Normandy Manor Of Rocky River

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

53.7% 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 92 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 45.2% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 42 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 0.30 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 49% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 12% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 150 beds and averages 132.8 residents a day — about 89% occupied, or roughly 17 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 3.55 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.39 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.24 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.18 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.70 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.46 to 0.21 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are 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.

This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

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

• Actual harm · G2024-02-12 · 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 medical record reviews, observations, family interview, staff interviews, and policy review the facility failed to ensure adequate fall interventions were in place to promote resident safety and prevent falls. Actual harm occurred on 12/05/23 when Resident #120, who was severely cognitively impaired and assessed at risk for falls, sustained an unwitnessed fall from a bed that was not in low position resulting in increased pain and hospitalization for traumatic sacral fractures with presacral edema and lumbar one and four compression fractures. The resident was not a candidate for invasive procedures and returned to the facility with hospice consultation orders. This affected three residents (#2, #88 and #120) of three residents reviewed for falls. The facility census was 117. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #120's medical record revealed an admission date of 12/19/22, a re-admission date of 12/08/23 and a discharge date of 12/15/23. Diagnosis included unspecified dementia, chronic atrial…

  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 · E2024-11-06 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — pattern
  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 observations, resident record review, resident and family interviews, staff interviews, facility policy review, call light audit review, resident council meeting minutes review, and concern log review, the facility failed to ensure call lights were in reach for two residents (#31, #62) and also failed to ensure call lights were answered in a timely manner for eighteen residents (#6, #17, #20, #24, #27, #60, #61, #65, #68, #72, #89, #92, #94, #101, #110, #127, #133, #136). This had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 136. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #65 revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including sepsis, hyperlipidemia, and atherosclerotic heart disease. Review of the physician orders revealed an order to encourage Resident #65 to reposition dated 10/04/24 and an order dated 10/08/24 for hoyer lift transfers at all times. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE]…

  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 · Ecited before2024-11-06 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — pattern
  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

  Based on record review, staff interviews and review of the employee handbook, the facility failed to ensure staff did not neglect resident care due to staff sleeping while on duty. This had the potential to affect all twenty-two residents (#3, #12, #14, #15, #20, #34, #43, #46, #51, #53, #55, #57, #64, #70, #79, #116, #119, #123, #124, #128, #131, #134) residing on the 500-Hall and had the potential to affect all twenty-three residents (#8, #9, #16, #17, #26, #31, #39, #47, #58, #59, #68, #72, #80, #85, #86, #88, #97, #103, #106, #117, #125, #127, #133,) residing on the 800-Hall. The facility census was 136. Findings include: Review of the resident council meeting minutes dated 09/25/24 revealed an identified concern by Resident #17 regarding staff sleeping outside of his room with blankets. Resident #17 resided on the 800-Hall. Review of the facility Employee Handbook effective 05/01/16 revealed the facility had in place requirements of its staff to promote efficiency, productivity, and cooperation. Review of the handbook, page 28 and 29, revealed prohibited actions that would…

  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 · D2024-11-06 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
  Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to timely notify Resident #146's physician or nurse practitioner (NP) regarding the resident's decreased oral intake. This affected one resident (#146) of three residents reviewed for notification of change. The facility census was 136. Findings include: Review of Resident #146's medical record revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] and discharged on 10/07/24 with diagnoses including cerebral infarction, unspecified dementia, hypothyroidism and major depressive disorder. Review of Resident #146's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident exhibited severe cognitive impairment; the resident had not had a weight loss or weight gain. Review of Resident #146's weight tracking form revealed on 05/02/24 the resident weighed 147.8 pounds in a wheelchair and on 09/05/24 the resident weighed 148 pounds in a wheelchair. Review of Resident #146's physician orders revealed an order dated 04/24/24 (discontinued 05/20/24)…

  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 · Fcited before2024-08-22 · 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

  Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview, medical record review and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) were consistently implemented for Resident #67. This affected one (#67) of one resident reviewed for EPB. The facility identified 27 additional residents (#2, #9, #12, #14, #16, #27, #32, #33, #36, #44, #50, #54, #59, #60, #63, #76, #79, #80, #82, #101, #105, #107, #108, #118, #123, #126, and #127) on EBP. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure hand hygiene was performed following resident care. This affected two (#73 and #85) of two residents reviewed for personal care. The facility census was 127. Findings include: Record review for Resident #67 revealed an admission date of 05/31/24. Diagnoses included gastrostomy status. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 06/07/24, revealed Resident #67 was cognitively intact. Resident #67 was dependent for toileting, bathing, personal hygiene and was always incontinent of bowel and bladder. Resident #67 had medically complex conditions…

  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 · Fcited before2024-07-11 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespread
  Dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to maintain a clean and sanitary dumpster area. This had the potential to affect all of the residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 126 residents. Findings include: Observation on 07/08/24 at 9:02 A.M. with Dietary Director (DD) #470 of facility dumpster area behind the kitchen revealed there were two dumpsters. The sliding doors on the sides of both dumpsters were open with a significant amount of garbage and debris on the ground outside the dumpsters and in the surrounding brush. There was an unpleasant odor emanating from the dumpster. Interview on 07/08/24 at 9:03 A.M. with DD#470 confirmed maintaining the dumpster area was a shared responsibility with grounds and kitchen staff. DD#470 confirmed the dumpster area was not maintained in a clean and sanitary manner. Review of facility policy titled Garbage Removal and Dumpster undated revealed the dumpster would have a tight fitting lid and slide doors and would be kept covered at all times. This deficiency represents…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-07-11 · tag F0655 — pattern
  Create and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure baseline care plans were developed and failed to ensure summaries of the baseline care plan were provided to the residents and/or their representatives. This affected two (Residents #120 and #67) out two residents who were reviewed for baseline care plans. The facility census was 126 residents. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #120 revealed admission date of 05/25/24 and diagnoses including sepsis due to streptococcus pneumoniae, aphasia, and dysarthria. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #120 dated 06/01/24 revealed the resident had severely impaired cognition and was dependent on staff for activities of daily living (ADLs.) Review of the medical record for Resident #120 revealed it did not include a baseline care plan. Interview on 07/11/24 at 1:04 P.M. with MDS Nurse #508 confirmed the facility had not completed a baseline care plan…

  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 · D2024-07-11 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
  Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on medical record review, observation, resident interview, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure physician's orders were followed regarding dressing changes for an enteral tube feeding site. This affected one (Resident #67) of one reviewed for enteral nutrition. The facility identified two Residents (#67 and #378) as receiving enteral nutrition feedings. The facility census was 126 residents. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #67 revealed an admission date of 05/31/24 with diagnoses including left non-dominant sided hemiplegia and hemiparesis, cerebral infarction, difficulty walking, dysphagia, gastrostomy status, aphasia, and enterocolitis due to clostridium difficile. Review of the physician's orders for Resident #67 revealed an order dated 06/01/24 revealed the resident to receive nothing by mouth (NPO) and was to receive continuous enteral feeding to meet nutrition and hydration needs. Review of the physician's order dated 06/13/24 revealed Resident #67's percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube…

  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 · F2024-02-12 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — widespread
  Keep 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, record review, resident interview, Ombudsman interview, and staff interviews, the facility failed to deliver all of residents mail to them and or their authorized representative. The facility also failed to provide residents mail to them unopened. This affected five (#10, #36, #97, #122, and #123) of five reviewed for mail and had the potential to affect all residents. The facility census was 117. Findings include: 1. Review for Resident #97's medical record revealed an admission date of 05/05/23. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #97 revealed Resident #97 was cognitively intact. Interview on 02/06/24 at 3:04 P.M., with Resident #97 revealed she received her mail the previous day delivered by an Activities Assistant #262. Resident #97 revealed she received four envelopes of mail and one of the envelopes was opened prior to her receiving it. Resident #97 grabbed the four envelopes. One of the four envelopes were opened. The envelope opened had Resident #97's full name on the top line of the envelope. Under her name was 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-02-12 · tag F0582 — isolated
  Give 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 record review, resident interview, Ombudsman interview and staff interview, the facility failed to provide timely monthly billing statements to a resident for care and services. This affected one (#97) of three residents reviewed for monthly billing statements. The facility census was 117. Findings include: Review of Resident #97's medical record revealed an admission date of 05/05/23. Record review of diagnoses included congestive heart failure and collapsed vertebrae. Record review of the census form revealed from 06/09/23 through 09/20/23 Resident #97 was private pay. Resident #97 had a hospital stay from 09/20/23 and returned to the facility on [DATE] under Managed Care. On 12/04/23, Resident #97 was again private pay. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #97 revealed Resident #97 was cognitively intact. Resident #97 had no impairment of upper or lower extremities. Resident used a wheelchair for mobility. Review of the form titled, Rescinded 30-day discharge for (Resident #97)…

  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 · D2024-02-12 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
  Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, family interview, staff interview, and policy review, the failed to update to care plans to included fall interventions. This affected three (#2, #88, and #120) of three resident reviewed for care plans. The facility census was 117. Findings included: 1. Review of Resident #120's medical record revealed an admission date of 12/19/22, a re-admission date of 12/08/23 and a discharge date of 12/15/23. Diagnosis included unspecified dementia, chronic atrial fibrillation, difficulty in walking, muscle weakness, need for assistants with personal care, and cognitive communication deficit. Record review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #120 was severely cognitively impaired. Review of the Morse Fall Scale completed on 12/19/22, 01/02/23, 01/13/23, 04/18/23, and 07/19/23 revealed Resident #120 was at high risk for falls. Review of the Morse Fall Scale completed on 10/21/23 revealed Resident #120 was a moderate risk for falls and review of the Morse…

  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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 19 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

This home reported $80K 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

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