Seven Hills Health & Rehab Center
819 Rockside Road, Seven Hills, OH 44131 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 80 certified beds · (216) 487-7557 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (38) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $57,194 in federal fines (most recent 2025-07-07)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (59%) runs well above the national median (45%)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 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 | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 2 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 2.5% | 5.3% | 15.4% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.0% | 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 | 0.0% | 0.4% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 16.0% | 30.1% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.4% | 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 | 13.6% | 25.5% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 94.7% | 94.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.6% | 3.4% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 18.6% | 21.4% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 2.2% | 8.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.4% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 81.0% | 75.6% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 34.7% | 24.9% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 16.2% | 12.9% | 12.0% | worse |
* 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.
52.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 66 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 33.3% 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 24 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 0.33 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 54% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
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 | 52.4%CMS range 40.7–64.8 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.7%CMS range 6.7–15.5 | 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 | 33.3% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 25.0% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 29.2% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 95.8% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this 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 | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 9.2%CMS range 5.2–16.5 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.01 | 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 80 beds and averages 69.5 residents a day — about 87% occupied, or roughly 10 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 3.90 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.67 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.09 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 3.47 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.07 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.79 to 0.37 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 59% is well above the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
38 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 27 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2025-07-07 · 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 record review, observation, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to provide evidence that enteral tube feedings were administered to prevent weight loss. This affected two residents (#57 and #60) out of three reviewed for tube feeding. The facility also failed to obtain weekly weights as ordered. This affected four residents (#11, #20, #57, and #60) out of six reviewed for nutrition. The facility also failed to provide adequate hydration to prevent dehydration. This affected one resident (#11) out of three reviewed for hydration. The facility census was 63.Actual harm occurred on 06/16/25 when Resident #60, who had severe cognitive impairment and required enteral tube feeding to meet nutritional needs, sustained a 20.6 pound weight loss (in 34 days) as a result of the facility's failure to accurately monitor and record tube feed intakes, obtain weekly weights as ordered, and adjust tube feeding rate timely to prevent further weight loss. On 05/01/25, Resident #60 weighed 207.2 pounds. On…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-07-07 · tag F0628 — patternProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
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 ensure notice of transfer and bed hold notice was provided to the resident, and the discharge summary was completed. This affected six Residents #28, # 46, #55, #66 #118, and #119 of eight residents reviewed for hospitalization and discharge. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #28 revealed an admission date 05/02/24 with diagnoses including diabetes type II, puerperal vascular disease (PVR), hypertension, anxiety, depression, and bipolar. The record revealed Resident #28 was sent out to the hospital on [DATE].Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #28 had intact cognition and was dependent on staff for activities of daily living. Review of the Immediate Transfer/Discharge, a written discharge notice to the resident/representative dated 05/13/25 revealed that the welfare and needs of the resident cannot be met in the facility due to the urgent medical needs of the resident.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-07-07 · 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 observation, interviews, review of resident council meeting minutes, review of dining council minutes, the facility failed to ensure palatable meals were being provided. This affected three residents (Resident #11, #30 and #45) and had the potential to affect 56 residents receiving food from the kitchen (except Residents # 6, #44, #51, #55, #57, #60, and #218 whom the facility identified as nothing by mouth). The facility census was 63. Findings include: Review of the food committee meeting minutes dated 01/21/25 revealed the following concerns: -an unidentified resident stated the Salisbury steak was bad -residents are asking for more juice options to be added to the juice cart at meals. Review of the food committee meeting minutes dated 02/25/25 revealed the following concerns: -rice is cooked too long and hard to chew -residents requested fresh fruit with meals -residents requested no more vegetable lasagna -residents reported getting sour milk with meals -residents reported kitchen not making enough food and are told they are not allowed to request more -Resident #50…
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 before2025-07-07 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard 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 medical record review, review of shower documentation and interviews, the facility failed to ensure accurate and complete bathing documentation was completed as required for four residents (Residents #5, #19, #33 and #57) of four residents reviewed for activities of daily living. The facility census was 63. Findings include:1. Review of the medical record for Resident #5 revealed an admission date of 12/09/16. Diagnoses included but were not limited to schizophrenia, anxiety disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder and osteoarthritis. Review of the 03/31/25 Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 for Resident #5 revealed intact cognition and was dependent upon staff for bathing. Review of Resident 5's care plan dated 02/26/24 revealed she is dependent upon staff for bathing. Review of the shower sheets from 04/03/25, 4/07/25, 04/10/25, 04/14/25, 04/17/25, 04/20/25, 04/25/25, 05/06/25, 05/09/25, 05/13/25, 05/15/25, 05/20/25, 05/23/25, 05/27/25, 06/06/25, 06/10/25, and 06/17/25 revealed no evidence the nurse reviewed…
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 before2025-07-07 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to follow enhanced barrier precautions as indicated during care for Resident #46, Resident #33, and #5. This affected one resident (#46) of three reviewed for pressure ulcers, one resident (#33) of three reviewed for catheter use, and one resident (#5) out of four reviewed for incontinence. The facility also failed to ensure staff performed hand hygiene during medication pass. This affected six residents (#23, #29, #48, #52, #61, and #130) out of eight observed for medication administration. The facility also failed to ensure staff followed contact precautions when entering Resident #12's room. This affected one resident (#12) of one reviewed for contact precautions. The facility census was 63.Findings include:1. Review of the medical record for R #5 admitted [DATE] with diagnosis overactive bladder, schizophrenia, and anxiety disorder. R #5 was alert and oriented without cognitive impairment. R #5 was dependent upon staff for performance…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-07 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably 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 3. Review of the medical record for Resident #28 revealed an admission date of 05/02/24 with diagnoses including diabetes mellitus, hypertension, anxiety, depression, bipolar disorder, and chronic kidney disease. Review of the minimum data set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #28 was cognitively intact and required substantial or maximum assistance for activities of daily living (ADLs). On 06/24/25 at 3:01 P.M., an observation of Resident #28's room revealed Resident #28 was laying in bed calling for help and her call light was observed on the floor and out of reach. An interview at the time of observation with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #27 verified Resident #28's call light was on the floor and out of reach. On 06/25/25 at 10:40 A.M., an observation revealed Resident #28 was lying in bed and the call light was not in reach. The call signal light on top of the door was illumined, indicating the residents in the room requested assistance. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #44 entered the room…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-07 · 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 record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to honor resident preferences as ordered by the physician. This affected one resident (#19) out of two reviewed for choices. The facility census was 63. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Specified Resident #19 revealed an admission date of 10/22/24 with diagnoses including hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting right dominant side, convulsions, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, depression, aphasia, muscle weakness, need for assistance with personal care, and difficulty in walking. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 04/18/25, revealed Resident #19 had severely impaired cognition. The assessment indicated Resident #19 required partial or moderate assistance for eating, oral hygiene, and personal hygiene; required substantial or maximum assistance for rolling left and right, sit to lying, and lying to sitting; and was totally dependent on staff for toileting hygiene, showering or bathing self, dressing, and chair/bed to chair transfer. 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 · D2025-07-07 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, review of the facility's self-reported incident (SRI), and interview, the facility failed to conduct a thorough investigation of an allegation of abuse. This affected one resident (#32) out of four reviewed for abuse. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #32 revealed an admission date 04/15/25 with diagnoses including osteomyelitis, clostridium difficile (c-diff), diabetes type II, peripheral vascular disease (PVR), bipolar, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #32 had intact cognition and was dependent on staff for activities of daily living. Review of the progress note dated 05/12/25 revealed the resident made an accusation about a staff member. Review of the Self-Reported Incident (SRI) 260268 dated 05/12/25 at 10:31 A.M. revealed an allegation of sexual abuse. The Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) reported to administration that Resident #32 was raped on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-07 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) user manual review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was accurate related to wounds. This affected one (Resident #46) of 21 residents reviewed for comprehensive assessments. The facility census was 63. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #46 revealed an admission date 8/15/24 with diagnoses including chronic respiratory failure, quadriplegia, neuromuscular bladder, and tracheostomy status. Review of the assessment revealed Braden scale for pressure ulcer risk assessments was completed on 11/06/24 indicating Resident #46 was at high risk for pressure ulcer development. There was no evidence of the current Braden assessment. Review of the plan of care dated 05/02/25 revealed Resident #46 had a plan for neuropathic ulcer (a type of ulceration that develops due to nerve damage, commonly found in individuals with conditions like diabetes or spinal cord injuries) to the right foot with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-07 · tag F0646 — isolatedNotify the appropriate authorities when residents with MD or ID services has a significant change in condition.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the appropriate Ohio Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services was timely notified of a significant change in a residents Pre-admission Screen (PASRR). The affected one (Resident #20) of three reviewed for PASRR status. The facility census was 63. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #20 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including heart failure, type II diabetes mellitus, major depressive disorder, generalized anxiety disorder and acquired absence of left leg below knee. Review of the 03/27/20 PASRR results for Resident #20 revealed no indications of serious mental illness or developmental disability. Review of the medical record for Resident #20 revealed on 06/01/24 a new diagnosis of bipolar disorder was received. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #20 was cognitively intact and receiving antipsychotics. Diagnoses listed included but…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-07 · 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 record review, interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the baseline care plan included person-centered care that included goals to properly care for the resident's specific health and safety concerns and physician orders to prevent decline for Resident #118. This affected one (Resident #118) out of eight residents reviewed for baseline care planning. The facility census was 63. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #118 revealed was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including acute and subacute endocarditis, methicillin resistant staphylococcus aureus (a highly resistant organism), anxiety, obesity, obstructive sleep apnea, hypertension, congestive heart failure, pacemaker, dysphagia, and muscle weakness. Review of the baseline care plan dated 02/14/25 revealed it did not include infection prevention or interventions regarding maintenance and care of peripheral intravascular central catheter (PICC) or care of sternal wound post open heart…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 27 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-07 · 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 record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure medical records were accurate. This affected one (Resident #5) of 16 resident medical records reviewed. The facility census was 63.Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #5 revealed an admission date of 12/09/16. Diagnoses included but were not limited to schizophrenia, anxiety disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder and osteoarthritis. Review of the 03/31/25 Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 for Resident #5 revealed intact cognition and was dependent upon staff for bathing. Review of Resident 5's care plan dated 02/26/24 revealed she is dependent upon staff for bathing. Review of the shower sheets from 04/03/25, 4/07/25, 04/10/25, 04/14/25, 04/17/25, 04/20/25, 04/25/25, 05/06/25, 05/09/25, 05/13/25, 05/15/25, 05/20/25, 05/23/25, 05/27/25, 06/06/25, 06/10/25, and 06/17/25 revealed no evidence the nurse reviewed the shower sheet and no signature. Shower sheets that had documented refusals on 04/07/25, 04/14/25, 04/17/25, 04/20/25, 05/06/25, 05/15/25, and 05/27/25 revealed no evidence of a nursing…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-07 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolatedProvide activities to meet all resident's 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 record review, observations and interviews, the facility failed to provide meaningful resident-centered activities for Resident #57. This affected one (Resident #57) out of three residents reviewed for activities. The facility census was 63. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #57 revealed an admission date of 01/09/25 with diagnoses of metabolic encephalopathy, moderate protein-calorie malnutrition, dysphagia, and type two diabetes mellitus. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #57 was cognitively impaired, rarely or never able to make needs known, and rarely or never understood communication. The assessment indicated that she was dependent upon two staff members to move in bed, take a shower or bath, and dependent on one staff member for dressing. Review of the current physician's orders revealed no pharmacological intervention for anxiety, agitation, or restlessness. Review of progress notes since admission revealed no…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-07 · 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 record review, interview, policy review, and review of the employee handbook, the facility failed to ensure staff performed transfers in a safe manner per physician's orders and re-assess fall risk after a fall occurred. This affected one resident (#19) out of four reviewed for accident hazards. The facility census was 63. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #19 revealed an admission date of 10/22/24 with diagnoses including hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting right dominant side, convulsions, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, depression, aphasia, muscle weakness, need for assistance with personal care, and difficulty in walking. Review of the physician's orders for Resident #19 identified an order for a mechanical lift for transfers (ordered 10/23/24). Review of the most recent fall risk assessment, dated 10/23/24, revealed Resident #19 had no falls within the previous six months, was completely paralyzed or completely immobilized, and had a score 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 · D2025-07-07 · tag F0691 — failed to provide colostomy / ostomy care — isolatedProvide appropriate colostomy, urostomy, or ileostomy 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 record review, interviews, and observations, the facility failed to ensure that colostomy care was provided as ordered and per resident's preference. This affected one resident (Resident #26) out of two residents reviewed for ostomy care. Findings include: Review of medical record revealed that Resident #26 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis of heart failure, weakness, polyneuropathy, and major depression. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] Resident #26 was alert and oriented without cognitive impairment. They were dependent upon staff for toilet hygiene, shower and bath, as well as personal hygiene. Resident #26 was always incontinent of bladder and had a colostomy for bowel movements. Review of physician's orders reveal an order dated 01/26/25 to empty the colostomy bag every shift. Report any changes noted such as changes is color of stool, amount of stool, or consistency of stool. Document emptying contents and any changes noted. Review of the comprehensive care plan updated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-07 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management 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, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure pain medications were administered timely to ensure effective pain management. This affected one resident (#120) out of eight residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 63. Findings include: Review of medical record for Resident #120 revealed an admission date of 04/15/25 with diagnoses including pathological fractures, malignant neoplasm's of bone, malignant neoplasm of bladder, protein-calorie malnutrition, urostomy, and need for assistance with personal care. Review of Resident #120's Minimum Data Sheet (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating intact cognition. Resident #120 required moderate assistance for upper body activities of daily living (ADLs) and maximum assistance for lower body and mobility needs. Resident #120 also needed maximum assistance for toileting and hygiene needs. Review of care plan 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 · Ecited before2024-10-03 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, observations and interviews the facility failed to ensure insulin was dated, labeled, and discarded properly. This affected six residents (#11, #12, #16, #30, #41 and Resident #53) of 12 residents reviewed for insulin storage. Findings include: Review of medical record for Resident #11 revealed an admission date of 05/22/21. Diagnosis included type two diabetes. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment for Resident #11 dated 08/14/24 revealed the resident had impaired cognition. Review of medical record for Resident #12 revealed an admission date of 11/28/23. Diagnosis included type two diabetes. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment for Resident #12, dated 09/26/24 revealed the resident had intact cognition. Resident #12 was ordered insulin. Review of medical record for Resident #16 revealed an admission date of 09/28/23. Diagnosis included type two diabetes. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment for Resident #16 dated 09/30/24 revealed the resident had intact cognition. Resident #16 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 · Dcited before2024-10-03 · 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, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5% (percent). A total of 24 medications were observed with two errors for a medication error rate of 8.33%. This finding affected two (Resident #39 and #41) of three residents observed for medication administration. Findings include: 1. Review of medical record for Resident #39 revealed an admission date of 03/26/20. Diagnoses included type two diabetes with diabetic neuropathy, unspecified, major depressive disorder, recurrent and bipolar disorder. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had intact cognition. Review of physician order dated 01/24/24 revealed orders for Novolin 70-30 via flexpen, administer 45 units one time a day. Observation on 10/03/24 8:43 A.M. revealed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #836 administered 45 units of Novolin to Resident #39. LPN #836 retrieved the injector pen, sanitized the tip, twisted the injector needle…
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 before2024-10-03 · 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 record review, observation, interview and policy review the facility failed to maintain infection control standards when administering medications. This affected one (Resident #30) of three residents reviewed for infection control during medication administration. Findings include: Review of medical record for Resident #30 revealed an admission date of 05/02/24. Diagnoses included type two diabetes, alcoholic cirrhosis of the liver and bipolar disorder. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment for Resident #1 dated 08/07/24 revealed the resident had intact cognition. Observations on 10/02/24 at 7:55 A.M. revealed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #836 administering medications for Resident #30. LPN #836 placed nine medications into her bare hand before placing them in the medication cup. Interview during the observation with LPN #836 revealed she should not have put the medication in my hand, they should go in the cup. Review of the facility policy titled, Pharmacy Services and Procedure Manual, dated 2022 revealed staff should not touch the 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-10-24 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably 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 observation of video from camera in room and record review, the facility failed to ensure call lights were kept within reach and residents were able to use if desired. This affected Resident #152, one of three sampled residents. The census was 62. Findings include: Medical record review revealed Resident #152 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including atherosclerotic heart disease, peripheral vascular disease with bilateral lower extremities wounds, hypertension, type 2 diabetes, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, dementia, cerebral infarction, protein-calorie malnutrition, osteomyelitis (bone infection), stage IV coccyx pressure wound and neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder. Resident #152 was severely cognitively impaired and was totally dependent on staff for all activities of daily living including bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toileting, and personal hygiene. Review of Resident #152's care plan dated 07/27/23 revealed Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-10-24 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure previously placed Fentanyl transdermal patches were removed prior to placing a new patch. This affected Resident #152, one of three sampled residents. The census was 62. Findings include: Medical record review revealed Resident #152 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including atherosclerotic heart disease, peripheral vascular disease with bilateral lower extremities wounds, hypertension, type 2 diabetes, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, dementia, cerebral infarction, protein-calorie malnutrition, osteomyelitis (bone infection), stage IV coccyx pressure wound and neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder. Resident #152 was severely cognitively impaired and was totally dependent on staff for all activities of daily living including bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toileting, and personal hygiene. Review of current physician's orders indicated Resident #152 was to receive a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-10-24 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure controlled substances (two Fentanyl transdermal patches) were disposed of properly after removal from resident. This affected Resident #152, one of three sampled residents. The total census was 62. Findings include: Medical record review revealed Resident #152 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including atherosclerotic heart disease, peripheral vascular disease with bilateral lower extremities wounds, hypertension, type 2 diabetes, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, dementia, cerebral infarction, protein-calorie malnutrition, osteomyelitis (bone infection), stage IV coccyx pressure wound and neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder. Resident #152 was severely cognitively impaired and was totally dependent on staff for all activities of daily Living including bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toileting, and personal hygiene. Review of physician's orders indicated Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-10-24 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation of video from camera in room, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure infection control protocols were followed when providing resident care. This affected Resident #152. The total census was 62. Findings include: Medical record review revealed Resident #152 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including atherosclerotic heart disease, peripheral vascular disease with bilateral lower extremities wounds, hypertension, type 2 diabetes, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, dementia, cerebral infarction, protein-calorie malnutrition, osteomyelitis (bone infection), stage IV coccyx pressure wound and neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder. Resident #152 was severely cognitively impaired and was totally dependent on staff for all activities of daily living including bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toileting, and personal hygiene. Observation of a video dated 09/16/23 obtained from the surveillance camera located in…
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 · F2022-09-19 · tag F0730 — widespreadObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, record review, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure State Tested Nursing Assistants (STNA) received 12 hours of inservices annually. This had the potential to affect all 75 of 75 residents residing in the facility. Findings include: Record review of STNA #326's employee file revealed a hire date of 06/25/20. Record review of the the signed transcript for STNA #326 revealed a combined total of 10.10 hours of annual inservices. Record review of STNA #327 employee file revealed a hire date of 03/30/21. Record review of the the signed transcript for STNA #327 revealed a combined total of 6.70 hours of annual inservices. Interview on 09/19/22 at 9:30 A.M. with Administrator confirmed STNA #326 had a total of 10.10 hours of inservicing and STNA #327 had a total of 6.70 hours of inservicing. Administrator confirmed all STNA's were required 12 hours of inservicing annually. Record review of the policy titled, Annual Inservices revealed no less than 12 hours annual inservice training/staff education is required. Calculate the date by which…
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 before2022-09-19 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, facility policy review, and review of online resources for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the facility failed to ensure staff wore personal protective equipment (PPE) as required when entering Resident #127 and #266's room who were under droplet precautions for COVID-19 observation. This had the potential to affect all 75 residents residing in the facility. Findings include: Review of medical record for Resident #127 revealed admission date 09/09/22 and a physician order dated 09/12/22 to 09/15/22 for droplet precautions. Review of the immunization record revealed Resident #127 had declined the COVID-19 vaccination. Review of medical record for Resident #266 revealed admission date of 09/12/22 and a physician order dated 09/13/22 to 09/20/22 for droplet precautions. Review of the immunization record revealed Resident #266 was not up to date on COVID-19 vaccination series. Observation on 09/14/22 at 8:08 A.M. revealed between Resident #127's room and #266's room there was a sign indicating droplet precautions and a bin with PPE…
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 · E2022-09-19 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — patternHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents had accurate advance directives within the medical records. This affected four residents (Residents #14, #43, #59, and #62) of twelve residents reviewed for advanced directives. Findings include: 1. Review of medical record for Resident #14 revealed admission date of 06/25/22 with diagnoses including revealed diabetes mellitus, hepatitis C, gout, end stage renal disease, dependence on renal dialysis, and right below knee amputation. Review of physician's order dated 06/25/22 revealed Resident #14 was a full code. Review on 09/12/22 at 3:57 P.M. of Resident #14's hard medical chart revealed no indication of code status. Interview on 09/12/22 at 4:28 P.M. with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #313 confirmed there was no indication of code status in hard medical chart. LPN #313 indicated the code status was supposed to be indicated in hard medical chart. Interview on 09/12/22 at 4:29 P.M. with Social Services Designee (SSD) #314 confirmed…
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 before2022-09-19 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — patternProvide 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 record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure meal intakes were monitored. This affected five residents (Resident #8, #14, #23, #61, and #62) of five residents reviewed for nutrition monitoring. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #8 revealed admission date of 08/30/21 with diagnoses including catatonic disorder, depression, and hyperlipidemia. Resident #8 had physician's order dated 09/01/21 for a regular diet. Review of the care plan dated 06/17/22 revealed Resident #8 was at increased nutritional risk. Interventions included monitor dietary intake, monitor need for increased nutritional intervention, and provide diet as ordered. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 quarterly assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #8 was independent during meals. Review of electronic medical record (EMR) meal intake documentation from September 2022 revealed no documentation of meal intake for breakfast, lunch, or dinner. Review of paper medical record for meal intakes…
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 before2022-09-19 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure regular nail care was provided for Resident #23. This affected one resident (Resident #23) of three reviewed for activities of daily living care. The facility census was 75. Findings include: Review of medical record for Resident #23 revealed admission date of 03/11/22 with diagnoses including rectal cancer, depression, anxiety disorder, unspecified side hemiplegia, and vital hepatitis C. Review of the care plan dated 03/14/22 revealed Resident #23 had activities of daily living (ADL) self-care deficit. Interventions included to assist with ADL of grooming, assist of two for bathing and hygiene, and refer to therapy as needed. Review of Medicare Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 quarterly assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #23 required extensive one staff assistance for personal hygiene and one staff physical help for bathing. Review of Monthly Nursing Note dated 09/12/22 revealed Resident #23 was alert, oriented, pleasant, 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 · D2022-09-19 · tag F0687 — failed to care for feet properly — isolatedProvide appropriate foot care.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure regular podiatry care was provided for Resident #23. This affected one resident (Resident #23) of three reviewed for activities of daily living care. Findings include: Review of medical record for Resident #23 revealed admission date of 03/11/22 with diagnoses including rectal cancer, depression, anxiety disorder, unspecified side hemiplegia, and vital hepatitis C. Review of the care plan dated 03/14/22 revealed Resident #23 had activities of daily living (ADL) self-care deficit. Interventions included to assist with ADL of grooming, assist of two for bathing and hygiene, and refer to therapy as needed. Review of physician's order dated 06/11/22 revealed Resident #23 may see podiatrist. Review of Medicare Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 quarterly assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #23 required extensive one staff assistance for personal hygiene and one staff physical help for bathing. Review of Weekly Skin Evaluation 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 · D2022-09-19 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure Resident #25's aerosol treatment was administered properly. This affected one resident (Resident #25) of out four residents observed for medication administration. Findings include: Record review for Resident #25 revealed an admission date of 07/13/21 with diagnosis including quadriplegia, cerebrovascular disease, pneumonia, heart failure, and muscle wasting and atrophy. Record review of the annual MDS dated [DATE] revealed Resident #25 was rarely or never understood. Resident #25 had a short term and long term memory problem. Resident #25 was total dependence for all activities of daily living. Record review of the physician orders for September 2022 revealed Resident #25 had orders for albuterol solution 0.5-0.25 milligrams (mg) per three milliliters (ml) inhale orally every four hours as needed for shortness of breath. Observation on 09/13/22 at 4:15 P.M. revealed Resident #25 was lying in bed. Resident #25 had an aerosol mask…
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 before2022-09-19 · 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, record review, interview, and review of manufacture's guidelines, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than five percent (%). Four errors occurred within 26 opportunities for error resulting in a medication error rate of 15.38%. This affected two residents (Resident #25 and #31) of four residents observed during the mediation administration observation. The facility census was 75. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #25's medical records revealed an admission date of 07/13/21 with diagnoses including hyperglycemia, necrotizing fasciitis, quadriplegia, dysphagia, heart failure, and chronic kidney disease. Review of the care plan dated 07/12/22 revealed the resident had risk for unstable blood glucose related to diabetes. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed had severely impaired cognition and required total care of two plus for bed mobility, transfers, toileting, and bathing. Resident #25 required total care of one assistance for dressing…
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 before2022-09-19 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to document Resident #126's hospitalization. This affected one resident (Resident #126) of four residents reviewed for hospitalization. Findings include: Record review of the medical records for Resident #126 revealed an admission date of 08/26/22 with diagnosis including paraplegia, neurogenic bowel, neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder and necrotizing fasciitis. Record review of the admission assessment dated [DATE] at 6:00 P.M. revealed Resident #126 arrived at the facility on 08/26/2022 at 6:00 P.M. for rehabilitation. Resident#126 had a discharge goal to return to the community. Resident #126 was alert and oriented and required one person assist for toileting. Record review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #126 was cognitively intact. Record review of the care plan dated 09/02/22 revealed Resident#126 had an activity of daily living (ADL) self care deficit. Interventions included toileting with assist of one to…
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 · D2022-09-19 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — isolatedImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the duration of Resident #18 antibiotic use was implemented and monitored properly. This affected one resident (Resident #18) out of three residents reviewed for urinary tract infections. The facility census was 75. Findings include: Record review revealed Resident #18 had an admission date of 05/24/21 with diagnosis including dementia and multiple fractures of the pelvis. Record review of the care plan for Resident #18 dated 05/25/21 revealed Resident #18 had altered genitourinary status with a history of urinary tract infections (UTI) prior to admission. Interventions included to administer medications as indicated by the physician. Record review quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #18 was rarely or never understood. Record review of the urine specimen for Resident #18 collected on 08/02/22 revealed the urine was positive for nitrates with many bacteria presen , blood 1+, slightly cloudy, and mucous was present. 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 · Fcited before2019-09-09 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to use alcohol-based hand sanitizer within dispensers mounted within resident care areas on the first and second facility resident care hallways. This had the potential to affect all 77 residents residing within the facility. The facility also failed to ensure Tuberculosis (TB) tests were completed or had the first step read before new employees started to work for five new employees (State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #640, STNA #641, STNA #660, STNA #663, and STNA #697) out of ten employees reviewed. This had the potential to affect all 77 residents in the facility. Findings include: 1. During the initial facility tour on 09/03/19 between 8:24 A.M. and 8:42 A.M., 19 hand sanitizer dispensers mounted within resident care areas on the first and second floors of the facility were observed to contain hand sanitizer gel labeled no alcohol. Review of Centers for Disease Control Guidelines for Healthcare Providers for Hand Hygiene, located at https://www.cdc.gov/handhygiene/providers/index.html, last reviewed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-09-09 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure treatments were given per physician's orders. This affected one resident (Resident #56) of two residents reviewed for non-pressure skin conditions. The facility census was 77. Findings include: Review of Resident #56's medical record revealed an admission date of 08/07/19 and diagnoses including chronic kidney disease, hypertension (high blood pressure), history of falls and peripheral vascular disease. Review of an admission comprehensive assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #56 was cognitively impaired and required limited assistance with assist of one staff for dressing and toileting. Review of a physician order dated 08/23/19 revealed a treatment consisting of Dakin's solution 0.5% (product used to treat skin infections) apply to left lateral ankle, topically, every day shift, for wound care; cleanse area with wound cleaner, pat dry, then apply Dakin's soaked gauze, cover with ABD (thick pad used for dressing wounds), and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-09-09 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure tube feed bags delivering enteral nutrition to residents were labeled with the formula, resident name, and time administered. This affected one resident (Resident #33) out of five residents identified by the facility as receiving tube feeds. The total census was 77. Findings include: Observation on 09/03/19 at 10:12 A.M. revealed Resident #33 had tube feed infusing via a gastric feeding tube from an unlabeled, undated bag of formula. No indication was found on the bag or tubing indicating what type of formula was infusing, when it was hung, or which staff member hung it. This observation was confirmed with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #600 on 09/03/19 at 10:25 A.M. Review of the facility's Enteral Therapy (Tube Feeding) and Care of G-Tube/J-Tube policy (revised August 2019) and policy titled Enteral Feeding Via Continuous Pump (revised October 2015)indicated nurses would administer enteral feeding as ordered by physician.
- Potential for harm · D2019-09-09 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
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 prevent significant medication errors for two residents (#31 and #58) of five residents reviewed for medication administration. The census was 77. Findings include: 1. Medical record review revealed Resident #31 was admitted to the facility for skilled care on 06/19/19 with diagnoses including end-stage renal disease, dependence on renal dialysis, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, blindness and muscle weakness. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #31 was cognitively intact and received insulin. Review of the physician order dated 06/19/19 indicated Resident #31 was to have her blood sugar checked four times a day. Review of the physician order dated 07/10/19 revealed Resident #31 was to receive Basaglar solution (insulin) 30 units one time a day. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for September 2019 indicated the Basaglar insulin was scheduled once a day at 9:00 A.M. During an interview on 09/03/19 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · C2019-09-09 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — widespreadDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on personnel record review, policy review, and interviews, the facility failed to implement their abuse policy and procedure in relation to employee reference checks prior to hire. This affected seven new employees out of ten employees reviewed (Licensed Nursing Home Administrator (LNHA), Maintenance Director (MD) #638, State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #640, STNA #641, STNA #660, STNA #663, and STNA #697) and had the potential to affect all 77 residents in the facility. Findings include: Review of personnel files on 09/04/19 from 12:15 P.M. to 2:00 P.M. with Human Resource Administrator (HRA) #608 and Director of Human Resources (DHR) #700 revealed the following: 1. The LNHA had a hire date of 10/08/18. Two reference check forms attached to the job application did not have proof of having been checked or attempted to have been checked. 2. MD #638 had a hire date of 09/06/18. Two reference check forms attached to the job application did not have proof of having been checked or attempted to have been checked. 3. STNA #640 had a hire date of 08/06/19. Two reference check…
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
$57,194 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $57,194 — penalty dated 2025-07-07
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to SABER HEALTHCARE GROUP — 126 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 | 2 of 5 | 2.9 | -0.9 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.6 | -0.6 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.0 | ≈ chain avg |
The other 125 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 125; lowest-rated first.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WWBV HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 09/30/2019 |
| MANDAT, THOMAS | Individual | CONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 09/30/2023 |
| KELFMAN-BARONI, KAYLEE | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 02/20/2023 |
| VOLPE, BENJAMIN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 03/01/2019 |
| WEISBERG, WILLIAM | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 03/01/2019 |
| NICOLUZAKIS, GREGORY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 03/01/2019 |
| SABER GOVERNANCE LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 09/01/2019 |
| SHG MANAGEMENT LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 09/01/2019 |
| YOUELL, VALERIE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 01/02/2024 |
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.
3 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 $976K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 12% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in OH
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Ohio Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 366441. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-07, 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.