Villa Vista Royale LLC
1800 Sinclair Avenue, Steubenville, OH 43953 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 54 certified beds · (740) 264-7301 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0602), cited Oct 2022
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (20) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
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 | 5 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
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 | 3 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 3 to 5 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 | 10.7% | 5.3% | 15.4% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.6% | 6.2% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.6% | 0.4% | 2.0% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 94.0% | 30.1% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 7.2% | 3.2% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 10.2% | 6.1% | 16.1% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 25.8% | 25.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.9% | 94.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.4% | 3.4% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 23.7% | 21.4% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 0.7% | 8.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.7% | 75.6% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 28.7% | 24.9% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 17.5% | 12.9% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.66 | 1.73 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.77 | 1.80 | 1.80 | typical |
‡ 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.
56.5% 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 41 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.39 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 67% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 20% 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 | 56.5%CMS range 44.9–70.2 | 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 | 11.8%CMS range 8.1–15.6 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 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 | 8.1%CMS range 4.0–13.9 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.37 | 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 54 beds and averages 45.5 residents a day — about 84% occupied, or roughly 8 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 3.83 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.96 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.30 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 3.37 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.01 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.07 to 0.68 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 36% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
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.
20 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 10 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-24 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to update a resident's Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) with changes to the resident medical diagnosis This deficient practice affected one resident (Resident #5) of one resident reviewed for PASARR. The facility census was 46.Findings Include: Review of Resident #5's medical record revealed an admission date of 07/01/24 with diagnoses including but not limited to high blood pressure, anxiety disorder, post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and history of falls.Review of Resident #5's physician orders revealed an order dated 04/01/25 for the antidepressant medication, Zoloft Oral Tablet 50 milligrams (mg). Give one (1) tablet by mouth one time a day for depression, sadness, tearfulness, self-isolation related to anxiety disorder, and an order dated 09/29/25 for the antianxiety medication Vistaril Oral Capsule, 50 mg. Give 50 mg by mouth at bedtime related to insomnia and anxiety disorder.Review of Resident #5's PASARR dated 05/06/24 revealed mood disorder, panic or other severe…
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 · D2026-02-24 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, observation, interview, review of manufacturer operating guidelines, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure pressure relieving interventions were appropriate based on resident weight and the location of the resident's pressure ulcer was accurately documented. This affected one resident (Resident #24) of two residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility census was 46.Findings Include: Review of Resident #24's medical record revealed an admission date of 04/28/23 with diagnoses including but not limited to dysphagia, dementia, hypokalemia, depression disorder, and high blood pressure.Review of Resident #24's physician orders revealed an order dated 12/23/25 for an air mattress to the bed to prevent skin breakdown, check placement and function every shift and a treatment order dated 02/03/26 for a left buttock wound - irrigate with normal saline, pack with calcium alginate with silver ribbon, cover with foam dressing daily and as needed (PRN) if soiled or loose every day shift for wound healing.Review of Resident #24's weekly wound/skin…
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 · D2025-04-03 · 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, interviews, record review, and policy review the facility failed to assess and monitor a resident's edema while having a sling and brace in place for a humerus fracture. This affected one resident (#249) of 24 resident records reviewed for assessments. Findings include: Review of record revealed Resident #249 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including left humerus fracture, hypertension (HTN) atrial fibrillation, generalize anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, Gastrointestinal reflux disease (GERD), type 2 diabetes, heart failure, cerebrovascular disease, hyperlipidemia, anemia, mitral stenosis, lymphedema, atherosclerotic heart disease, abnormal weight loss, Transient ischemic attack (TIA), breast cancer, hypothyroid, dry eyes, cataracts, polyarthritis, hyponatremia, diverticulitis left breast lumpectomy with lymph node sampling, lumpectomy of right breast. Review of baseline care plan completed 03/25/25 revealed Resident #249 required two assist 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 · Dcited before2025-04-03 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, restorative master log, review of the therapy log, and interview the facility failed to ensure a newly admitted resident was accurately assessed for range of motion (ROM) and failed to ensure an individualized restorative program was implemented to ensure the resident maintained range of motion. This affected one resident (#399) of three reviewed for ROM. Findings included: Medical record review revealed Resident #399 was transferred to the facility on [DATE] from another skilled nursing facility located in another state. The resident diagnoses included stiffness of unspecified joint, absence of right leg above knee, diabetes type two, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting right dominating side, lack of coordination, weakness, and difficulty walking. Review of Resident #399's base line care plan dated 03/01/25 revealed the resident's bilateral hands the fingers (last two) only opened 50-75%. There were no goals or interventions documented.…
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 before2025-04-03 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to identify, monitor and measure targeted behaviors with the use of antipsychotic medication. This affected one resident (#14) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medication. The facility census was 50 residents. Findings include: Review of Resident #14's medical record revealed a 08/21/23 admission with diagnoses including severe protein calorie malnutrition, magnesium deficiency, hypo-osmolality an hyponatremia, age related physical disability, pain, lack of coordination, muscle wasting and atrophy, peripheral vascular disease, Vitamin D deficiency, neuropathy, bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder, Vitamin B 12 deficiency anemia, dizziness and giddiness, gastroesophageal reflux disease, insomnia, dysphagia, anxiety disorder, hypokalemia, hypothyroidism, hypertension, orthostatic hypotension, and diverticulosis, Review of the Quarterly 01/02/25 Minimum Data Set assessment revealed the resident was independent for daily decision making with little interest or pleasure in doing things,…
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 · D2025-04-03 · tag F0773 — isolatedProvide or obtain laboratory tests/services when ordered and promptly tell the ordering practitioner of the results.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure laboratory testing was completed per physician order. This affected one resident (#28) of five residents reviewed for medication review. Findings included: Medical record review revealed Resident #28 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including history of hypertension, grade I diastolic dysfunction, and dementia. Review of Resident #28's orders dated 03/2025 revealed on 10/28/22 the physician ordered lipid profile to be obtained every six months (April/October). Review of laboratory results dated [DATE] to 04/01/25 revealed no evidence a lipid profile was obtained per orders in October 2024. Further review of laboratory results revealed the last lipid profile was obtained on 04/05/24. The resident's cholesterol was 250 (high) (normal less than 200 milligram (mg) / deciliters (dL), triglyceride 234 high (normal less 150 mg/dl), HDL 36.0 low (higher than desirable 40 mg/dl), LDL 167 high (less than 100 if…
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 before2025-04-03 · 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 medical record review, policy review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure residents had appropriate indications for use of antibiotics. This affected one resident (#20) of five residents reviewed for antibiotic use. The facility census was 50. Findings include: Review of Resident #20's medical record revealed an admission date of 12/13/22 with diagnoses that included diabetes mellitus, hypertension and peripheral vascular disease. Review of Resident #20's nursing notes revealed on 11/01/24 the resident sustained a fall and was sent to the local emergency department for evaluation. Upon return to the facility on [DATE], Resident #20 was diagnosed at the emergency department with a urinary tract infection (UTI) and prescribed Cephalexin (antibiotic) 500 milligrams (mg) every six hours for five days due to a UTI. Nursing staff advised Resident #20's physician of the returning diagnosis and antibiotic order. Nursing staff also advised the physician the resident's urinalysis was negative 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 · F2022-10-12 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespreadHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to use the services of a registered nurse (RN) for at least eight consecutive hours a day, seven days a week as required. This had the potential to affect all 42 residents residing in the facility. Findings include: Review of the facility assessment, dated 02/02/22 revealed no evidence of RN requirements, however the assessment revealed nursing was available 24 hours a day. Review of the staffing schedule, daily posting, and timecards dated 08/29/22 to 09/25/22 revealed there was no consecutive RN coverage for eight hours as required on 09/03/2, 09/10/22, or 09/11/22. Interview on 10/05/22 at 9:23 A.M. with Human Resource (HR)/Scheduler #42 verified there was only six hours RN coverage on 09/03/22 and there was no RN coverage on 09/10/22 or 09/11/22 due to call offs and no RNs to cover the shifts. Interview on 10/05/22 at 10:57 A.M. with the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed there was not eight hours of consecutive RN coverage on 09/03/22, 09/10/22, or 09/11/22. Review of the Staffing…
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 · D2022-10-12 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #31 was provided a dignified dining experience. This affected one resident (#31) of thirteen residents observed for dining. Findings include: Review of Resident #31's medical record revealed an admission date of 01/26/21 with diagnoses including arthritis, cervical spinal stenosis and dysphagia (difficulty swallowing). Review of the physician's orders revealed the resident had a current order for a puree consistency diet. Review of the annual Minimum Data Assessment (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 08/30/22 revealed the resident had severe cognitive impairment and required extensive assistance of one staff member with eating. On 10/11/22 at 8:22 A.M. Resident #31 was observed seated in her chair while State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #44 was observed standing next to Resident #31, feeding the resident her breakfast meal. The STNA continued to stand through completion of the meal at 8:40 A.M. On 10/11/22 at 8:35 A.M. the Director of Nursing (DON) entered the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-10-12 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, shower schedule review and interview the facility failed to ensure residents were provided the opportunity to choose their shower schedule and/or failed to ensure residents were offered choices related to meals. This affected one resident (#32) of one resident reviewed for choices and one resident (#11) of one resident reviewed for dialysis. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #32's medical record revealed an admission date of 08/27/22 with diagnoses including nondisplaced fracture of the surgical neck of the left humerus, hypertension and heart disease. Review of the physician's orders revealed an order, dated 08/27/22 to maintain sling to the left arm and may remove for hygiene. Review of the undated document titled MDS Information and Resident History revealed the resident preferred a shower and the preferred time of day was 9:00 A.M. to 10:00 A.M. Review of the resident preferences plan of care, initiated on 08/29/22 revealed interventions including make sure she gets a shower…
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 10 citations
- Potential for harm · D2022-10-12 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure resident health concerns were timely reported to the physician. This affected one resident (#32) of five residents reviewed for range of motion. Findings include: Review of Resident #32's hospital history and physical, dated 08/22/22 revealed the resident had a past medical history of thyroid disease. Review of Resident #32's medical record revealed an admission date of 08/27/22 with diagnoses including nondisplaced fracture of the surgical neck of the left humerus, hypertension and heart disease. Review of the physician's orders revealed an order, dated 08/27/22 to maintain sling to the left arm and may remove for hygiene. There were no orders for thyroid medication or thyroid laboratory monitoring. Review of the five day admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 09/03/22 revealed the resident was cognitively intact and required extensive assistance from one staff member with bed mobility,…
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 · D2022-10-12 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolatedProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, review of a facility investigation, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to prevent an incident of misappropriation of personal property involving Resident #11. This affected one resident (#11) of five residents reviewed for misappropriation. Findings include: Record review revealed Resident #11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including hypertrophy of kidney, obstructive and reflux uropathy, Vitamin D deficiency, constipation, heart disease, diabetic, hyperlipidemia, morbid obesity, chronic kidney disease requiring dialysis. Review of Resident #11's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 07/12/22 revealed the resident was cognitively intact with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 (out of 15). Interview on 10/03/22 at 2:32 P.M., with Resident #11 revealed in April the resident's wallet came up missing out of his locked cabinet. The facility replaced the wallet and helped him obtain a new social…
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 · D2022-10-12 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, review of a facility investigation, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to implement their abuse/misappropriation policy and procedure to prevent an incident of misappropriation, to ensure the incident was thoroughly investigated and to ensure the incident was reported to the State agency. This affected one resident (#11) of five residents reviewed for misappropriation. Findings include: Record review revealed Resident #11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including hypertrophy of kidney, obstructive and reflux uropathy, Vitamin D deficiency, constipation, heart disease, diabetic, hyperlipidemia, morbid obesity, chronic kidney disease requiring dialysis. Review of Resident #11's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 07/12/22 revealed the resident was cognitively intact with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 (out of 15). Interview on 10/03/22 at 2:32 P.M., with Resident #11 revealed in April the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-10-12 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely 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 record review, review of a facility investigation, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to report an allegation of misappropriation of personal property involving Resident #11 to the State agency as required. This affected one resident (#11) of five residents reviewed for misappropriation. Findings include: Record review revealed Resident #11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including hypertrophy of kidney, obstructive and reflux uropathy, Vitamin D deficiency, constipation, heart disease, diabetic, hyperlipidemia, morbid obesity, chronic kidney disease requiring dialysis. Review of Resident #11's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 07/12/22 revealed the resident was cognitively intact with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 (out of 15). Interview on 10/03/22 at 2:32 P.M., with Resident #11 revealed in April the resident's wallet came up missing out of his locked cabinet. The facility replaced the wallet 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 · D2022-10-12 · 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, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #18, who was dependent on staff for activities of daily living (ADL) care received proper and adequate oral care. This affected one resident (#18) of one resident reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL). Findings include: Record review revealed Resident #18 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including peripheral vascular disease, cerebrovascular disease, multiple sclerosis, mood affective disorder, osteoporosis, dysphagia and Alzheimer's Disease. Review of Resident #18's last dental note, dated 01/23/18 revealed the resident had lots of debris and inflammation. The note revealed the resident needed assistance with brushing teeth and gums. Patient was uncooperative; unable to clean teeth today and would try with next visit. Review of Resident #18's Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 07/26/22 revealed the resident had severe cognitive impairment, had no behaviors or rejection of care. 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 · Dcited before2022-10-12 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to develop and implement comprehensive and individualized restorative nursing service plans to ensure interventions and treatments were provided to residents to prevent a decline in range of motion (ROM) or maintain current ROM function. This affected two residents (#1 and #11) of five residents reviewed for mobility. Findings include: 1. Record review revealed Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including dementia, Alzheimer's Disease and limited range of motion. Review of Resident #1's annual Minimum Date Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 09/20/22 revealed the resident had limited range of motion to one side of the upper extremity. Review of Resident #1's current orders, dated 10/2022 revealed an order (dated 02/04/22) to gently perform passive range of motion to the right hand and place rolled wash cloth after range of motion was performed. The order indicated to keep wash cloth in place as tolerated throughout…
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 · D2022-10-12 · 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 observation, record review, review of dialysis dietary notes, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure residents were assessed and timely identified related to continued significant weight loss. The facility also failed to ensure residents receiving hemodialysis had accurate diet and fluid restriction orders. This affected two residents (#11 and #21) of three residents reviewed for nutrition. Findings include: 1. Record review revealed Resident #11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including hypertrophy of kidney, obstructive and reflux uropathy, Vitamin D deficiency, constipation, heart disease, diabetic, hyperlipidemia, morbid obesity, chronic kidney disease requiring dialysis. Review of Resident #11's nutritional note, dated 07/21/22 revealed the resident was ordered a no OJ, tomatoes or fried foods diet. The resident was currently not on any supplements, had no significant weight changes, meal intakes were 76% to 100% and fluid intakes were…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-10-12 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary 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 record review and interview the facility failed to ensure parameters were noted when to administer analgesic verses narcotic pain medication. The facility also failed to ensure nonpharmacological intervention were attempted prior to administration of narcotics. This affected one resident (#11) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medication use. Findings include: Record review revealed Resident #11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including renal dialysis, osteoarthritis of the knee, and unspecified pain. Review of Resident #11's orders, dated 09/01/22 to 10/06/22 revealed the resident was ordered Acetaminophen 325 milligrams (mg) two tablets every four hours as needed for pain and Oxycodone 10 mg one tablet every six hours as needed for pain. Review of Resident #11's medication administration records (MAR) dated 09/2022 and 10/2022 revealed Acetaminophen was administered for a pain level of four to six as well as Oxycodone being administered for pain rated a level of zero 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 · Dcited before2022-10-12 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure non-pharmacological interventions were attempted prior to the administration of as needed psychotropic medications. This affected one resident (#21) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications use. Findings include: Review of Resident #21's medical record revealed an admission date of 04/08/20 with diagnoses including depression, Alzheimer's Disease and schizoaffective disorder. The diagnosis of Parkinson's Disease was added to the resident's medical record in December of 2021. Review of the resident uses anti-anxiety medications related to anxiety disorder plan of care, dated 07/07/21 revealed interventions including administer medications per orders and observe for side effects and effectiveness. Review of the physician's orders revealed an order for Vistaril (anti-anxiety medication) 50 milligrams tablet one tablet by mouth twice a day for anxiety disorder (initiated 07/24/22) and one 50 mg tablet daily as needed for restlessness for 14 days only (dated 09/23/22)…
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 before2022-10-12 · 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
Based on record review, infection control log review, McGeer's Criteria review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure antibiotic use was appropriate and/or met antibiotic stewardship criteria. This affected two residents (#3 and #21) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications and one resident (#40) of one resident reviewed for antibiotic stewardship. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #3's medical record revealed an admission date of 05/30/19 with diagnoses including overactive bladder, dementia and constipation. Review of the June 2022 Infection Control Log revealed a urine culture was obtained due to increased behaviors and urgency on 06/17/22 and contained greater than 100,000 colony count of escherichia coli and this met McGeer's Criteria for treatment due to the colony count and increased urgency. The resident was treated with the antibiotic, Keflex for a urinary tract infection. Review of the urine culture obtained on 06/17/22 and verified on 06/19/22 revealed the resident did have E coli in her urine, however Keflex…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LANCIA, GUIRINO | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | 40% | since 11/01/1992 |
| LANCIA, GIUSEPPE | Individual | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/01/1992 |
| HUNTINGTON BANK | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2023 |
| JP MORGAN CHASE, N.A. | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/18/2006 |
| PNC BANK | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/16/2012 |
| WESBANCO BANK, INC. | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/13/2005 |
| BARCROFT, ANGELA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/01/2016 |
| CRANE, SHANE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/31/1987 |
| DALTON, DEBBIE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/16/2016 |
| DALTON, THOMAS | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/04/2019 |
| FERRELL, KRISTY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/23/2021 |
| NOLAN, JANET | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/04/1980 |
| RAMSEY, HEATHER | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/26/2022 |
| ZAKOVICH, PARIS | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/11/2004 |
| CITRIN COOPERMAN ADVISORS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2025 |
| D'ANNIBALLE AND COMPANY, INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| G & G AGENCY, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/01/2002 |
| L & L REALTY HOLDING COMPANY, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/25/1995 |
| RENEWAL REHAB LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| BOWMAN, KASI | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/26/2021 |
| DALTON, LESLIE | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/07/2025 |
| FIGEL, JOHN | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2019 |
| GREEN, MEGAN | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/01/2022 |
| KEENAN, KARIN | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/22/1987 |
| KELLER, LISA | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/22/1991 |
| LANCIA, JOSEPH | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2010 |
| NEWLIN, BARBARA | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/18/1985 |
| RIGGLE, SUSAN | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/19/2016 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 44 rows in the source record cover these 28 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
9 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.
About 70% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $22K 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
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 366416. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-24, 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.