Colonial Nursing Center Of Rockford
201 Buckeye Street, Rockford, OH 45882 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 34 certified beds · (419) 363-2193 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has citations for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0567, F0569)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (33) — 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 (2/5)
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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 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
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
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 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 improved from 2 to 3 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.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 3.0% | 5.3% | 15.4% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 0.0% | 6.2% | 5.4% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.0% | 0.2% | 0.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 3.6% | 0.4% | 2.0% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 4.9% | 30.1% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 3.5% | 3.2% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 2.8% | 6.1% | 16.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 45.6% | 25.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 96.6% | 94.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 0.0% | 3.4% | 4.7% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 12.5% | 21.4% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 7.1% | 8.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ 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.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.32 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 53% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 13% 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
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | not 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 next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not 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 discharge | not reported — Newly certified nursing home with less than 12-15 months of data available or the nursing home opened less than 6 months ago, and there were no data to submit or claims for this measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.85 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS 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
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 34 beds and averages 32.7 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 1 bed typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. 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 3.42 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.40 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.12 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.98 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.59 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.41 to 0.38 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 45% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
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.
33 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 23 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-12-31 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the dishwasher was adequately sanitizing dishes. This had the potential to affect all 33 residents residing in the facility who receive meals from the kitchen. The facility census was 33. Findings include: Observation with Dietary Aid (DA) #39 of the dishwasher on 12/29/25 at 8:12 A.M. revealed the dishwasher contained a manufactures label that read Minimum Temperature 120 degrees Fahrenheit (F) and sanitizer at 50 parts per million (ppm). The temperature observed during operation was observed three times with the maximum temperature for the wash at 110 degrees F and rinse was 115 degrees F. Testing of the sanitizer did not result in a color change of the strip. Interview with DA #39 at the time of the observation revealed he did not test the temperature of the dishwasher or sanitizer during this shift. Interview on 12/29/25 at 8:28 A.M. with DA #39 revealed he set up the dishwasher that morning and was able to demonstrate how to turn the dishwasher on. DA #39 stated he had not checked the water…
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.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-12-31 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observations, staff and resident interviews, review of facility documentation and review of facility policy, the facility failed to implement enhance barrier precautions as required. This affected one (#1) of five residents reviewed for infection control. The facility also failed to document Legionella prevention control measures were documented. This had the ability to affect all 33 residents residing in the facility. The facility failed to ensure a resident's urinary collection bag was stored in a manner to reduce the chance of infection. This affected one (#35) of two residents reviewed for urinary catheters. The census was 33. Findings include: 1.Review of Resident #1's medical revealed an admission date of 04/29/21. Diagnoses listed included hemiplegia, diabetes mellitus, irritable bowel syndrome, pathological fracture, depressive disorder, hypertension, and schizophrenia. Review of an annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #1 had moderately impaired…
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.
- Potential for harm · F2025-12-31 · tag F0882 — widespreadDesignate a qualified infection preventionist to be responsible for the infection prevent and control program in the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of infection control documents, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to have a qualified infection preventionist. This had the potential to affect all 33 residents residing in the facility. The census was 33. Findings include: Review of the facility's infection control program documentation revealed no evidence of any current staff member being certified infection control and prevention. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 12/20/25 at 9:50 A.M. revealed she had not received specialized training in infection prevention and had not obtained any infection control and prevention certification. The DON had been responsible for the facility's infection control program since 10/20/25. Interview with Administrator on 12/30/25 at 11:09 A.M. confirmed the DON had not received specialized training in infection prevention and had not obtained any infection control and prevention certification. The Administrator stated Contracted Registered Nurse (CRN) #36 had been certified in infection prevention. During a follow-up 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-31 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to manage his or her financial affairs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to have personal funds available after business hours. This affected three (#15, #9 and #35) out of three residents reviewed for availability of personal funds. The facility census was 33. Findings include: Interview on 12/29/25 at 9:27 A.M. with Resident #15 revealed the resident is unable to obtain money from personal funds after 4:00 P.M. after business office is closed during the week. Personal funds are not available on weekends or holidays. Interview on 12/30/25 at 1:40 P.M. with Register Nurse (RN) #71 revealed no personal funds are not kept in the medication cart for withdrawal when business office is closed. Interview on 12/30/25 at 1:50 P.M. with Business Office Manager (BOM) #11 revealed personal funds are not available in the evening or weekends. Business office has hours of Monday through Friday 8:00 A.M. to 4:00 A.M. BOM #11 stated, Everyone is in the route of doing that. Interview on 12/31/25 at 9:13 A.M. with Resident #9 revealed the resident did not know how much funds he has available or…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-31 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 medical record review, resident and staff interviews, policy review, and review of the Centers of Disease Control (CDC) website, the facility failed to ensure a resident who tested positive for coronavirus (COVID-19) was monitored for changes in health status as per Center for Disease Control (CDC) guidelines. This affected one (#34) out of one residents reviewed for COVID-19. The facility census was 33. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #34 revealed an admission date of 04/30/24 with medical diagnoses of gastroparesis, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and depression. Review of the medical record for Resident #34 revealed a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], which indicated Resident #34 was cognitively intact and required partial/moderate staff assistance with toilet hygiene, bathing, bed mobility, and transfers. Review of the medical record for Resident #34 revealed a nurses' note, dated 12/25/25 at 2:15 P.M., which stated Resident #34 had returned from 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-31 · tag F0685 — isolatedAssist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing 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 medical record review, review of the facility optometrist visit log, and staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident was provided with the opportunity to see an optometrist. This affected one (05) out of four residents reviewed for ancillary services. The facility census was 33. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #05 revealed an admission date of 04/02/24 with medical diagnoses of schizoaffective disorder, suicidal ideations, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, depression, post traumatic stress disorder, and anxiety. Review of the medical record for Resident #05 revealed a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 10/01/25, which indicated Resident #05 was cognitively intact, required supervision with bathing and was independent with bed mobility and transfers, and required set-up with eating and toileting. The MDS indicated Resident #05 had no vision issues with the use of glasses. Review of the medical record for Resident #05 revealed no…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-31 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 medical record review, observations, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to provide cares/services to prevent falls. The facility also failed to investigate and initiate interventions to prevent further falls. This affected one (#20) out of three residents reviewed for falls. The facility census was 33. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #20 revealed an admission date of 04/19/25 with medical diagnoses of Parkinsonism, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, schizophrenia, dementia, and depression. Review of the medical record for Resident #20 revealed a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 10/24/25, which indicated Resident #20 was cognitively intact and required supervision with eating, toilet hygiene, and transfers, and was independent with bed mobility and ambulation. Review of the MDS indicated Resident #20 did not have any recent falls. Review of the medical record for Resident #20 revealed an at risk for falls care plan indicated an intervention for staff to walk with resident when feeling weak, 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-31 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a medication as administered as ordered. This affected one (#05) resident out of five residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 33.Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #05 revealed an admission date of 04/02/24 with medical diagnoses of schizoaffective disorder, suicidal ideations, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, and anxiety. Review of the medical record for Resident #05 revealed a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 10/01/25, which indicated Resident #05 was cognitively intact, required supervision with bathing and was independent with bed mobility and transfers, and required set-up with eating and toileting. Review of the medical record for Resident #05 revealed a physician order dated 09/20/25 for losartan potassium 50 milligram one tablet by mouth daily, hold if systolic blood pressure <100. Review of the medical record for Resident #05 revealed the December 2025…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-31 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolatedProvide timely, quality laboratory services/tests to meet the needs of residents.
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 laboratory work was completed as per physician orders. This affected one (#04) resident out of the five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 33. Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #04 revealed an admission date of 06/29/22 with medical diagnoses of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), anxiety, Ogilvie syndrome, diabetes mellitus, depression, hyperlipidemia, and atrial fibrillation. Review of the medical record for Resident #04 revealed a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], which indicated Resident #04 was cognitively intact and was dependent upon staff for toilet hygiene, showering, transfers, and required substantial/maximum assistance with bed mobility. Review of the medical record for Resident #04 revealed a physician order dated 08/24/22 for the following laboratory values to be completed every June: thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH), thyroxine…
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.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-04-17 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, policy review and review of local health department documentation the facility failed to ensure the kitchen was maintained in a safe and sanitary manner. This had the potential to affect all residents residing at the facility. The facility census was 27. Findings include: Observation on 04/17/25 at 7:58 A.M. of the kitchen revealed an uncovered trash can placed to the right side of the steel clean utensil cart. Food was observed splattered along the side of the cart. Food debris was noted encircling the clean utensil holders. A two layered steel cart was noted to have three open soda cans, with food debris and an uncovered plastic container of butter. A hooded sweatshirt was observed wadded up in the corner of the bottom shelf. The food service prep area had a pan of scrambled eggs and a second pan with bacon and seven over easy eggs. Food particles were observed on the steel cart where the clean plates were held encircling the clean plates. This was verified with [NAME]…
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.
Show the remaining 23 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-25 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, review of facility investigation report, resident and staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure medications were consumed at the time of administration. This affected one (#08) out of three residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 25. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #08 revealed an admission date of 07/24/24 with medical diagnoses of acquired left below the knee amputation (BKA), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure, obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), major depression, and peripheral vascular disease. Review of the medical record for Resident #08 revealed an admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 07/29/24, which indicated Resident #08 was cognitively intact and required substantial/maximum staff assistance with toilet hygiene and bathing, supervision with transfers and set-up assistance with eating and bed mobility. The MDS indicated Resident #08 received antidepressant, anticoagulant, antibiotic, and opioid medications.…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-22 · tag F0569 — isolatedNotify each resident of certain balances and convey resident funds upon discharge, eviction, or death.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy the facility failed to ensure resident funds were conveyed in a timely manner. This affected two residents (#20 and #23) of three reviewed for personal funds. The facility census was 19. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record of Resident #20 revealed an admission date of [DATE] and a date of death on [DATE]. Diagnoses included acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypercapnia and hypoxia, hypotension, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, anxiety disorder, emphysema, and quadriplegia C5-C7 incomplete. Review of the facility form titled, Transaction Report, dated [DATE] to [DATE] revealed Resident #20's account had a payment applied on [DATE] in the amount of $25,000.00. A second payment was applied on [DATE] in the amount of $7,000.00, and a third on [DATE] in the amount of $7,000.00. A refund of $7,500.00 was issued on [DATE]. There was a balance of $7,500. Interview on [DATE] at 10:30 A.M. with Business Office Manager…
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.
- Potential for harm · F2023-03-09 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — widespreadKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure the resident shower room provided adequate privacy. This had the potential to affect all 19 residents residing in the facility. The facility's census was 19. Findings include: Observation on 03/07/23 at 2:20 P.M. of the resident shower room revealed two separate shower suites for residents, with an open doorway to each suite. There were no doors or privacy curtains in place for resident privacy for either suite or near the shower itself. If a resident were to be receiving a shower, and a second resident or staff member entered, the first resident would be easily observed by the second resident and/or staff entering the shower room. Interview on 03/07/23 at 2:27 P.M. with State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #136 verified there were no doors or privacy curtains in place in the resident shower room. Interview on 03/07/23 at approximately 3:45 P.M. with the Director of Nursing (DON) verified all 19 residents utilized the resident shower room. Review of facility policy, Resident Rights,…
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.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-03-09 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — widespreadEnsure 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 observation, staff interview, and review of facility smoking contract, the facility failed to ensure cigarettes were lit outside the facility. Furthermore, the facility failed to ensure the resident smoking area was free from cigarette butts. This had the potential to affect all 19 residents residing in the facility. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure alcohol was stored properly. This affected one (Resident #11) of one resident reviewed for alcohol storage. The facility census was 19. Findings include: 1. Observation on 03/06/23 at 3:43 P.M. revealed State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #117 lighting the cigarettes of two male residents while they were inside the building, prior to them exiting to the courtyard patio. Observations of the courtyard revealed the presence of a large amount of cigarette butts on the ground, in the mulch, in the grass, and on the cement. STNA #117 verified the large amounts of cigarette butts throughout the courtyard. Interview on 03/06/23 at 3:45 P.M. with STNA…
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.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-03-09 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on the facility's water management program information, staff interview, review of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) guidance, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to have an appropriate Legionella water management program in place. This had the potential to affect all 19 residents in the facility. Findings include: Review of the facility's Legionella environmental assessment form dated 05/26/22 revealed the assessment was not fully completed and did not include all the required components. Further review revealed the facility did not complete a map/flow diagram of the facility and/or water temperature monitoring. Interview on 03/09/23 at approximately 1:50 P.M. with Maintenance Staff #128 revealed she had been working in the maintenance position since the end of November 2022. Maintenance Staff #128 admitted she was unaware what the requirements were for the water management program and verified she had yet to do anything regarding water management related to Legionella, including monitoring of water temperatures. Review of the undated CDC guidance titled,…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-03-09 · tag F0645 — patternPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure an accurate Preadmission Screen and Resident Review (PASRR) was completed and failed to ensure the PASRR Review Results were obtained timely. This affected five (Residents #01, #05, #20, #08, and #10) of five residents reviewed for PASRRs. The facility census was 19. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #01 revealed an admission date of 07/02/21 with diagnoses of residual schizophrenia, major depression, and unspecified psychosis. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated Resident #01 was cognitively intact. Resident #1 required supervision with bed mobility, transfers, locomotion, and eating. Resident #01 required limited assistance with toileting and extensive staff assistance with bathing. Further review of the medical record revealed a PASRR screen was completed on 05/11/18. The Review Results indicated Resident #01 had no indications of serious mental…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-03-09 · tag F0741 — failed to have staff trained for behavioral health — patternEnsure that the facility has sufficient staff members who possess the competencies and skills to meet the behavioral health needs of residents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, employee file review, and staff interview, the facility failed to complete Behavioral Health training upon hire for new employees. This affected two State Tested Nurse Aides (STNAs #106 and #117) of four STNAs review for Behavioral Health training. Additionally, this affected four (Residents #2, #5, #20, and #1) of four residents reviewed for mental health diagnoses. The facility identified 16 residents with mental health diagnoses (Residents #1, #6, #2, #5, #12, #123, #18, #15, #7, #174, #3, #11, #20, #175, #8, and #10). The facility's census was 19. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #2 revealed an admission date of 03/11/2020 with medical diagnoses of schizoaffective disorder and paranoid schizophrenia. Review of the medical record for Resident #5 revealed an admission date of 04/29/21 with medical diagnoses of schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and depression. Review of the medical record for Resident #20 revealed an admission date of 12/13/22 with medical diagnoses of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety,…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-03-09 · tag F0838 — failed to assess facility resources and resident needs — patternConduct and document a facility-wide assessment to determine what resources are necessary to care for residents competently during both day-to-day operations (including nights and weekends) and emergencies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of a facility list of residents identified as smokers, review of the facility assessment, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to identify smoking residents. Additionally, the facility assessment failed to address the facility's smoking population's needs. This had the potential to affect eight (Residents #2, #3, #6, #10, #11, #12, #14, and #19) identified by the facility as smoking residents. The facility's census was 19. Findings include: Review of a facility provided list of residents identified as smokers, revealed eight residents (#2, #3, #6, #10, #11, #12, #14, and #19) smoked out of the 19 residents residing in the facility, equaling 42 percent (%) of the facility population. Review of the facility assessment dated [DATE] revealed the assessment did not identify the facility's resident smoking population, nor did it identify needed services and care for smoking residents. Further review revealed the assessment indicated the facility would provide…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-03-09 · tag F0887 — patternEducate 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance for Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination and boosters, the facility failed to ensure residents were offered COVID-19 vaccines in a timely manner. This affected five (Residents #3, #6, #5, #8, and #11) of five residents reviewed for COVID-19 vaccination. This also had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 19. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #3 was admitted on [DATE]. Diagnoses included type two diabetes mellitus, borderline personality disorder, schizophrenia, hyperlipidemia, essential (primary) hypertension, nicotine dependence, major depressive disorder, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was cognitively intact. Review of COVID-19 vaccine documentation dated 11/04/21 revealed Resident #3's responsible party…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-09 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor 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 staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents had access to a clean bathroom. This affected two (Residents #02 and #12) of three residents reviewed for physical environment. The facility census was 19. Findings include: Observation on 03/06/23 at 9:43 A.M. of the bathroom shared by Resident #02 and #12, revealed three large light green stains to the bathroom floor around the toilet. The bathroom was noted to have a strong odor of urine. Interview on 03/07/23 at 7:35 A.M. with Housekeeper #108 stated the facility was aware of the stains to the floor and the strong urine odor to Resident #02 and #12's bathroom. Housekeeper #108 stated housekeeping had been cleaning the floor frequently and the stains had improved but they were unable to get rid of the urine odor or stains to the floor. Interview on 03/07/23 at 8:45 A.M. with Maintenance #128 confirmed the floor to Residents #02 and #12's bathroom had large green stains and the bathroom had a strong urine odor. Maintenance #128 stated the housekeeping staff have been working to remove the stains but…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-09 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop 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 medical record review, staff and resident interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to conduct quarterly care conferences. This affected three (Residents #10, #11, and #18) of three residents reviewed for care conferences. The census was 19. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #11 was admitted on [DATE]. Diagnoses included heart failure, high blood pressure, and chronic kidney disease. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was cognitively intact. Review of the social service progress notes dated 06/30/22 revealed a care conference was held for the resident. Further review of the medical record, including progress notes, revealed no other care conferences taking place, indicating care conferences were not completed quarterly. Interview on 03/08/23 at 11:37 A.M. with Social Services #115 verified Resident #11 had not had any care conferences since 06/30/22. 2. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #18 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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-09 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to complete monthly medication regimen reviews. This affected three (Residents #02 #05, and #10) of five residents reviewed for medication regimen reviews. The facility census was 19. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #02 revealed an admission date of 03/11/20 with medical diagnoses of schizoaffective disorder, paranoid schizophrenia, and extrapyramidal and movement disorder. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated Resident #02 was cognitively intact. Resident #02 required supervision with bed mobility, transfers, eating, and ambulation. Resident #02 required limited assistance with toileting and extensive assistance with bathing. Further review of the medical record revealed no documentation to support the pharmacy completed a monthly medication regimen review for 05/2022, 06/2022, 07/2022, and 08/2022. 2. Review of the medical record for Resident #05 revealed an admission date 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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-09 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure 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, resident interview, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure medications were stored properly. This affected one (Resident #19) of one resident reviewed for medications left at bedside. The facility's census was 19. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #19 revealed an admission date of 12/12/22 with medication diagnoses of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), pneumonia, anemia, and hypertension. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated Resident #19 was cognitively intact. Resident #19 required supervision with bed mobility, transfers, ambulation, and toileting. Review of Resident #19's physician orders revealed an order dated 12/30/22 for guaifensin (Mucinex) extended release 600 milligram (mg) tablet one tablet daily by mouth and an order dated 01/07/23 for acetaminophen (Tylenol) 500 mg two tablets by mouth three times per day. Review of the medication self-administration safety screen dated 12/12/22…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-09 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolatedMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff and resident interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to provide a resident with a functioning call light. This affected one (Resident #05) resident of 19 residents reviewed for functioning call lights. The facility census was 19. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #05 revealed an admission date of 04/29/21 with medical diagnoses of left sided hemiplegia, schizophrenia, unspecified, history of cerebral infarction due to thrombosis, bipolar disorder, major Depression, diabetes mellitus (DM), and morbid obesity. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #05 had moderate cognitive impairment. Resident #05 required extensive assistance with bed mobility, dressing, toileting, and personal hygiene, and was dependent upon staff for transfers and bathing and was non-ambulatory. Observation on 03/06/23 at 9:00 A.M. revealed Resident #05 lying in bed with no call light within reach. Further observation 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.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2019-07-03 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident record review, staff interviews, and policy review; the facility failed to implement standard precautions when a resident's used/dirty urinary catheter bag was placed in another resident's storage basin which contained personal hygiene products. This affected one (#13) of 16 resident reviewed during the initial pool process for infection control. Additionally, the facility failed to implement a water management program for the prevention and spread of Legionella. This had the potential to affect 24 of 24 residents who reside at the facility. The census was 24. Findings include: 1. Observation on 07/01/19 at 10:12 A.M. of Resident #13's shared bathroom revealed a storage basin was sitting on the counter next to the sink. The storage basin was noted to contain multiple denture cleaner tablets, a tube of tooth paste, body wash, and other bottles of hygiene products. Laying directly on top of the denture cleaner tablets, tube of tooth paste, body wash, and other hygiene products was a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-07-03 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
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 provide a skilled nursing facility advanced beneficiary notice (SNF ABN) (form CMS-10055) to a resident who was discharged from Medicare A services when benefit days were not exhausted and the resident remained at the facility. Additionally, the facility failed to provide a notice of medicare non coverage (NOMNC) (form CMS 10123) to a resident who had was discharged from Medicare A services when benefit days where not exhausted and the resident immediately discharged from the facility following the last covered skilled day. This affected two (#21 and #76) of two residents reviewed for liability notice. The census was 24. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #21 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses include schizoaffective disorder, psychosis, alcoholism, cocaine abuse, hypertension, major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, psychoactive substance abuse, bipolar disorder,…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2019-07-03 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on resident record review and staff interview; the facility failed to provide the resident/resident representative a written summary of the baseline care plan. This affected two (#12, #73, and #13) of three residents reviewed for baseline care plans. The census was 24. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #12 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses include congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, post traumatic stress disorder, and diabetes mellitus type one. Review of the admission minimum data set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #12 had intact cognition. Review of the medical record for Resident #12 revealed no evidence of a written summary of the baseline care plan being given to the resident. Interview on 07/02/19 at 1:30 P.M. with the Director of Nursing (DON) verified there was no written summary of the baseline care plan given to Resident #12. The DON…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2019-07-03 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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 resident record review and staff interview; the facility failed to develop and implement a person-centered comprehensive care plan for the use of psychoactive, anticoagulant, and diuretic medications. This affected one (#12) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medication. The census was 24. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #12 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses include congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, post traumatic stress disorder, and diabetes mellitus type one. Review of the admission minimum data set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #12 was administered antianxiety, anticoagulant, and diuretic medication on seven days during the seven day reference period. Review of the medication administration record dated 06/19 and 07/19 revealed Resident #12 was administered xanax (antianxiety medication) one milligram (mg), one tablet by mouth twice…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-07-03 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 observations, medical record review and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident was adequately secured on the facilities transportation bus. This affected one (#73) of one resident reviewed for accident/hazards. The census was 24. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #73 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses include insomnia, chronic pain, anxiety, major depressive disorder, muscle spasms, chronic fatigue, multiple spasms, and multiple sclerosis. Review of the admission minimum data set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #73 had intact cognition. The resident required limited assistance of one staff for transfers. Documentation revealed the resident's mobility devices was a wheel chair (manual or electric). Review of the nurse progress notes dated 06/20/19 at 3:15 A.M. revealed Resident #73 complained of nausea and headache. Vital signs were systolic blood pressure 130 millimeters of mercury (mmHg) and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-07-03 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
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 treat an urinary tract infection to maintain bladder function for a resident who utilizes an indwelling urinary catheter. This affected one (#13) of one resident reviewed for urinary catheter. The census was 24. Findings include: Review of the the medical record for Resident #13 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses include cerebral palsy, anxiety, major depressive disorder, diabetes mellitus type two, spastic hemiplegia, bipolar disorder, and hydronephrosis. Review of the quarterly minimum data set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #13 had intact cognition. The resident was totally dependent upon staff for bed mobility, transfers, toilet use, and personal hygiene. The resident utilized an indwelling urinary catheter. Review of a physician order dated 06/21/19, revealed Resident #13 was ordered the antibiotic medication ciprofloxacin 500 milligram (mg), take one tablet by mouth two times a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-07-03 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — isolatedImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
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 review and staff interview; the facility failed to implement antibiotic stewardship protocol to ensure appropriate antibiotic use. This affected one (#13) of one resident review of a urinary tract infection. The census was 24. Findings include: Review of the the medical record for Resident #13 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses include cerebral palsy, anxiety, major depressive disorder, diabetes mellitus type two, spastic hemiplegia, bipolar disorder, and hydronephrosis. Review of the quarterly minimum data set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #13 had intact cognition. The resident was totally dependent upon staff for bed mobility, transfers, toilet use, and personal hygiene. The resident utilized an indwelling urinary catheter. Review of a physician order dated 06/21/19, revealed Resident #13 was ordered the antibiotic medication ciprofloxacin 500 milligram (mg), take one tablet by mouth two times a day for 10 days. Review of a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · Ccited before2025-12-31 · tag F0730 — widespreadObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on review of personnel records and staff interviews, the facility failed to complete performance reviews for Certified Nurse Aides (CNA) as required. This affected two (#13, and #18) of three CNA reviewed and had the potential to affect all 33 residents residing in the facility. The census was 33. Findings Include: Review of CNA #13's personnel file revealed a hire date of 04/25/23. Further review revealed no documentation of an annual performance review being completed in 2025. Review of CNA #18's personnel file revealed a hire date of 04/25/23. Further review revealed no documentation of an annual performance review being completed in 2025. Interview with Business Office Manager (BOM) #11 on 12/31/25 at 12:11 P.M. confirmed there were no annual evaluations for CNA #13 and CNA #18.
- No harm found · Ccited before2019-07-03 · tag F0730 — widespreadObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on personnel record review and staff interview, the facility failed to complete annual performance evaluations for two State Tested Nurse Aides (STNA) #402 and #426 reviewed. This had the potential to affect 24 of 24 residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 24. Findings include: Review of the personnel records for two State Tested Nurse Aides (STNA #402 and #426) were silent for annual performance evaluations. During an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 07/03/19 at 3:05 P.M., she verified annual performance evaluations were not completed.
“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.
- 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.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to HILLSTONE HEALTHCARE — 9 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 3 of 5 | 3.9 | -0.9 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 3.3 | -1.3 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 1.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 5.0 | ≈ chain avg |
The other 8 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.9★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| KOTHARI, ZAHID | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | 6% | since 01/01/2024 |
| MELTON, DAVID | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | 6% | since 01/01/2024 |
| WOODWARD, MELVIN | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | 88% | since 02/01/2022 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 10 rows in the source record cover these 3 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $334K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 12% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in OH
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.
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 366234. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-31, 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.