Otterbein St Marys Retirement Community

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.

57.8% 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 157 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 51.9% 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 81 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 0.49 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 80% 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 53 beds and averages 49.7 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 3 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.49 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.79 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.05 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 3.11 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.65 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.94 to 0.40 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 34% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 3 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

24 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 13 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · Gcited before2023-11-14 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, review of facility investigations, review of a Sheriff's Office incident report, review of the weather forecast, review of hospital discharge documents, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to prevent the elopement of confused residents from the secured memory care unit. This resulted in actual harm when one resident (#20) eloped from the facility without staff knowledge, was outside for approximately three hours in cool weather temperatures and light rain, was subsequently admitted to the hospital for evaluation and stabilization and was diagnosed with hypothermia (a significant and potentially dangerous drop in body temperature most commonly caused by prolonged exposure to cold) and a hypothermic blanket was applied. Furthermore, the resident was diagnosed with hypokalemia (low potassium) requiring intravenous (IV) fluids for hydration and found to have an episode of non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (heart arrythmia). Additionally, 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 · Dcited before2024-04-03 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide wound care as ordered. This affected one (Resident #20) of three reviewed for wounds. The facility census was 47. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #20 revealed an admission date of 01/25/24 with diagnoses including but not limited to displaced bimalleolar fracture (ankle) of right lower leg, fracture of upper end of right tibia (larger bone in lower leg, shinbone), type one diabetes, major depressive disorder, syncope and collapse, other specified disorders of bone density and structure to right thigh, and hypertension. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #20 was cognitively intact. Resident #20 required extensive assistance for Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) and had surgical wounds. Review of the care plan dated 02/01/24 revealed Resident #20 had actual impairment to skin integrity of the right lower leg related to surgical wound. Interventions 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-11 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, review of facility policy, and staff interview the facility failed to ensure care was not delayed and a fall was properly assessed for one resident, Resident #1, out of three residents reviewed for falls. The current census is 46. Findings include: Record review of Resident #1 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged to another facility on 01/05/24. Diagnoses for Resident #1 included displaced fracture of the femur, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, malnutrition, and heart disease. Review of Resident #1's Minimum Data Set (MDS) comprehensive assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had intact cognition and was a fall risk. Review of Resident #1's care plans dated 12/2023 revealed a focus for falls. Interventions included non-skid footwear, keeping path free of clutter, and call light within reach at all times. Review of the fall assessment dated [DATE] at 1:30 P.M. revealed the nurse documented her progress note regarding the assessment…

  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 before2023-11-14 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
  Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, review of facility investigations, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to report instances of potential neglect related to resident elopement to the state agency. This affected two (#20 and #21) of three residents reviewed for elopement. The facility census was 44. Findings Include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #20 revealed an admission date of 03/03/21. Diagnoses included major depressive disorder, schizoaffective disorder, dementia, Alzheimer's disease delusional disorder, and mood disorder. Resident #20 resided on the secured memory unit. Review of Resident #20's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of five, indicating Resident #20 was severely cognitively impaired. Resident #20 required supervision, set up only for her activities of daily living (ADLs). Resident #20 displayed verbal behavioral symptoms directed toward others one to three days during the review period.…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2023-09-14 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — pattern
  Develop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to provide each resident or representatives with education regarding the risk and benefits of influenza immunization yearly when influenza vaccines were offered. This affected four (#2, #27, #31 and #36) out of five residents reviewed for immunizations. The facility census was 47. Findings include 1. Medical record review for Resident #2 revealed an admission date of major depressive disorder, syncope and collapse, cerebral infarction, poly osteoarthritis, vitamin D, hyperlipidemia, seasonal allergic rhinitis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), anemia, hypertension, chronic bronchitis, dementia without behaviors, chronic kidney disease stage three. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #2 revealed the resident had impaired cognition. Resident #2 required extensive assist for bed mobility, transfers, and toileting. Resident #13 required supervision for eating. Review 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.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-09-14 · 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

  Based on medical record review, staff and resident representative interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to include resident representative in the development of a baseline care plan and failed to provide resident representative with a copy of the baseline care plan. This affected one (#198) out of five residents reviewed for baseline care plans. The facility census was 47. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #198 revealed an admission date of 08/24/23 with medical diagnoses of sepsis, nondisplaced fracture of left humerus, hypothyroidism, and dementia. Review of the medical record for Resident #198 revealed an admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 08/30/23, which indicated Resident #198 had severely impaired cognition and required extensive staff assistance with bed mobility, transfers, dressing, and toileting. Review of the medical record for Resident #198 revealed an admission Screen and Baseline Care plan assessment was completed by Director of Nursing (DON) on 08/24/23. Further review of the medical record revealed a signature…

  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 before2023-09-14 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, staff, physician and resident representative interviews, the facility failed to follow the physicians orders for treatment of a wound. This affected one (#8) of one reviewed for wound care. Additionally, the facility failed to provide care and services to treat a resident's constipation. This affected one (#198) out of one resident reviewed for constipation. The facility census was 47. Findings include: 1. Medical record review for Resident #8 revealed an admission on [DATE] with diagnoses including but not limited to myasthenia gravis with exacerbation, type two diabetes, sleep apnea, morbid obesity, major depressive disorder and anxiety. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #8 revealed the resident had impaired cognition. Resident #8 required limited assistance from one staff member for bed mobility, transfers, and toileting. Resident #8 required application of non surgical dressing and ointments to areas other than feet. Review…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-09-14 · tag F0849 — isolated
  Arrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice services.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on medical record review, staff and hospice staff interviews and review of a hospice contract, the facility failed to collaborate hospice services for the completion of a comprehensive plan of care for a resident admitted hospice services. This affected one (#13) of one reviewed for Hospice services. The facility census was 47. Findings include: Medical record review for Resident #13 revealed an admission dated on 12/09/22 with diagnoses including but not limited to sepsis, electrolyte imbalance, hypothyroidism, anemia, lymphedema, acute osteomyelitis, type two diabetes, obesity, seizures, obstructive sleep apnea, encephalopathy, intracranial abscess and granuloma. Review of the significant Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #13 dated 08/28/23 revealed the resident had intact cognition. Resident #13 required limited assist for bed mobility, extensive assist for transfers and toileting. Resident #13 required supervision for eating. Resident #13 was coded as receiving hospice care in the past 14 days. Review of the hospice plan of care dated 08/21/23 for Resident #13…

  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.

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-06-10 · 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

  Based on medical record review, resident and staff interview, review of the facility's shower schedules, shower/bath body audit sheets, and review of the state tested nurse aide (STNA) job summary, the facility failed to provide routine showers to a resident who was totally dependent on staff for bathing. This affected one (#15) of one resident reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs). The facility census was 45. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #15 revealed an admission date of 04/09/21 with diagnoses of fracture of the right fibula, chronic kidney disease, depression and heart failure. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 04/13/21, revealed Resident #15 was cognitively intact. She required extensive assistance to total assistance for activities of daily living (ADLs), including extensive assistance of two staff for dressing and personal hygiene. She was totally dependent on staff for bathing. Review of the plan of care revealed Resident #15 had an impaired ability to perform or complete activities of daily living for…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-06-10 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, resident and staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure non-pressure skin impairments were accurately assessed and routinely monitored. This affected one (#15) of two residents reviewed for non-pressure skin impairments. The facility census was 45. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #15 revealed an admission date of 04/09/21 with diagnoses of fracture of the right fibula, chronic kidney disease, and heart failure. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 04/13/21, revealed surgical wounds were present upon admission for Resident #15. Review of the nurse progress notes from admission on [DATE] to 06/07/21 revealed no information about a new wound on her right leg at any time. Review of the physician orders, dated 04/09/21, revealed a dry dressing change to the right lower extremity daily. Skin checks to the right lower extremity every shift was ordered on 04/09/21. An immobilizer to the right…

  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 before2021-06-10 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview and review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to accurately assess and routinely monitor residents with pressure ulcers. This affected two (#4 and #25) of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility identified four residents with pressure ulcers. The facility census was 45. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #4 revealed an admission date of 03/05/21. Diagnoses included stage four pressure ulcer to sacral region (Full thickness tissue loss with exposed bone, tendon or muscle. Slough or eschar may be present on some parts of the wound bed.), mononeuropathy, protein calorie nutrition, dementia with behavioral disturbance, muscle weakness, and colostomy. Review of Resident #4's plan of care, dated 03/10/21, revealed the pressure wound was to be assessed and monitored with length, width and depth when possible. The wound perimeter, wound bed and healing process was to be documented with improvements and declines in wound healing reported to the physician accordingly. Review…

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

  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 OTTERBEIN SENIORLIFE — 20 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

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 59 rows in the source record cover these 40 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

4 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 $343K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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