No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Wapakoneta Manor

1010 Lincoln Ave, Wapakoneta, OH 45895 · For profit - Corporation · 73 certified beds · (419) 738-3711 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (419) 738-3711 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
1 actual-harm citation1 Medicare payment denial
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
Worth asking about
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation
  • its last standard health inspection was over 2 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
Pharmacy
1302 Defiance St · (419) 738-5959 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
805 Defiance St · (419) 738-8817 · Call to confirm hours
Park
399 W Harrison St · (419) 738-7158 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 2 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased5.1%5.3%15.4%typical for the state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight6.6%6.2%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.2%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%0.4%2.0%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms1.5%30.1%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury1.8%3.2%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened5.7%6.1%16.1%typical for the state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication22.7%25.5%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine93.4%94.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers3.5%3.4%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control19.8%21.4%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table12.8%8.8%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication2.1%1.2%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine72.2%75.6%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission35.2%24.9%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit6.6%12.9%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.801.731.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.581.801.80better

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.

45.8% 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 112 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

45.8%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.7%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
41.9%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.41U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.25hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.14hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.01hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 41.9% 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 43 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 0.41 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 70% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 2% 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.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF45.8%CMS range 38.2–54.251.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.7%CMS range 6.5–13.410.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge41.9%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge55.8%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge48.8%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified97.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 setting93.9%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot 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 stay1.5%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened3.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization5.5%CMS range 3.5–11.17.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.141.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

0.62
RN hours/ resident / day
0.55
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.39
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.57
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.45
RN hoursweekends
36.5%
Total nursing turnover
30.8%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 73 beds and averages 65.8 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 7 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 3.57 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.62 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.39 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 3.35 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.66 on weekdays — 8% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.69 to 0.45 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

5
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2024-05-16)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2022-09-01)

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

This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

14 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Actual harm · Gcited before2024-05-16 · 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, staff interview, observation, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure interventions were in place to prevent the development of a pressure ulcer. This resulted in actual harm when Resident #07 acquired a stage four pressure ulcer to his left heel while at the facility. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure pressure ulcer treatments were completed as ordered. This affected two (#07 and #51) of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The census was 62. Finding include: 1. Review of Resident #07's medical record revealed an admission date of 06/04/23. Diagnoses listed included type II diabetes mellitus, congestive heart failure, skin cancer, obesity, major depressive disorder, and stage four pressure ulcer of left heel. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment revealed Resident #07 had a stage four pressure ulcer, lower extremity impairment to both sides, and was cognitively intact. Review of the, Braden Scale for Predicting Pressure…

    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 before2024-06-11 · 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 observation, medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to complete adequate wound assessments and failed to ensure pressure-reducing interventions were in place as ordered. This affected one (#11) of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility census was 58. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #11 revealed admission date of 04/24/24. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including congestive heart failure, type two diabetes mellitus, and depression. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had intact cognition. Resident #11 required required moderate assistance for transfers, maximum assistance for bed mobility, was dependent for toileting hygiene, and required supervision for eating. Resident #11 was assessed at risk for pressure ulcers, but none were observed at the time of the assessment. Review of a progress note by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #108 dated 05/23/24…

    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 · D2024-05-16 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure Resident #210's catheter bag was covered to promote dignity. This affected one (Resident #210) of one residents reviewed for dignity. The facility census was 62. Findings include: Review of Resident #210's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including acute kidney failure and benign prostatic hyperplasia without lower urinary tract symptoms. Review of Resident #210's physician's orders revealed an order dated 05/13/24 to use privacy bag for catheter bag every shift. Observation on 05/13/24 at 9:50 A.M. revealed Resident #210's Foley catheter bag, with urine present, hanging on the bed side dresser visible from the hallway. There was no privacy bag present. Observation on 05/14/24 at 9:40 A.M. revealed Resident #210 resting in bed with the Foley catheter bag, with urine present, hanging on bedframe on the right side of bed without a Foley privacy bag,…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-16 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure resident comprehensive care plans had interventions for psychiatric disorders. This affected one (Resident #18) of two reviewed for care planning. The census was 62. Findings Include: Review of Resident #18's medical record revealed an admission date of 03/06/24. Diagnoses listed included Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, and type two diabetes mellitus. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #18 was cognitively intact with a diagnoses of PTSD. Interview with Resident #18 on 05/13/24 at 2:33 P.M. revealed she had not had a care conference since admission. Review of Resident #18's comprehensive care plan revealed PTSD was not listed and no interventions were in place. Interview with Corporate Registered Nurse (CRN) #361 on 05/14/24 at 3:50 P.M. confirmed a PTSD diagnosis and interventions were not listed on…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-16 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to hold care conferences with residents. This affected (Residents #07 and #18) of two residents reviewed for care conferences. Additionally, the facility also failed to implement fall interventions and update the care plan after falls. This affected one (Resident #209) of three reviewed for falls care planning. The census was 62. Findings Include: 1. Review of Resident #07's medical record revealed an admission date of 06/04/23. Diagnoses listed included type II diabetes mellitus, congestive heart failure, skin cancer, obesity, major depressive disorder, and stage four pressure ulcer of left heel. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #07 had a stage four pressure ulcer, lower extremity impairment to both sides, and was cognitively intact. Interview with Resident #07 on 05/14/24 at 8:28 A.M. revealed he had not had any recent care conferences. Further review of Resident #07's medical record revealed a…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-16 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of contract with dialysis center, review of facility policy, observation of care, interview with resident, and interview with staff, the facility failed to ensure Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) were implemented. This affected two (Residents #51 and #52) of three residents reviewed for EBP. The current census is 62. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #52 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses for Resident #52 included peritonitis, diabetes type two, chronic kidney disease, dependence on peritoneal dialysis, and hypotension. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) comprehensive assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had no brief interview for mental status coded as no interview due to resident never understood. Per the assessment the resident was receiving peritoneal dialysis. Review of Resident #52's care plan dated 01/20/24 revealed a focus for receiving Peritoneal (PD) dialysis services through Fresenius. Interventions included…

    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 · E2022-09-01 · tag F0641 — pattern
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on resident record review and staff interview; the facility failed to ensure minimum data set (MDS) assessments were accurate. This affected four (#18, #22, #41, and #45) of 14 residents reviewed for accuracy of the MDS assessment. The census was 44. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record of Resident #18 revealed an admission date of 12/22/20. Diagnoses include lumbosacral spinal stenosis, anxiety disorder and unspecified visual disturbance. Review of the quarterly MDS assessments dated 06/10/22 and 07/15/22 revealed no brief interview of mental status (BIMS) nor mood assessment being completed as required. Interview on 09/01/22 at 8:57 A.M. with Director of Clinical Support #174 provided verification of the MDS assessment incompleteness. 2. Review of Medical Record for Resident #22 admitted [DATE] with diagnoses that included, but are not limited to, depression, chronic pain, spinal stenosis, mild cognitive impairment, delusional disorders, anxiety, and brief psychotic disorder. Review of…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2022-09-01 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — pattern
    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, observations and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain a safe environment when medications were left unattended by staff. This directly affected one resident (#31) and had the possibility to affect seven residents (#2, #3, #13, #34, #36, #39, and #43) identified by the facility as being independently mobile and cognitively impaired, residing in the D hall. The facility census was 44. Findings include: Review of the medical record of Resident #31 revealed an admission date of 11/22/20. Diagnoses include atherosclerotic heart disease of native coronary artery with other forms of angina pectoris, chronic atrial fibrillation, hypertensive heart disease with heart failure, acute embolism and thrombosis of unspecified deep veins of unspecified lower extremity, presence of cardiac pacemaker, history of alcohol dependence, uninhibited neuropathic bladder, gastro-esophageal reflux disease, benign prostatic hyperplasia with lower urinary tract symptoms, feeling of incomplete…

    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 · D2022-09-01 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, resident interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to serve meals in the dining room due to staffing issues. This potentially affected 40 residents (with exception of Residents #3, #13, #18, and #40 who preferred to eat in their rooms) who receive meals from the kitchen. The census was 44. Findings include: Observation of dining on 08/29/22 at 7:30 A.M. revealed no residents were eating in the dining room. Interview on 08/29/22 at 7:30 A.M. with State Tested Nursing Assistant/Medical Records (STNA #134) who was working as a cook stated all meal trays were being served on the nursing floors. STNA #134 stated that no residents were eating in the dining room due to being short staffed. Interview on 08/29/22 at 3:46 P.M. with Administrator stated they were not sure why residents were not eating in the dining room. Administrator stated they would find out what the protocol for the facility was. Interview on 08/31/22 at 11:24 A.M. with Dietary Aide #139 stated they were told that there was not enough staff to assist residents with eating in the dining room.…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-09-01 · 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 interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure treatments were completed as ordered. This affected one (Resident #41) of two residents reviewed for wounds. The census was 44. Findings include: Review of Medical Record for Resident #41 admitted [DATE] with diagnoses that included, but not limited to, pressure ulcer stage four (deep wound that reaches the muscles, ligaments, or bone) in sacral region, noncompliance with other medical treatment and regimen, type two diabetes, morbid obesity, depression, insomnia, and renal dialysis. Review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] for Resident #41 revealed resident is cognitively intact. Resident #41 required extensive assist of two for Activities of Daily Living (ADL's) and had a catheter and colostomy. MDS indicated Resident #41 did not have any unhealed pressure ulcers. Review of pharmacy delivery sheet revealed Acetic Acid 0.25 percent (%) solution (1000 milliliters) was delivered on 07/09/22, 07/23/22, 08/02/22, and 08/23/22. Review of…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2019-09-12 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure opened food was dated when placed into storage. This had the potential to affect 80 resident who received food from the facility kitchen. The facility identified one resident (#19) who received no food from the kitchen. The facility census was 81. Findings include: Observation of the facility kitchen on 09/09/19 starting at 8:45 A.M. revealed the walk in refrigerator to have a bag of shredded lettuce and an open bag of parmesan cheese which were undated. The dry food storage had a bag of vanilla wafers and bag of cheese curls which were opened and undated. The reach in refrigerator had five bowls of lettuce covered with plastic wrap without dates. Interviews at the time of the observations with Staff Member #400 verified opened and undated foods observed during the kitchen tour. Review of the undated facility policy titled Storage of Perishable Foods revealed prepared or left-over foods should be stored tightly covers, clearly dated and used within three days or discarded.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2019-09-12 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of medication administration record, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure medications were stored in a safe manner. This affected three residents (#10, #44, and #55) and had the potential to effect 11 residents (#5, #11, #23, #27, #29, #31, #32, #62, #67, #68 and #73), residing in the A and D Halls, who were independently mobile and confused. The facility census was 81. Findings include. Observation on 09/09/19 at 9:16 A.M. revealed Housekeeper #415 approached Registered Nurse (RN) #420 and handed her a white tablet, stating I found this on the floor in Resident #55's room. Interview on 09/09/19 at 9:20 A.M. with RN #420 revealed the tablet was bumetanide, a diuretic, 1 milligram. Review of the 09/19 medication administration record of Resident #55, with RN #420, revealed the bumetanide was administered at supper on 09/08/19 and upon rising on 09/09/19. Observation on 09/09/19 at 12:26 P.M. of Resident #10 and Resident #44's room, room…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-09-12 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, staff interview, family interview, resident interview, medical record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to have supporting documentation for the medical necessity for an indwelling urinary catheter for one (#181) of one resident reviewed for urinary catheters. The facility identified three residents with indwelling urinary catheters. The facility census was 81. Findings include: Review of the medical record of Resident #181 revealed an admission date of 08/28/19. Diagnoses included intrahepatic bile duct carcinoma, obstruction of bile duct and atherosclerotic heart disease. Review of the hospital discharge paperwork revealed Resident #181's daughter would like the urinary catheter to be placed for comfort reasons. Review of the physician orders for September 2019 contained no order for a urinary catheter. The record was silent for documentation on a valid diagnosis for a urinary catheter. Observation on 09/09/19 at 10:00 A.M. revealed Resident #181 with a urinary catheter hanging on the foot of the bed, in a privacy bag. Interview on…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · C2022-09-01 · tag F0732 — widespread
    Post nurse staffing information every day.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to post daily nurse staffing information. This affected 44 residents who reside in the facility. The census was 44. Findings include: Observation on 08/30/22 at 7:28 A.M. of daily staffing tool at entryway revealed a date of 08/23/22. Interview on 08/30/22 at 7:30 A.M. with Corporate Director of Clinical Services (CODC) #174 verified staffing tool was dated 08/23/22.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has plan 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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.

  • Medicare payment denial — starting 2024-06-15 for 20 days

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to HCF MANAGEMENT — 22 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 4 of 53.1+0.9 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.9+1.1 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 52.8+0.2 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.1≈ chain avg
The other 21 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.1★, per CMS)

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
CHAD M. UNVERFERTH 12-14-11 IRRV GRANTOR TROrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST6%since 12/13/2021
DAVID V. UNVERFERTH 12-14-11 IRRV GRANTOR TROrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST6%since 12/13/2021
JEFFREY L. UNVERFERTH 12-14-11 IRRV GRANTOR TROrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST6%since 12/13/2021
JOANN C. UNVERFERTH 12-29-04 REVOCABLE TRUSTOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST5%since 12/13/2021
JOANN C. UNVERFERTH 12-31-12 IRREVOCABLE GRANTOR TRUST FBO KENDRA M. UOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST7%since 12/13/2021
JOANN C. UNVERFERTH 12-31-12 IRREVOCABLE GRANTOR TRUST FBO KERRI A. ROOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST7%since 12/13/2021
JOANN C. UNVERFERTH 12-31-12 IRREVOCABLE GRANTOR TRUST FBO KEVAN R. UNOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST7%since 12/13/2021
JOANN C. UNVERFERTH 12-31-12 IRREVOCABLE GRANTOR TRUST FBO KRISTEN S.Organization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST7%since 12/13/2021
JOANN C. UNVERFERTH 12-31-12 IRREVOCABLE GRANTOR TRUST FBO KYLE J. UNVOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST7%since 12/13/2021
JOSEPH L. UNVERFERTH 12-15-11 IRRV GRANTOR TROrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST6%since 12/13/2021
LAWRENCE G. UNVERFERTH 12-13-11 IRRV GRANTOR TROrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST6%since 12/13/2021
R. STEVEN UNVERFERTH 12-14-11 IRRV GRANTOR TROrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST6%since 12/13/2021
KLAY, CELESTEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2016
ROMES, KERRIIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/29/2019
TOWNSEND, CHRISTIANIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 11/25/2024
SHAW, ANTHONYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/24/2015
UNVERFERTH, CHADIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2004
HCF MANAGEMENT, INC.OrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2004

CMS files one row per role, so the 30 rows in the source record cover these 18 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

13 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.

$6.2M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-5.2%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$298K
Related-party expense5% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 51%Medicare 16%Other / private 34%

This home reported $298K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

Cost & finances

$335per resident / day
operating cost
$10,196per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$319per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in Ohio
$9,186/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$10,389/mo
Nursing home (private)
$6,103/mo
Assisted living

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 365238. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-05-16, 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.

What to do next