Concord Care And Rehabilitation Center
620 W Strub Rd, Sandusky, OH 44870 · For profit - Individual · 50 certified beds · (419) 626-5373 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- 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 an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0602), cited Dec 2023
- a high number of inspection citations overall (29) — 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 payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- its last standard health inspection was over 2 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions
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 | 3 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 2 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 1 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
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 | 2.0% | 5.3% | 15.4% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.1% | 6.2% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.6% | 0.4% | 2.0% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 77.6% | 30.1% | 6.5% | worse 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 | 1.8% | 3.2% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 0.0% | 6.1% | 16.1% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 42.3% | 25.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 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 | 3.9% | 21.4% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 7.7% | 8.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.5% | 75.6% | 79.4% | 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 0.23 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 28% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 54% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy at close to weekday levels right through the weekend. 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 | 10.9%CMS range 7.6–16.2 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at 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 — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF 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 | 1.20 | 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 50 beds and averages 47.1 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 3 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 3.15 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.64 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.77 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 2.77 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.31 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.72 to 0.43 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 50% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
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.
29 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 19 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-05 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure residents were treated with dignity/respect when staff failed to ensure residents names were not visible on their clothing. This affected one (Resident #31) of three residents reviewed for dignity. The facility census was 46. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #31 revealed an admission date of 12/08/23 and diagnoses of rhabdomyolysis, heart disease, pneumonia, urinary tract infection, hypoglycemia, presence of cerebrospinal fluid drainage device, muscle weakness, altered mental status, depression, anxiety, anorexia. Review of the most recent quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of three, indicating Resident #31 was severely cognitively impaired. Resident #31 required substantial/maximal assistance with upper and lower body dressing as well as putting on/taking off footwear. Observation on 09/03/24 at 12:38…
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 before2024-09-05 · 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, staff and resident interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were safely smoking. This affected one (Resident #41) of one resident reviewed for smoking. The facility census was 46. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #41 revealed an admission date of 06/11/24 with diagnoses of cardiomyopathy, hypoxemia, ascites, chronic passive congestion of liver, nicotine dependence, congestive heart failure, type two diabetes mellitus, hypertension, fatty liver, insomnia, hypotension, and dyspnea. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13, indicating Resident #31 was cognitively intact. Observation on 09/03/24 at 10:09 A.M. of Resident #41 while they were smoking revealed Resident #41 extinguished their cigarette on the ground and then placed the butt between the cushion of their wheelchair and the wheelchair. Interview on 09/03/24 at 10:10 A.M.…
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 · Ecited before2024-06-03 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure 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, resident and staff interview, medical record review, and review of a facility policy, the facility failed to provide residents with appropriate supervision while smoking and failed to maintain smoking materials in a safe manner. This affected six (#11, #17, #23, #24, #26, and #37) of 16 residents reviewed for smoking. The census was 41. Findings include: Observation on 05/29/24 at 9:11 A.M. revealed Resident #11 was standing outside in the smoking area by herself smoking unsupervised. Observation on 05/29/24 at 9:22 A.M. revealed Resident #37 had a pack of cigarettes laying on his bed. Resident #37 was resting with his eyes closed while sitting in his custom electric wheelchair beside his bed. Interview with State Tested Nurse Aide (STNA) #130 on 05/29/24 at 9:22 A.M. verified Resident #11 was outside smoking unsupervised and Resident #37 had a pack of cigarettes laying on his bed. Interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #125 on 05/29/24 at 9:25 A.M. revealed activities staff 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 · D2024-06-03 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to administer medications as ordered by the physician. A total of two medication errors were identified out of 30 opportunities for a medication error rate of 6.67 percent (%). This affected one (#33) of four residents observed for medication administration. The census was 41. Findings include: Review of Resident #33's medical record revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including diabetes mellitus type II, hypertension, and seizures. Review of Resident #33's current physician orders revealed the resident was to received a multivitamin with minerals to give one tablet by mouth once daily for supplement and the combined blood pressure medication valsartan-hydrochlorothiazide 160 milligrams (mg) - 25 mg tablet by mouth once daily with instructions to hold if the resident's systolic blood pressure was less than 110 millimeters of mercury (mmHg). Observation of medication administration for…
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 · D2024-06-03 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide 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, staff interview interview, and review of facility policies, the facility failed to ensure proper hand hygiene was maintained during medication administration. This affected two (#32 and #39) of four residents observed during medication administration. The census was 41. Findings include: Observation on 05/29/24 at 5:20 A.M. of medication administration to Resident #39 revealed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #146 popped out a tablet of the pain medication gabapentin 600 milligrams (mg) into his bare hand then put the tablet in the medication cup without sanitizing his hands. Observation on 05/29/24 at 5:35 A.M. of medication administration to Resident #32 revealed LPN #146 put a supplemental vitamin C 500 mg tablet directly into his bare hand from the bottle and put it in the medication cup without sanitizing his hands. Interview with LPN #146 on 05/29/24 at 6:00 A.M. confirmed he did not wash his hands from the beginning of medication administration at 5:20 A.M. through confirmation at 6:00 A.M. LPN #146 confirmed he put medications for Resident #32 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 · D2023-12-28 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolatedProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
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 interview, review of a facility self-reported incident (SRI), review of witness statements, review of a local law enforcement report, review of bank records, review of Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) notes, review of a signed acknowledgement, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a resident was free from misappropriation of money. This affected one (#02) of three residents reviewed for misappropriation. The facility census was 46. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #02 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included multiple sclerosis, depression, anxiety, legal blindness, chronic pain, muscle weakness, lack of coordination, and tremors. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 11/14/23, revealed Resident #02 had a moderate cognitive impairment. Review of the nursing progress note dated 12/08/23 and timed 5:59 P.M. revealed Resident #02 stated he 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 · F2022-04-25 · tag F0801 — widespreadEmploy sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and staff interview, the facility failed to have a director of food and nutrition services to provide oversight for the sanitation of the kitchen and the serving of physician ordered diets. This affected all 40 residents who reside in the facility. Findings include: Observations from 04/18/22 through 04/21/22 revealed no dietary staff member who was identified as in charge of kitchen. Observations and interviews between 04/19/22 and 04/21/22 revealed the facility failed to store food appropriately; failed to prepare food appropriately; failed to maintain a clean, sanitary kitchen; failed to serve food that was palatable, failed to provide adaptive equipment for meals, and failed to serve meals according to physician orders. Interview on 04/21/22 at approximately 3:00 P.M. with the Administrator revealed the facility has had no Dietary Manager since 02/08/22. Interview with the Registered Dietician (RD) on 04/21/22 at 3:22 P.M. revealed she was aware there was an issue with the kitchen staff not following diet orders and she thought the Administrator was going…
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 before2022-04-25 · 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 observation, staff interview, review of dishwasher sanitation logs, and review of the facility policies, the facility failed to store food in a safe manner, failed to maintain a clean and sanitary kitchen area, and failed to prepare and serve food in a sanitary manner. This had the potential to affect all residents in the facility. The facility census was 40. Findings include: 1. Observations during tour of the facility kitchen on 04/18/22 between 6:35 P.M. and 7:15 P.M. revealed the refrigerator had chopped cabbage and diced carrots dated 04/12/22, unsealed and undated shredded cheddar cheese, unsealed and undated mozzarella cheese, an undated bowl of potato salad, and approximately 20 single-serving green salads uncovered and undated. The freezer had undated and unsealed meatballs, vegetable egg rolls, chicken patties, and biscuits. The dry storage area had opened, undated raisins. The wire rack of the toaster upon which bread was placed before starting the conveyor belt was coated with debris. Crumbs and debris were on the counter around the toaster, there was a dried…
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 · F2022-04-25 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — widespreadSet up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on staff interview and review of facility documents, the facility failed to have an effective quality assurance program to address repeated concerns identified during three consecutive annual surveys. This affected all residents in the facility. The facility census was 40. Findings include: Review of the Certification and Survey Provider Enhanced Reporting system (CASPER) report dated 02/18/22 revealed the facility received a deficiency for food procurement, food storage, food preparation during the annual surveys completed on 04/19/18 and 05/30/19. Interviews and observations between 04/19/22 and 04/21/22 revealed the facility failed to store food appropriately, failed to prepare food appropriately, and failed to maintain a clean, sanitary kitchen. Interview on 04/21/22 at 2:14 P.M. with the Administrator revealed the facility could provide no documentation the Quality and Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee met in 2021 or 2022. Interview on 04/21/22 at approximately 3:00 P.M. with the Administrator revealed the facility had no Dietary Manager since 02/08/22.
- Potential for harm · F2022-04-25 · tag F0868 — widespreadHave the Quality Assessment and Assurance group have the required members and meet at least quarterly
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on staff interview and review of facility documents, the facility failed to ensure a quality assessment and assurance committee met at least quarterly. This affected all residents in the facility. The facility census was 40. Findings include: Review of the facility documents revealed no Quality and Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee sign-in sheets or minutes were available for 2021 and 2022. Interview on 04/21/22 at 2:14 P.M. with the Administrator revealed the facility could provide no documentation the Quality and Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee met in 2021 or 2022.
Show the remaining 19 citations
- Potential for harm · E2022-04-25 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on resident interview, observation of a meal test tray, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure food was served at an appetizing temperature and acceptable palatability for 13 (#4, #5, #6, #11, #12, #21, #24, #26, #27 and #33) residents with food complaints. The census was 40. Findings include: Interviews were completed with Resident #4, #5, #6, #11, #12, #21, #24, #26, #27 and Resident #33 at various times on 04/18/22 regarding meals services. All 13 residents had concerns regarding meals being cold, The residents identified this has been an on-going concern for quite a while. Observation on 04/19/22 at 12:37 P.M. revealed the requested test tray was placed on top of the food delivery cart and exited the kitchen. All resident meals were placed inside the delivery cart. Residents trays were delivered by staff on 04/19/22 between 12:39 P.M. and approximately 12:53 P.M. The test tray was removed from cart on 04/19/22 at 12:55 P.M. Test tray temperatures on 04/19/22 at approximately 12:57 P.M. revealed the diced potatoes were 90 degrees Fahrenheit, some pieces were…
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 before2022-04-25 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interviews and review of facility policy, the facility failed to provide dining assistance during with meals in a dignified manner when staff stood up while feeding residents. This affected one (Resident #27) of two residents reviewed for dining assistance. The facility census was 40. Findings include: Review of Resident #27's medical record revealed an admission date of 09/13/19. Diagnoses included cerebral vascular accident (CVA), dysphasia, hemiplegia, diabetes mellitus, and congestive heart failure. Review of Resident #27's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 03/28/22, revealed the resident had low cognitive function. The resident required supervision and set up assistance with eating. Observation on 04/20/22 at 8:09 A.M. revealed State Tested Nurse Aide (STNA) #419 standing next to Resident #27 while feeding her bites of oatmeal. Interview at that time with STNA #419 confirmed she was standing over Resident #27 while feeding her. Review of the facility policy titled Assistance With Meals, revised July 2017, revealed residents who…
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 · D2022-04-25 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
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 interviews, the facility failed to inform in advance of the risks and benefits of a new treatment order and the option to choose an alternative order of treatment for one (#40) resident out of 15 residents sampled. The facility census was 40. Findings include: Review of Resident #40's medical record identified admission to the facility occurred on 01/25/22. Diagnoses included end stage renal disease, anemia, diabetes and peritonitis. Resident #40 discharged on 02/19/22. Review of the admission assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #40 was alert and oriented and and independent with decisions. Resident #40 was independent with eating. Review of progress notes on 01/26/22 revealed Resident #40 was upset over his diet order and stated he was not going to be able to tolerate thickened liquids. Review of progress notes on 01/27/22 revealed Resident #40 requested and was denied ice for a dry throat. The notes revealed the dietician assessed Resident #40 on 01/26/22 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 · D2022-04-25 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record reviews, resident interviews, staff interviews, observations, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure resident food preferences were served during meals. This affected two (#12 and #25) of three residents reviewed for choices. The facility census was 40. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #12 revealed an admission date of 02/08/22. Diagnoses included end stage renal disease, type 2 diabetes mellitus, vascular dementia with behavioral disturbance, and hypertension. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 02/23/22, revealed Resident #12 had intact cognition. Review of the care plan initiated 02/10/22 for Resident #12 revealed he had a potential nutritional problem related to type 2 diabetes mellitus and end stage renal disease requiring hemodialysis. Interventions added on 04/06/22 included double portions at all meals. Review of a progress note dated 04/06/22 revealed Resident #12 requested double portions at all meals. Review of the physician orders for Resident #12 revealed an order dated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-04-25 · tag F0636 — isolatedAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was completed within 14 days of admission for one (#238) our of 15 residents sampled. The facility census was 40. Findings include: Review of Resident #238's medical record revealed an admission date of 04/07/22. Diagnosis included diabetes mellitus, obesity, seizures, and homicidal ideations. The resident was admitted on Hospice care due to congestive heart failure. As of 04/21/22 Resident #238 did not have a completed MDS assessment. Interview with Licensed Practical Nurse #430 on 04/21/22 at 9:02 A.M. verified the facility failed to complete a MDS assessment for Resident #238.
- Potential for harm · D2022-04-25 · 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
Based on medical record review, resident interview, and staff interviews, the facility failed complete care conferences and provide the opportunity to participate in care planning meetings to make decisions about care for one (#5) out of 15 residents sampled. The facility census was 40. Findings include: Review of Resident #5's medical record revealed admission to the facility occurred on 02/07/20. Diagnoses included stroke, high blood pressure, dysphasia, and COVID-19. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 01/10/22, revealed Resident #5 was cognitively intact. The medical record revealed the most recent care plan meeting for Resident #5 occurred on 10/29/21. No additional care plan meetings have occurred since 10/29/21. Interview on 04/18/22 at 7:47 P.M., Resident #5 revealed she has no had a care conference in a long time and she would like to discuss therapy options with the facility. Interview on 04/21/22 at 7:43 A.M., the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) confirmed there was no evidence the facility has conducted a care plan meeting for Resident #5 since…
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 · D2022-04-25 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, medical record review, resident interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure showers were provided at a frequency to maintain a clean hygienic appearance for one (#5) of two residents reviewed for activities of daily living. The facility census was 40. Findings include: Review of Resident #5's medical record revealed admission to the facility occurred on 02/07/20. Diagnoses included stroke, high blood pressure and seizures. Review of the Minimum Data Set assessment, dated 01/10/22, revealed Resident #5 was cognitively intact and dependant on staff for bathing. Observation and interview with Resident #5 on 04/18/22 at 7:43 P.M. Resident #5's hair was observed to be greasy and somewhat matted together. Resident #5 stated she was not even sure when the last time she received a shower and or her hair was washed. Review of the facility shower schedules revealed Resident #5 should be showered on Wednesdays and Saturdays, on the night shift. Review of the facility shower sheets revealed Resident #5's had one shower sheet completed for 04/06/22 with 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 · D2022-04-25 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, resident interview, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to complete preventive wound care per physician orders for one (#26) of two residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility identified three residents receiving wound care and 35 residents with preventative skin care. The facility census was 40. Findings include: Review of Resident #26's medical record revealed an admission date of 10/08/21. Diagnoses included seizures, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, metabolic encephalopathy, cerebral vascular accident and fibromyalgia. Review of Resident #26's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 03/23/22, revealed the resident had intact cognitive function. She required limited assistance for bed mobility and was dependent on staff for transfers. Review of Resident #26's most recent care plan revealed she had a potential and actual impairment of skin integrity related to fragile skin, immobility, incontinence, and poor nutritional intake. Record review revealed Resident #26 had a healed pressure sore to the right hip 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 · D2022-04-25 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
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, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to apply a hand splint as ordered for one (#23) out of two residents reviewed for positioning. The facilty had seven residents with contractures. The facility census was 40. Findings include: Resident #23 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included hemiplegia affecting left side, diabetes mellitus, neuralgia and neuritis, muscle weakness, and major depressive disorder. Review of the physician order, dated 03/04/21, revealed an order for left resting hand splint to be applied with A.M. care and off with P.M. care as tolerated. Splint to be worn for up to 8 hours daily. Observations on 04/19/22 at 9:59 A.M., 12:40 P.M. and again at 4:19 P.M. revealed no splint to Resident #23's left hand. Observations on 04/20/22 at 7:45 A.M. revealed Resident #23 was up in the wheelchair in the dining room. Resident #23 did not have the left hand splint in place. Interview on 04/20/22 at 07:47 AM with the Executive Director and Assistant…
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 · D2022-04-25 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, resident interview, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to provide a physician ordered nutritional supplements and failed to provide a physician prescribed therapeutic renal diet. This affected two (#12 and #27) out of five residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility identified four residents who were on nutritional supplements. The census was 40. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #27's medical record revealed an admission date of 09/13/19. Diagnoses included cerebral vascular accident (CVA), dysphagia, hemiplegia, diabetes mellitus, and congestive heart failure. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 03/28/22, revealed Resident #27 had a low cognitive function. The resident required supervision and set up assistance with eating. Review of Resident #27's current care plan revealed she had nutritional problems related to CVA and dysphasia. The care plan showed fluctuating weight changes over the past year. Review…
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 · D2022-04-25 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, review the dialysis correspondence notebook, and review of the policy, the facility failed to ensure communication was received from the dialysis clinic after dialysis treatment and failed to check for a bruit and thrill per physician order. This affected two (#12 and #11) of two residents reviewed for dialysis. The facility census was 40. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #12 revealed an admission date of 02/08/22. Medical diagnoses included end stage renal disease, type 2 diabetes mellitus, vascular dementia with behavioral disturbance, and orthostatic hypotension. Review of the physician orders dated 04/19/22 revealed Resident #12 had hemodialysis on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. Review of the dialysis correspondence notebook for Resident #12 revealed the facility received no documentation from the dialysis clinic upon return of Resident #12 from the treatment. Interview on 04/20/22 at approximately 12:00 P.M. confirmed 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 · D2022-04-25 · tag F0773 — isolatedProvide or obtain laboratory tests/services when ordered and promptly tell the ordering practitioner of the results.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record reviews and staff interviews, the facility failed to obtain physician ordered laboratory (lab) tests for two (#3 and #23) of seven residents sampled for medication review. The facility census 40. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #3's medical record revealed admission to the facility occurred on 09/01/20. Diagnoses included atrial flutter, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and congestive heart failure. Review of the current physician orders revealed Resident #3 was to have a liver function and thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) lab test completed every six months. Review of Resident #3 lab tests revealed a liver function test and a TSH level were obtained on 08/19/21. The record identified no testing was completed in February 2022 as ordered. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 04/21/22 at 12:11 P.M. confirmed the facility did not complete the TSH and liver function testing for Resident #3 as ordered. 2. Review of Resident #23's medical record identified admission to the facility occurred on 04/20/16. Diagnoses included diabetes, stroke,…
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 · D2022-04-25 · tag F0790 — failed to provide dental care — isolatedProvide routine and 24-hour emergency dental care for each resident.
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 residents received regular dental services. This affected one (#35) of two residents reviewed for dental services. The facility census was 40. Findings include: Review of Resident #35's medical record revealed an admission date of 07/12/21. Diagnoses included type II diabetes, dysphagia, major depressive disorder, and dysphagia. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 03/25/22, revealed Resident #35 was cognitively intact. Resident #35 had no mouth or facial pain or discomfort with chewing and had no obvious cavities or broken teeth at the time of the review. Review of Resident #35's care plan, revised 04/19/22, revealed supports and interventions for oral/dental health problems. Interventions included coordinating arrangements for dental care and transportation as needed, monitor for any signs or symptoms of oral problems needing attention, and to encourage to brush his teeth at least in the morning and at night. Review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-04-25 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, resident interview, observation of meal tickets, policy review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide the correct physician ordered diet consistency for three(#4, #27, #338) out of five residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility identified four residents who were ordered mechanical soft diets. The census was 40. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #27's medical record revealed an admission date of 09/13/19. Diagnoses included cerebral vascular accident (CVA), dysphagia, hemiplegia, diabetes mellitus, and congestive heart failure. Review of Resident #27's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 03/28/22, revealed the resident had a low cognitive function. The resident required supervision and set up assistance with eating. Review of Resident #27's most recent care plan revealed she had nutritional problems related to CVA and dysphagia. The resident needed a therapeutic diet and mechanical soft diet texture due to aspiration precautions. Review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-04-25 · tag F0810 — isolatedProvide special eating equipment and utensils for residents who need them and appropriate assistance.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, observation, policy review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide adaptive devices at meals for one (#27) of five residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility identified no residents requiring assistive meal devices. The census was 40. Findings include: Review of Resident #27's medical record revealed an admission date of 09/13/19. Diagnoses included cerebral vascular accident (CVA), dysphasia, hemiplegia, diabetes mellitus, and congestive heart failure. Review of Resident #27's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 03/28/22, revealed the resident required supervision and set up assistance with eating. Review of Resident #27's most recent care plan revealed she had nutritional problems related to CVA and dysphasia. Interventions added on 01/21/22 included the use of a plate guard and a non-skid mat. Observation of breakfast service on 04/20/22 at 8:14 A.M. revealed Resident #27 was in the dining room. The resident failed to be provided a non-skid mat and dish with plate guard. Observation of lunch service on 04/20/22 at 12:14 P.M.…
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 · D2022-04-25 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain an accurate medical record. This affected one (#12) of 15 residents reviewed. The facility census was 40. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #12 revealed an admission date of 02/08/22. Medical diagnoses included end stage renal disease, type 2 diabetes mellitus, vascular dementia with behavioral disturbance, and orthostatic hypotension. Review of the hospital records for Resident #12 revealed he was hospitalized from [DATE] to 02/21/22. Review of the medication administration record for Resident #12 for February 2022 revealed staff documented vital signs on 02/18/22 during day shift, 02/19/22 during night shift, and 02/20/22 during day shift. Interview on 04/20/22 at 1:34 PM with the Director of Nursing confirmed Resident #12 was hospitalized and not in the facility from 02/15/22 to 02/21/22 and staff charted vital signs on 02/18/22, 02/19/22, and 02/20/22. Review of the policy titled Charting and Documentation,…
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 before2019-05-30 · 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 observation, staff interview, review of manufacturer's instructions and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the dishwashing machine maintained the proper chemical sanitizing level to sanitize dishes; and failed to store foods in a safe and sanitary manner. This had the potential to affect all residents who received food from the kitchen. The facility identified all 43 residents received food from the kitchen. The facility census was 43. Findings include: Observation on 05/28/19 at 8:48 A.M. of the low temperature dishwasher revealed the sanitization level test strip showed no sanitizer was found in the rinse cycle of the dishwasher. The bottle of sanitizer connected below the dishwasher was empty. Interview on 05/28/19 at 8:50 A.M. with Dietary Staff #101 verified the sanitizer bottle was empty and the test strip was white which indicated no sanitizer was present in the rinse cycle of the dishwasher. Interview on 05/28/19 at 8:52 A.M. with Dietary Staff #101 revealed no rinse sanitizer solution was available to replace the empty bottle. Dietary Staff #101 reported…
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 · D2019-05-30 · 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 medical record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to develop a baseline care plan for newly admitted residents. This affected one (Resident #28) of two residents reviewed for baseline care plans. The facility identified ten newly admitted residents. The facility census was 43. Findings include: Review of Resident #28's medical record revealed an admission date of 04/03/19. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cerebral infarction, dysphagia, lack of coordination, type II diabetes, anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, hypertension, osteoarthritis, anemia, hyperlipidemia, and Wernicke's encephalopathy. Review of Resident #28's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was cognitively intact. Resident #28 required extensive assistance with bed mobility, transfer, dressing, toilet use, and personal hygiene. Resident #28 required limited assistance with walking and supervision with eating and locomotion. Resident #28 displayed…
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 · D2019-05-30 · 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
Based on medical record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive care plan for residents who smoked, experienced pain and used psychotropic medications. This affected two (Residents #33 and #41) of 14 care plans reviewed. The facility census was 43. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #33's medical record revealed an admission date of 04/11/19. Diagnoses included symbolic dysfunctions, hypertension, lack of coordination, osteoarthritis, major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, nicotine dependence, fracture of upper end of tibia subsequent encounter for closed fracture, and encounter for surgical aftercare. Review of Resident #33's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 05/09/19, revealed the resident was cognitively intact. Resident #33 required supervision of staff for set up only for bed mobility, transfer, walking, locomotion, eating, toilet use and personal hygiene. Resident #33 displayed no behaviors during the review period. Resident #33 received as needed (PRN) pain medications and non-medication…
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.
“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 AOM HEALTHCARE — 20 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 | 4 of 5 | 2.7 | +1.3 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.3 | +0.7 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 1.6 | +0.4 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
The other 19 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.7★, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AMSEL, HINDY | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 10% | since 06/02/2015 |
| GOLDSTEIN, JEFFERY | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | 10% | since 06/02/2015 |
| SHERMAN, ALEXANDER | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | 13% | since 06/02/2015 |
| SHERMAN, TZVI | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 13% | since 06/02/2015 |
| SHERMAN, YEHUDA | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 13% | since 06/02/2015 |
| TRATNER, BATSHEVA | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 10% | since 06/02/2015 |
| GILBERT, CORA | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 10/31/2019 |
| PARKER, DIANE | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 08/01/2015 |
| SHERMAN, SAMUEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 08/01/2015 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 11 rows in the source record cover these 9 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.
About 75% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. 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 365885. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-09-05, 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.