Altercare Somerset Inc.

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

58.3% 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 53 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 30.0% 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 30 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 0.17 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 15% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 3% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 79 beds and averages 68.4 residents a day — about 87% occupied, or roughly 11 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 3.29 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.61 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.00 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.70 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.52 on weekdays — 23% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.68 to 0.44 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 64% is well above the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are 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.

29 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 18 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · Gcited before2024-07-18 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
  Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive, effective and individualized nutritional program to ensure nutritional recommendations were implemented timely, weights and assessments were completed timely, care plans were updated appropriately, and significant/severe weight changes were addressed for Resident #264. Actual harm occurred when Resident #264 who was cognitively impaired and weighed 104 pounds on 05/19/24 experienced a gradual weight loss until 06/24/24 when she experienced a severe 8.5% (9 pounds) weight loss. The nutritional recommendations for Resident #264 that were made on 05/19/24 were not put in place until they were recommended again on 06/09/24. A nutritional assessment was not completed again following the 06/09/24 recommendation, and as of 07/18/24 Resident #264 weighed 93.8 pounds which was severe 6.7% (6.8 pound) weight loss from 06/20/24. This affected one resident (#264) of two residents 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-19 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and closed record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident received showers or bed baths at least twice weekly. This affected one resident (#70) of six residents sampled for showering. The facility census was 68.Findings include:Review of Resident #70's closed medical record revealed an admission date of 04/21/26, a discharge date of 05/16/26 and diagnoses including age-related osteoporosis with current pathological fracture, right lower leg, subsequent encounter for fracture with routine healing, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, cerebral infarction, congestive heart failure, anemia, asthma, hypothyroidism, and pulmonary hypertension.Review of Resident #70's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating the resident was cognitively intact. Further review of the MDS revealed Former Resident #70 used a wheelchair for mobility and required partial/moderate assistance with toileting hygiene,…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-02-26 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — pattern
  Make sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, medical record review, interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure resident equipment was maintained in a clean and sanitary manner. This affected three residents (#9, #44 and #54) of 25 sampled residents. The facility census was 69. Findings Include:1. Review of the medical record for Resident #44 revealed an initial admission date of 08/20/23 with the latest readmission of 05/21/24 diagnoses included the protein calorie malnutrition, urinary tract infection (UTI), depression, mood disorder, hypothyroidism, anemia, metabolic encephalopathy, solitary pulmonary nodule, chronic pain, atrial fibrillation, anorexia, osteoarthritis, dementia, macular degeneration and cerebral atherosclerosis. Review of the resident's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had a severe cognitive deficit. Observation of Resident #44 on 02/23/26 at 10:58 A.M., revealed Resident #44's custom wheelchair was extremely dirty with food debris in 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.

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-02-26 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolated
  Honor 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, staff and family interview, the facility failed to honor a resident's stated beverage preference. This affected one, (Resident #22) of two residents reviewed for choices. The facility census was 69. Findings include:Review of Resident #22's medical record revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including dementia and chronic kidney disease. Review of the the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #22 was cognitively impaired, and required supervision and assistance with eating and drinking. Resident #22 relied on staff to ensure adequate hydration was maintained.Review of the facility document titled Resident Centered Care Food Preferences revealed juice was identified as the resident's preferred beverage at meals. There was no documentation indicating the resident preferred water over juice. During an interview on 02/23/26 at 10:45 A.M., Resident #22's daughter and Power of Attorney (POA) revealed the resident does…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-02-26 · tag F0655 — isolated
  Create and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, interview, and review of facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the baseline care plan was timely reviewed and provided to one ((Resident #74) of 24 residents reviewed. The census was 69.Findings include:Review of Resident #74's medical record revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including hypertensive emergency, repeated falls, dementia, and major depressive disorder.Review of the admission Nursing assessment dated [DATE] revealed an unsigned Baseline Care Plan dated 01/28/26. There was no evidence that the resident was provided with the baseline care plan or that it had been reviewed with her or the resident representative.Review of the initial Resident Care Conference dated 02/03/26 revealed no evidence the resident or resident representative was provided with a copy of the baseline care plan.Review of the care conference progress notes authored by Social Services Coordinator #178 dated 02/03/26 revealed current medications, all orders,…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-26 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to develop and implement a person-centered comprehensive care plan for one, (Resident #22) of 24 residents reviewed. The facility census was 69.Findings include:Findings include:Review of Resident #22's medical record revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including dementia and chronic kidney disease.Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #22 was cognitively impaired reflected cognitive impairment and needed for supervision and assistance with eating and drinking. The MDS revealed Resident #22 required staff assistance to ensure adequate hydration.During an interview on 02/23/26 at 10:45 A.M., Resident #22's daughter and Power of Attorney (POA) stated the resident does not want water to drink and prefers juice. The POA stated staff continued to provide water despite the resident's stated preference.Review of the facility document titled Resident…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-26 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, medical record review, interviews and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents who were dependent on staff were provided routine bathing. This affected two residents (#10 and #36) of six residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL). The facility census was 69. Findings Include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #10 revealed an initial admission date of 08/14/24 with the latest readmission date of 07/15/25. Diagnoses included but were not limited to spinal stenosis lumbar region, dementia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, palliative care, chronic respiratory failure, chronic pain, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, myasthenia gravis, diabetes mellitus, depression, anxiety, migraine, atrial fibrillation, congestive heart failure, cardiomyopathy, arthritis, candidiasis and anemia. Review of the resident's significant change MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had no cognitive deficit. Review of the mood and behavior revealed 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-02-26 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, medical record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure fall prevention interventions were implemented as indicated. This affected one resident (#47) of three residents reviewed for falls. The facility census was 69.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #47 revealed an admission date of 12/08/18 with diagnoses including cerebral infarction, difficulty in walking, vascular dementia, muscle weakness, lack of coordination, other abnormalities of gait and mobility, and unsteadiness on feet.Review of the physicians orders revealed an order dated 03/10/25 to encourage resident to wear gripper socks when non-skid footwear not in place for safety three times a day and an order dated 01/18/26 or gripper sock on while out of bed.Review of the falls care plan last reviewed/revised 02/09/26 revealed Resident #47 was at risk for falls/injury related to incontinent of bowel/urine and impaired gait. Interventions included gripper socks applied for safety dated 07/08/25, encourage resident to wear gripper socks…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-26 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, and staff interview, this facility failed to ensure a resident who required an indwelling foley catheter for bladder elimination was monitored for appropriate daily urine output as well as documenting urine output each shift. This affected one (Resident #46) of the three residents reviewed for bladder elimination. The facility census was 69.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #46 revealed an admission date of 08/04/2023. Diagnoses included sepsis due to a urinary tract infection, acidosis, metabolic encephalopathy, and retention of urine. Review of Resident #46's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10 out of 15 indicating a moderately impaired cognition for daily decision-making abilities. Resident #46 required an indwelling catheter for urine elimination. Review of the plan of care dated 07/29/2025 revealed Resident #46 had alteration in elimination related to obstructive…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-26 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
  Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure meal intakes were monitored and documented for three (Resident #44, #46, and #74), and the facility failed to ensure an order supplement was documented for one, (Resident #44). This affected three of six reviewed for nutrition and hydration. The facility census was 69. Findings include: 1.Review of the medical record for Resident #46 revealed an admission date of 08/04/2023. Diagnosis included sepsis due to a urinary tract infection, dysphagia oropharyngeal phase, and type two diabetes. Review of Resident #46's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10 out of 15 indicating a moderately impaired cognition for daily decision-making abilities. Resident #46 was noted to be 68 inches tall and weight 199 pounds. Resident #46 required supervision for eating. Review of the plan of care dated 07/31/24 revealed Resident #46 was at risk for dehydration or fluid…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-02-26 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  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, facility staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to follow physician 's order for oxygen administration. This affected one resident (#9) of one resident reviewed for respiratory care. The facility census was 69.Findings include: Review of medical record for Resident #9 revealed an admission date of 12/13/23 and a readmission date of 11/17/25 with diagnoses including Parkinsons disease, chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, and dependence on supplemental oxygen. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #34 had a Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating no impaired cognition and she was receiving oxygen therapy. Review of the physician's orders dated 11/26/25 revealed oxygen two to four liters via nasal cannula to maintain saturations above 90 percent (%) every shift. Observation on 02/25/2026 at 10:11 A.M. of Resident #9 revealed the nasal cannula was in place and the oxygen concentrator 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to ALTERCARE — 22 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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 13 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

8 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 $255K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in OH