. This affected five residents (#1, #30, #37, #45, and #46) of five residents reviewed for immunizations. The facility census was 48. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #1 revealed an admission date of 02/06/24 with diagnoses including hypertension, dementia, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following unspecified cerebrovascular disease affecting right dominant side, major depressive disorder, cerebral infarction, and aphasia following unspecified cerebrovascular disease. Review of the influenza vaccine consent form dated 11/28/24 for Resident #1 indicated the vaccination was declined. The form indicated the declination was verbal, there was no indication as to whether the decision was made by the resident or by a resident representative, and there was no signature on the form to indicate education had been provided on the…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-05-28 · tag F0887 — pattern
    Educate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure education on immunization risk and benefits were provided and failed to obtain written consent for COVID-19 immunizations. This affected five residents (#1, #30, #37, #45, and #46) of five residents reviewed for immunizations. The facility census was 48. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #1 revealed an admission date of 02/06/24 with diagnoses including hypertension, dementia, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following unspecified cerebrovascular disease affecting right dominant side, major depressive disorder, cerebral infarction, and aphasia following unspecified cerebrovascular disease. Review of the COVID-19 vaccination consent form, which was not dated, for Resident #1 indicated the vaccination was declined. The form indicated the declination was verbal, there was no indication as to whether the decision was made by the resident or by a resident representative, and there was no signature on the form to indicate education had been provided on immunization…

    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 · D2025-05-28 · 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 medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were nutritionally assessed and monitored on a routine basis. This affected two residents (#30, and #46) of five residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility census was 48. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #30 revealed an admission date of 10/21/24 and diagnoses including right dominant side hemiplegia and hemiparesis, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, diastolic congestive heart failure, chronic ischemic heart disease, and chronic kidney disease. Review of the physician's order dated 12/12/24 revealed Resident #30 was on a regular diet with regular texture and thin liquids. Review of the physician's order dated 02/13/25 revealed Resident #30 received 150 milliliters (ml) water flush every four hours via percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube (used for administration of enteral feeds). Review of the physician's order dated 03/15/25 revealed Resident #30 received 400 ml bolus three…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-28 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
    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 resident record reviews, staff interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure communication and monitoring between the facility and dialysis center was completed and maintained. This affected one resident (#46) of one resident reviewed for dialysis. The facility census was 48. Findings include: Record review for Resident #46 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses including end stage renal disease (ESRD), acute on chronic combined systolic (congestive) and diastolic (congestive) heart failure, blindness in both eyes, and dependence on renal dialysis. Review of Resident #46's care plan dated 12/09/24 revealed the resident received dialysis treatments on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays. Listed interventions included to auscultate (listen to) lungs sounds as ordered and monitor for edema, check for new orders upon return from dialysis, maintain communication staff with dialysis staff and physician, monitor dressing to vascular…

    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 · D2025-05-28 · 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 and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure pharmacy recommendations were timely reviewed and addressed by the physician. This affected three residents (#18, #30, and #34) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 48. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #30 revealed an admission date of 10/21/24 and diagnoses including right dominant side hemiplegia and hemiparesis, Diabetes mellitus, essential hypertension, diastolic congestive heart failure, chronic ischemic heart disease, and chronic kidney disease. Review of the pharmacy Consultation Report dated 10/23/24 revealed the pharmacist recommended to obtain a complete blood count (CBC) and basic metabolic panel (BMP) lab draw on next lab day due to Resident #30 receiving Eliquis (an anticoagulant medication). There was no evidence provided that this pharmacy recommendation was addressed by a physician. A BMP and CBC were not obtained until 11/21/24. Review of an…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-10-03 · tag F0623 — isolated
    Provide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, resident interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure two ( #32 and #7) of three residents reviewed for admission, transfers, or discharges, were notified of past due payments resulting in a 30 day discharge notice and failed to ensure the reasons for the transfers or discharge was documented in the medical record. The facility census was 49. Findings Include: 1.Resident #32 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including infection and inflammatory reaction with removal of internal fixation device of a left hip replacement, post traumatic stress disorder, high blood pressure, diabetes, depression, and generalized anxiety disorder. Review of the physician's orders for Resident #32 revealed an order dated 09/04/24 from Medical Doctor (MD) #400 indicating he certified that there is a medical necessity for this patient/resident to be in this skilled nursing facility. I have informed the resident of diagnoses, treatment and care plan. I have…

    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
Show the remaining 21 citations
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-03 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure Resident #100 received assistance as needed and failed to recognize a change in Resident #100's condition. This affected one (#100) of six residents reviewed for the provision of care and services. The facility census was 49. Findings Include: Resident #100 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including breast cancer to the left breast, dementia without behavioral disturbance, multiple sclerosis, high blood pressure, left mastectomy, and psychotic disorder with delusions. Review of the quarterly comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 08/06/24 revealed Resident #100 was moderately cognitively impaired, needed set up for eating, and supervision for toileting and bathing. Review of the progress notes revealed on 08/22/24 timed 2:06 P.M. revealed Resident #100 had an appointment scheduled for 10:00 A.M. but was unable to make it due to the resident being incontinent of a large amount of stool. It…

    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 before2024-10-03 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
    Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure appropriate and accurate medical record documentation for one (#100) of six residents reviewed for change in condition. The facility census was 49. Findings Include: Resident #100 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including breast cancer to the left breast, dementia without behavioral disturbance, multiple sclerosis, high blood pressure, left mastectomy, and psychotic disorder with delusions. Review of the quarterly comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 08/06/24 revealed the Resident #100 was moderately cognitively impaired and needed supervision for all care. Review of the progress note dated 08/22/24 timed 2:06 P.M. revealed Resident #100 had an appointment scheduled for 10:00 A.M. but was unable to make the appointment because the resident had been incontinent of a large amount of stool and it took a long time to clean the resident up. The resident's daughter contacted the doctor's…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-06-11 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure Resident #115, who had cognitive and neurological impairments, a diagnosis of dementia, and was at risk for falls, was not left unattended in the facility van with no air conditioning and the door open for an extended period of time. This affected one resident (#115) of three residents reviewed for transportation to outside appointments. The facility census was 67. Findings include: Resident #115 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including left breast wound, left breast cancer, dementia, multiple sclerosis, heart disease, chronic kidney disease, depression, anxiety, and psychosis with delusions. Review of the admission MDS (Minimum Data Set) Version 3.0 Assessment Tool dated 05/17/24, Resident #115 had a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) of 10/15 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #115's care plan initiated on 05/11/24 indicated Resident #115 had impaired thought processes related to cognitive…

    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 · E2024-04-23 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — pattern
    Provide activities to meet all resident's needs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, observations, and interview the facility failed to provide activities as scheduled and to support the residents' mental and psychosocial wellbeing. This affected three (#2, #45, #47) of 13 residents interviewed and had the potential to affect nine (#1, #2, #12, #17, #24, #26, #30, #34, and #36) of 48 residents observed for participation in activities. Findings include: Review of the activity calendar for April 2024 revealed on 04/18/24 the facility would provide room visits at 10:00 A.M., exercise at 11:30 A.M., brain teasers at 11:45 A.M., and a scenic ride with ice cream stop at 2:00 P.M. Observations on 04/18/24 at 8:50 A.M. revealed Activity Aide #210 was doing leg exercises with residents in the common area. Observations on 04/18/24 at 11:11 A.M. revealed Residents #1, #2, #12, #17, #24, #26, #30, #34, and #36 were sitting in the common area watching television and sleeping. Staff were seated at the nurse's desk; no organized activities were observed. Observations on 04/18/24 at 1:10 P.M. revealed Residents #1, #2, #12, #17, #24, #26, #30, #34, and #36…

    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 · D2024-04-23 · tag F0557 — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to be treated with respect and dignity and to retain and use personal possessions.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, observation, and interview the facility failed to ensure residents had a dignified eating experience. This affected three ( #12, #19, #34) of 20 residents observed for meals. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #12 revealed an admission date of 12/26/23. Diagnoses included epilepsy, legal blindness, and cerebral infarction due to unspecified occlusion of the cerebral artery. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 03/31/24, revealed Resident #12 had impaired cognition and required moderate assistance for eating. Review of the medical record for Resident #19 revealed an admission date of 09/16/23. Diagnoses included multiple sclerosis, quadriplegia, and muscle weakness. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment, dated 02/03/24, revealed Resident #19 had intact cognition and required setup and clean up for eating. Review of the medical record for Resident #34 revealed an admission date of 09/02/23. Diagnoses included unspecified dementia and legal blindness. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment, dated 02/28/24,…

    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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-01-22 · 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 record review, review of the facility reported incident, review of facility policy and interview, the facility did not ensure Resident #52 was free from physical abuse by Resident #46. This affected one resident (#52) out of four residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 49. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #52 revealed an admission date of 10/06/23 and a discharge date of 11/10/23. Diagnoses included depression, bipolar disorder, anxiety disorder, and vascular dementia. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 10/19/23, revealed Resident #52 was severely impaired mentally and exhibited physical and verbal behavioral symptoms for one to three days. Review of progress notes for Resident #52, dated 10/09/23 through 10/19/23, revealed Resident #52 had documented behaviors of wandering into other resident's rooms, confusion, aggression and cursing directed towards others. Resident #52 was noted to be urinating in front of other resident's room,…

    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 · Fcited before2023-05-18 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespread
    Dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain its garbage disposal area in a clean and sanitary condition. This had the potential to affect all 34 residents. Findings include: Observation of the facility's garbage disposal area with Dietary Director #218 on 05/15/23 at 9:53 A.M. revealed both lids were open on the dumpster. There was some trash and leaves accumulated around the dumpster. Dietary Director #218 verified the above findings at the time of observation.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2023-05-18 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — widespread
    Implement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on record review, interview, and facility policy review the facility failed to provide documented evidence an antibiotic stewardship program was in place. This affected six residents (#2, #21, #23, #32, #38, and #141) and had the potential to affect all 34 residents residing in the facility. Findings include: Review of the infection control documentation revealed no documented evidence that an antibiotic stewardship program was in place. Interview on 05/17/23 at 5:22 P.M. with the Director of Nursing (DON) and Administrator revealed antibiotic stewardship was stopped during the COVID-19 pandemic as the task was waivered and had not started back up yet. Review of the facility matrix revealed Residents #2, #21, #23, #32, #38, and #141 were on antibiotics. Review of the facility policy titled Antibiotic Stewardship, dated 12/16, revealed antibiotics will be prescribed and administered to residents under the guidance of the facility's antibiotic stewardship program.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-05-18 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the resident's environment was kept clean, neat, well lit, and homelike. This had the potential to affect all 34 residents residing in the facility. Findings include: During the initial tour of the facility on 05/15/23 from 8:43 A.M. through 9:20 A.M. revealed light bulbs were burned out in the main hall by rooms #101, #107, #109, #111, #116, #208, #212, #301, #304, #308, #309, #310, #312, #313, one of two bulbs of a two-light sconce in the TV room, four can lights in the nurse's station and one ballast. There were no coverings of ballast light bulbs by rooms #104, #112, #116, #120, #202, #206, #301, #305, #317, #321, #323, outside the central bath and eight around the nurse's station. There were multiple heavily soiled spots in the carpeting throughout the facility. Interview on 05/15/23 at 2:16 P.M. with Maintenance #261 verified the burned-out light bulbs and stated the bulbs were ordered but failed to produce the order requisition. He verified the multiple stains in the carpets. He verified the missing plastic…

    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 · E2023-05-18 · tag F0641 — pattern
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to have an accurate Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #3, Resident #4, Resident #7, Resident #8, and Resident #15. This affected five residents (#3, #4, #7, #8, and #15) of fifteen residents reviewed for MDS accuracy. The facility census was 34. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #4 revealed an admission date of 01/27/21. Diagnoses included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction, cervical disc displacement, diabetes, and osteoarthritis. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] stated Resident #4 was not receiving hospice care. Review of the care plan revealed Resident #4 started hospice on 02/04/22. Interview on 05/18/23 at 1:09 P.M. with the Director of Nursing (DON) verified Resident #4 was on hospice. 2. Review of the medical record for Resident #8 revealed an admission date of 03/25/22. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's, diabetes, glaucoma, and the need for assistance with personal care. 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-05-18 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to ensure staff hands were cleansed between residents when passing out meal trays to residents in their rooms for three residents (#17, #32 and #34), failed to ensure dirty linen was kept off the floor for Resident #38, failed to ensure urinary catheter bag was kept off the floor and catheter care was done properly for Resident #3. This affected five residents (#3, #17, #32, #34 and #38) of 34 residents reviewed for infection control. The facility census was 34. Findings include: 1. Observation on 05/15/23 at 4:37 P.M. revealed Resident #3's urinary catheter bag was on the floor under her bed. Interview on 05/15/23 at 5:09 P.M. with the Licensed Practical Nurse/Unit Manager (LPN/UM) #238 verified the catheter bag was on the floor under the bed. 2. Observation on 05/16/23 at 4:15 P.M. during the emptying of Resident #'s catheter/leg bag revealed State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #234 did not place a barrier on the floor under the urinal. STNA #234 did not disinfect off the tip of the catheter/leg bag before…

    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 · Dcited before2023-05-18 · 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 interview and record review the facility failed to have updated/revised care plans for Resident #8 and Resident #31. This affected two residents (#8 and #31) of fifteen residents reviewed for care plans. The facility census was 34. Finding include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #8 revealed an admission date of 03/25/22. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's, glaucoma, and the need for assistance with personal care. Review of the annual MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #8 had intact cognition. The resident's hearing and vision were not assessed and bed mobility, transfers, locomotion, eating, toilet use, and personal hygiene had only occurred once or twice. Review of the care plan for activities of daily living (ADL) dated 10/06/22 for Resident #8 revealed a gait belt was needed for transfers. Interview on 05/18/23 at 3:18 P.M. with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #238 verified Resident #8 required a Hoyer lift (mechanical lift) for transfers, and the care plan was 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 · D2023-05-18 · 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, interview, record review, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure Resident #8 received timely nail care and failed to ensure Resident #38 received timely oral care. The facility failed to have accurate documented evidence that Resident's #3, #8, #14 and #31 had showers as ordered and/or per preference. This affected five residents (#3, #8, #14, #31, and #38) of fifteen residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL) care. The facility census was 34. Finding include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #8 revealed an admission date of 03/25/22. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's, glaucoma, and the need for assistance with personal care. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #8 had intact cognition. The resident's hearing and vision were not assessed and bed mobility, transfers, locomotion, eating, toilet use, and personal hygiene had only occurred once or twice. Observation on 05/15/23 at 11:41 A.M. revealed…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-05-18 · 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

    Based on record review, interview, and observation the facility failed to administer medications with an error rate of 5 percent (%) or less. This affected Resident and #3 and Resident #17, two of five residents observed medication administration. There were three errors out of 30 opportunities resulting in an error rate of 10%. Findings include: 1. Observation on 05/17/23 at 8:19 A.M. revealed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #275 was administering medication to Resident #3. LPN #275 administered vitamin B complex with vitamin C tablet (supplement) orally. Record review for Resident #3 revealed a physician order written on 04/25/23 for vitamin B complex daily. Interview with LPN #275 at 9:00 A.M. revealed the incorrect medication of vitamin B complex with vitamin C had been administered to Resident #3. Observation on 05/17/23 at 8:19 A.M. revealed LPN #275 was administering medication to Resident #3. LPN #275 administered Refresh Plus Ophthalmic Solution 0.5%. One drop in each eye. Record review for Resident #3 revealed a physician order written on 04/25/23 for Refresh Plus…

    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 · Fcited before2020-01-23 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespread
    Dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on observation and staff interview the facility failed to ensure its garbage disposal area was maintained in a clean and sanitary condition. This had the potential to affect all residents. The facility census was 33. Findings Include: Observation of the facilities garbage disposal area with Dietary Manager (DM) #101 on 01/21/20 at 8:53 A.M. revealed there were plastic bags of garbage covered with snow around the outside dumpster. DM #101 verified the above observations at the time of discovery.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2020-01-23 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure comprehensive resident centered care plans were initiated, developed and implemented to meet the needs of its residents. This affected five (Residents #35, #136, #240, #241, #287) of fourteen sampled residents. The facility census was 33. Findings Include: 1. Resident #35 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included bronchitis, type 2 diabetes and kidney failure. Review of the care plan for Resident #35 revealed problem areas of shortness of breath, anticoagulant medication use, discharge planning, vision impairment, falls, pain and skin conditions . None of these areas were noted with resident specific focus areas or goals. Minimum Data Set Nurse #100 verified the lack of individualized focus areas and goals in an interview on 01/22/20 at 7:30 A.M. 2. Resident #136 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included cellulitis of the right leg, type two diabetes and hyperlipidemia. Review of the care…

    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 · D2020-01-23 · 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 record review, observation and interview, the facility failed to provide an adequate sized bed for Resident #14. This affected one, Resident #14, of three residents reviewed, Residents #14, #12 and #21 for adequate sized beds. The facility census was 33. Findings include: Record review revealed Resident #14 had an admission date of 11/20/19. Diagnosis for Resident #14 included heart failure, muscle weakness, type two diabetes mellitus, peripheral vascular disease, acquired abscess of other right toe. The minimum data assessment (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #14 had been at risk for developing pressure ulcers, and had one or more unhealed pressure ulcers. Record review of the wound documentation tool dated 11/20/19 included six wounds, two left lateral proximal foot diabetic ulcers, two left heel pressure ulcers, a right lateral ankle ulcer and a sacrum wound. Resident #14's care plan revealed Resident #14 required assistance with activities of daily living due to decreased mobility and overall…

    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 · D2020-01-23 · tag F0636 — isolated
    Assess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, observation and record review the facility failed to ensure a thorough skin assessment was done on a newly admitted resident. This affected one resident (Resident #286 ) out one resident reviewed for skin issues not pressure related. The facility census was 33. Findings Include: Resident #286 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His admitting diagnoses included urinary tract infection, cerebral infarction due to unspecified occlusion or stenosis, delirium due to physiological condition, type II diabetes, and dementia. Review of the resident's admission assessment revealed the resident did have cognitive impairment. He needed assistance of one for a majority of activities of daily living including toileting. Review of skin assessment from this admission showed no noted skin issues or wounds on admission. Observation of Resident #286 on 01/22/20 at 1:00 P.M. revealed the resident had a bruise on his right hand from below the thumb to the wrist. This area was dark purple in color. There 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2020-01-23 · 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

    Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to monitor supplemental intake for Resident #12. This affected one, Resident #12, of one residents reviewed for supplemental intake. The facility census was 33. Record review revealed Resident #12 had an admission date of 07/22/15. Diagnosis for Resident #12 included type two diabetes mellitus, abnormalities of gait and mobility, dependence on a wheelchair, and unspecified dementia without behavioral disturbances. The minimum data assessment (MDS)completed on 12/06/19 revealed Resident #12 required set up help only for eating. The care plan dated 10/03/19 revealed Resident #12 had been at nutritional risk due to a variable food intake. Resident #12 had a significant negative weight decrease of 10.7 percent in the previous six months. Resident #12 began to refuse meals. An intervention included in the care plan was to monitor the meal intake with each meal. Record review of Dietitian #204 recommendations from 10/03/19 included to start Glucerna (a nutritional supplement) five times a day. Resident #12's diet dated…

    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 before2020-01-23 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to give prescribed medications per physicians orders for Residents #287. This affected one, Resident #287 of five, Residents #4, #7, #9 and #14 , reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 33. Findings include: Record review on 01/22/20 revealed Resident #287 had an admission date of 01/10/19. The admitting diagnosis included acute embolism (obstruction of an artery typically by a clot of blood or an air bubble) and thrombosis (local clotting of the blood) of right femoral vein and acute embolism and thrombosis of left iliac vein. The care plan for Resident #287 included nursing was to administer medication to Resident #287 as per the physicians orders. Record review of medications ordered on 01/10/20 included warfarin sodium tablet 2 milligram (mg)tablet by mouth in the evening for anticoagulant. Review of the medication administration record (MAR) for 01/22/20 for unnecessary medications revealed Resident #287 had not received warfarin sodium nor any other anticoagulant medication. Review of physicians…

    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 before2020-01-23 · 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, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain a medication error rate of less then 5 percent. This affected one, Resident #4, of nine residents, Residents #241, #12, #32, #7, #236, #238, #287 and #239 reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 33. Record review revealed Resident #4 had an admission date of 10/05/19. Resident #4 diagnosis included obesity, heart failure, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The minimum data assessment dated [DATE] included Resident #4 had been cognitively intact, required limited assistance for bed mobility and personal hygiene and extensive assistance for transfers. Resident #4's plan of care dated 01/21/2 included nursing staff to administer medications as per physicians orders. Observation of medication administration on 01/22/20 at 09:00 A.M. revealed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #102 administered Breo two puffs to Resident #4. After administration of the medication, LPN #102 exited Resident #4's room…

    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

“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.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
Ownership Data Not Available

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.

$6.9M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-24.9%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$653K
Related-party expense8% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 54%Medicare 11%Other / private 35%

This home reported $653K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. 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

$568per resident / day
operating cost
$17,257per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$454per 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 366377. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-05-28, 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