Ayden Healthcare Of Wauseon
303 W Leggett St, Wauseon, OH 43567 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 50 certified beds · (419) 337-3050 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (15% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- 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 (F0600), cited May 2026
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0570)
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (41) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- 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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 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 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 8.4% | 5.3% | 15.4% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.2% | 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 | 8.4% | 30.1% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 4.1% | 3.2% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 10.9% | 6.1% | 16.1% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 43.3% | 25.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 51.1% | 94.5% | 95.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 0.0% | 3.4% | 4.7% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 24.1% | 21.4% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 5.8% | 8.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 3.0% | 1.2% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 0.0% | 75.6% | 79.4% | worse |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.42 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 71% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| 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 | 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 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 50 beds and averages 47.1 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 3 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.74 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.65 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.01 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 3.34 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.91 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.75 to 0.39 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 15% is below the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 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.
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.
41 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 30 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2022-02-18 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, medical record review, policy review, and review of information from the National Pressure Injury Advisory Panel (NPIAP), the facility failed to assess and monitor pressure ulcers to prevent the deterioration of wounds. This resulted in Actual Harm when Resident #36 was admitted to the facility with a Stage 2 pressure ulcers (partial thickness skin loss into but no deeper than the dermis) to the coccyx and a Stage 2 pressure ulcer to the ankle that were not assessed and monitored regularly. Subsequently, both pressure ulcers declined and was assessed as Unstageable (full thickness tissue loss but is either covered by extensive necrotic tissue or by eschar) 15 days after admission. This affected one (#36) of two residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility identified two residents in the facility with pressure ulcers. The facility census was 39. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #36 revealed an admission date of 01/20/22 and re-admitted…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-05-28 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — patternHonor 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, staff interview, and review of facility policy the facility failed to ensure residents were treated with dignity and respect when a facility staff used profanity. This affected six (#7, #14, #16, #26, #41, and #43) of six residents identified to be in the common area. The facility census was 47.Findings include:Observation on 05/27/26 at 6:28 A.M. revealed Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #335 at the nurses' station visually reviewing a piece of paper. CNA #335 stated in a loud tone, I get that she is new, but you are not going to [explicative] me over. Further observation revealed Residents #7, #14, #16, #26, #41, and #43 were in the common area located approximately 10 feet from the nurses' station and within hearing distance. Interview on 05/27/26 at 6:30 A.M. with CNA #335 verified using profanity in front of the residents. Review of the facility provided document titled, Resident Rights, dated 10/03/23, revealed resident's had the right to be treated at all times with courtesy, respect, and full recognition of dignity and individuality. This was an…
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 · D2026-05-28 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, resident interview, staff interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure medication self-administration evaluations were completed. This affected one (#19) of one resident reviewed for medication self-administration. The facility census was 47. Findings include:Review of the medical record revealed Resident #19 was admitted on [DATE]. Diagnoses included hypocalcemia, Type II diabetes mellitus, anxiety disorder, depression, hypothyroidism, adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood, paranoid personality disorder, malignant neoplasm of thyroid gland, and mild neurocognitive disorder due to known physiological condition without behavioral disturbance. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 05/08/26, revealed the resident was cognitively intact. Further review of Resident #19's medical record revealed no evidence a self-administration assessment was completed for the resident to safely self-administer medications or a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-28 · 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 medical record review, observation, resident interview, staff interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure resident's choices were honored. This affected one (#19) of three residents reviewed for choices. The facility census was 47.Findings include:Review of the medical record revealed Resident #19 was admitted on [DATE]. Diagnoses included hypocalcemia, Type II diabetes mellitus, anxiety disorder, depression, hypothyroidism, adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood, paranoid personality disorder, malignant neoplasm of thyroid gland, and mild neurocognitive disorder due to known physiological condition without behavioral disturbance. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 05/08/26, revealed the resident was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #19's written documentation, dated 3/30/26, revealed the staff pulled her curtain open and used the roommate's trash can to prop open the door. Resident #19 documented propping the door open let in a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-28 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of written staff statements, staff interviews and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from abuse. This affected one (#16) of four residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 47.Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #16 revealed an admission date of 04/03/26 with diagnoses of dementia, adjustment disorder, and fracture of the sacrum.Review of the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) dated 05/19/26 revealed Resident #16 had significant cognitive impairment.Interview on 05/27/26 10:51 A.M. with the Director of Nursing (DON) and the Administrator revealed a report of an allegation of abuse that occurred in the afternoon of 05/26/26 between Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #330 and Resident #16. The Administrator stated LPN #300 and Registered Nurse (RN) #315 had knowledge of the incident on the date of occurrence and did not report it at the time of the incident. LPN #300 reported the allegation this morning. Interview on 05/27/26 at 11:30 A.M. with LPN #300 revealed she walked down the north hall…
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 · D2026-05-28 · 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
Based on review of written staff statements, staff interview and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure staff reported allegations of abuse timely. This affected one (#16) of four residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 47. Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #16 revealed an admission date of 04/03/26 with diagnoses of dementia, adjustment disorder, and fracture of the sacrum.Interview on 05/27/26 10:51 A.M. with the Director of Nursing (DON) and the Administrator revealed a report of an allegation of abuse that occurred in the afternoon of 05/26/26 between Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #330 and Resident #16. The Administrator stated LPN #300 and Registered Nurse (RN) #315 had knowledge of the incident on the date of occurrence and did not report it at the time of the incident. LPN #300 reported the allegation this morning. Interview on 05/27/26 at 11:30 A.M. with LPN #300 revealed she walked down the north hall when LPN #330 reported to her that Resident #16 was attempting to hit her (LPN #330) and LPN #330 stated she…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-08-22 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — widespreadEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of 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 observation, medical record review, resident and staff interview, review of the menu, review of the menu spreadsheet, review of food product information, and review of facility policies, the facility failed to ensure food was served per the facility menu and spreadsheets. This directly affected one (#23) resident who was ordered a mechanical soft diet, directly affected one (#33) resident who received a pureed diet, and had the potential to affect all 45 residents residing in the facility who received food from the facility. The census was 45. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #23 revealed an admission date of 05/24/22 with diagnoses of type II diabetes mellitus and gastroesophageal reflux disease. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #23 had intact cognition and was not on a therapeutic diet. Review of a physician order dated 01/16/23 revealed Resident #23 received a regular diet with double protein at breakfast.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-08-22 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — widespreadEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff and resident interviews, review of a test tray, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure meals were palatable, delivered at the proper temperature, and had an attractive appearance. This had the potential to affect all 45 residents in the facility. The census was 45. Findings include: 1. Interview on 08/19/24 at 9:06 A.M., with Resident #5 revealed the food the facility served was usually cold. Interview on 08/19/24 at 9:19 A.M., with Resident #36 revealed the food was always cold. Interview on 08/19/24 at 9:22 A.M., Resident #10 stated the food was sub-par lately. Resident #10 stated the plates and food were cold. Interview on 08/19/24 at 11:16 A.M., Resident #29 revealed food which should be hot was usually served cold. Observation prior to meal service on 08/20/24 at 7:24 A.M. revealed [NAME] #312 taking food temperatures. The temperature of the scrambled eggs was 175 degrees Fahrenheit (F) and the temperature of the French toast was 169 degrees F. Observation during meal service on 08/20/24 at 7:41 A.M. revealed a test tray was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-08-22 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, review of nutritional supplement directions for use, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure nutrition supplements were not expired and were used within the appropriate timeframe. This had the potential to affect eight (#12, #17, #19, #25, #31, #38, #45, and #50) residents who received nutrition supplements. The facility census was 45. Findings include: Observation on [DATE] at 11:34 A.M. of the residents' snack refrigerator revealed a box of approximately 25 cartons of four-ounce liquid nutrition supplements. Observation of one carton revealed an expiration date of [DATE]. Observation of the additional cartons revealed they expired in 2025. Review of the directions on the supplement cartons revealed the item should be stored frozen, and thawed under refrigeration. Further review revealed the thawed supplement should be used within 14 days after thawing. Interview on [DATE] at 11:34 A.M. with Social Services Director (SSD) #474 confirmed the single container of nutrition…
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 · D2024-08-22 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal 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 medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were provided a timely written discharge notice. This affected one (#30) of two residents reviewed for discharges from the facility. The facility census was 45. Findings included: Review of Resident #30's medical record revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE]. Diagnosis included schizoaffective disorder, asthma, congestive heart failure, dementia, bipolar, and benign lipomatous neoplasm of skin and subcutaneous tissue. Review of Resident #30's quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had a moderate cognitive function. Review of Resident #30's medical record revealed on 04/19/24 the resident was transferred to a behavioral unit in the local hospital due to increased behaviors throughout the day where the resident was admitted . The physician ordered a hospital/psychiatric evaluation. Interview with Business Office Manager #348 on 08/21/24 at 11:20 A.M. verified Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-22 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, medical record review, review of fall investigations, review of facility guidelines, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure neurological checks were performed per facility guidelines, and failed to ensure fall interventions were in place as care planned. This affected one (#31) of one resident reviewed for falls. The facility census was 45. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #31 revealed an admission date of 06/06/23 with diagnoses of anxiety and Alzheimer's disease. Review of the annual comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #31 had impaired cognition, used a walker and wheelchair for mobility, required substantial/maximal assistance for transfers, and was able to ambulate ten feet with supervision or touching assistance. Further review revealed Resident #31 had two or more falls without injury since the previous assessment dated [DATE]. Review of a progress note dated 12/29/23…
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 30 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-22 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, review of a hemodialysis communication binder, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure hemodialysis access sites were monitored as care planned, and failed to ensure communication between the hemodialysis clinic and the facility regarding a resident's hemodialysis and services was maintained. This affected one (#200) of one resident reviewed for hemodialysis. The facility census was 45. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #200 revealed an admission date of 08/09/24 with diagnoses of type II diabetes mellitus and end stage renal disease. Review of the comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #200 had intact cognition, received hemodialysis, and was on a therapeutic diet. Review of the current care plan for Resident #200 revealed he received hemodialysis. Interventions included monitoring the hemodialysis site for signs or symptoms of infection or bleeding. Review of the physician…
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 · D2024-08-22 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
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, resident and staff interview, and medical record review, the facility failed to ensure resident's food preferences were followed. This affected two (#20 and #26) of seven residents reviewed for food preferences. The facility census was 45. Findings Included: 1. Review of Resident #26's medical record revealed an admission date of 07/27/23. Diagnosis included diabetes mellitus, absence of right toes, and iron deficiency anemia. Review of Resident #26's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident's cognition was intact. The resident had no natural teeth and required set up or clean up assistance for eating. Review of Resident #26' most recent care plan revealed she suffered from anemia and diabetes mellitus type two. The resident was at risk for hyper/hypoglycemia episodes related to diabetes mellitus type two. Review of Resident #26's physician order revealed an order dated 01/18/24 for a regular diet, regular texture, and thin consistency. No chips or sharp…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-22 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the medical record, observation, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident with an indwelling urinary catheter was placed on enhanced barrier precautions. This affected one (#5) of one resident reviewed for urinary catheters. The facility census was 45. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #5 revealed an admission date of 09/20/22. Diagnoses included multiple sclerosis, urinary retention, neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder, malignant neoplasm of right kidney, osteoarthritis, and venous insufficiency. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #5 had intact cognition. Review of a progress note dated 06/10/24 at 10:58 A.M. revealed Resident #5 would be returning from the hospital with an indwelling urinary catheter. Observation on 08/19/24 at 9:06 A.M. revealed Resident #5 had an indwelling urinary catheter. Further observation revealed the resident was not on enhanced barrier precautions…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-08-01 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — widespreadEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, resident interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure food was served warm and palatable. This had the potential to affect all residents who receive food from the facility's kitchen. The facility census was 47. Findings include: Observation on 08/01/24 at 7:40 A.M. of meal delivery to the south hall revealed the door to the meal delivery cart was left open between delivery of each tray. Observation on 08/01/24 at 7:42 A.M. of meal delivery to the south hall revealed 11 plate covers (from previously delivered trays), one undelivered resident tray, and a tote of condiments on top of the meal delivery cart. Interview on 08/01/24 at 7:47 A.M. with State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #219 revealed the top of the meal delivery cart for the south hall had 11 plate covers (from previously delivered trays), one undelivered resident tray, a tote of condiments on top, and the door was let open in-between delivering trays. Concurrent interview on 08/01/24 at 7:47 A.M. with STNA #219 revealed they receive multiple complaints daily from…
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 · E2024-08-01 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and resident interview, the facility failed to ensure residents had a safe, clean, comfortable environment. This affected one resident (#35) and had the potential to affect an additional 36 residents (#1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #9, #10, #11, #12, #13, #14, #15, #17, #19, #20, #21, #22, #23, #25, #26, #27, #29, #31, #32, #33, #34, #38, #39, #40, #42, #43, #44, #45, #46, ) residing in the facility. The facility census was 47. Findings include: Review on 07/24/24 at approximately 2:00 P.M. revealed Resident #35 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of severe protein-calorie malnutrition, non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), acidosis, peripheral vascular disease (PVD), unsteadiness on feet, adult failure to thrive, anorexia, right foot drop, hypertension (HTN), drug induced constipation, cognitive communication deficit, muscle wasting and atrophy, muscle weakness, dysphagia, difficulty in walking, hypomagnesia, and depression. Review of 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 before2024-08-01 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were safely smoking. This affected one (Resident #48) of one resident observed for smoking. The facility census was 47. Findings include: Observation on 08/01/24 at 7:35 A.M. revealed Resident #48 outside of the facility at the end of the north hall smoking a cigarette unattended in a non-designated smoking area with no flame-retardant receptacle to extinguish smoking materials into. Concurrent observation on 08/01/24 at 7:35 A.M. of Resident #48 revealed Resident #48 extinguish their cigarette with their hand and place unused portion in their pocket. Observation on 08/01/24 at 7:53 A.M. of Resident #48 revealed a package of cigarettes in their left sock. Interview on 08/01/24 at 8:33 A.M. with the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed the facility is implementing a new smoking policy on 08/01/24, but the residents and staff have not been educated on it. Concurrent interview on 08/01/24 at 8:33 A.M. with the DON revealed Resident #48 has a locked drawer in his room to store his…
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 · F2022-02-18 · 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 review of staff schedules, staff on duty hours daily postings, staff timecards and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a Registered Nurse (RN) was on duty for eight hours a day seven days a week. This has the potential to affect 39 of 39 residents in the facility. The census is 39. Findings include: Review on 02/15/22 at 9:00 A.M., of the staff schedules for 02/12/22 revealed no RN was scheduled to work. Registered Nurse (RN) #56 was scheduled from 2:30 A.M. until 6:30 A.M. on 02/13/22. Further review of staff schedules for Sunday, 02/13/22 revealed one (RN) #39 scheduled from 6:30 A.M. until 12:30 P.M. Review of staff on duty hour postings on 02/15/22 at 9:05 A.M., revealed zero registered nurse hours on Saturday, 02/12/22 and six register nurse hours on Sunday, 02/13/22. Review of timecard on 02/16/22 at 8:48 A.M., for RN #56 revealed a clocked in at 2:58 A.M. on 02/13/22 and clocked out at 7:09 A.M. on 02/13/22 for a total of 4.08 hours. Review of timecard on 02/16/22 at 8:50 A.M., for RN #39 revealed a clocked in on 02/13/22 at 6:29 A.M. and clocked out at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2022-02-18 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, infection control log reviews and review of policies, the facility failed to store, prepare, and distribute foods in a safe, sanitary manner. This affected 38 of 38 residents who received food from the kitchen. The facility identified one (#36) resident had an order for nothing by mouth. The facility census was 39. Findings include: Observation on 02/14/22 at 9:26 A.M., revealed the reach-in refrigerator contained a container of chili dated 01/27/22, and a container of chili with meat dated 01/30/22, and an undated Styrofoam container of cupcakes. Interview at the time of the observation, with the [NAME] #60, confirmed the chili was beyond its use-by date and the cupcakes were undated. Observation on 02/14/22 at 9:31 A.M., revealed a box of sprouting and rotted red skinned potatoes in the dry storage area. Interview at the time of the observation, with the [NAME] #29, confirmed the potatoes were sprouting and rotted. Observation on 02/14/22 at approximately 9:34 A.M. revealed four and a half gallons of chocolate milk labeled best if used by…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2022-02-18 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of the facility Legionella Control Risk Management Plan, staff interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to monitor and implement control measures to prevent Legionella growth. This had the potential to affect 39 of 39 residents in the facility. The facility census was 39. Findings include: Review of the facility risk management plan for Legionella Control, updated 11/2021, revealed thee facility identified pipe work with low flow in several areas and would flush the areas weekly. Also, the facility would monitor the hot water system, measure the temperature weekly and make adjustments if the temperature was below 140 degrees Fahrenheit. Additionally sink basin and shower heads would be cleaned monthly of scale and lime build up to ensure proper water flow. Furthermore the facility would test the water system for colony forming units (CFUs) of Legionella per milliliter of water. Interview on 02/16/22 at 2:51 P.M., with the Administrator verified the facility had not been flushing water in low flow areas, and had not monitored water temperatures of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2022-02-18 · tag F0655 — patternCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on resident record review, resident interview, resident family interview, staff interview, and policy review; the facility failed to provide the resident/resident representative a written summary of the baseline care plan. This affected two (#338 and #36) of four residents reviewed for baseline care planning. The census was 39. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #338 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses include respiratory failure, diabetes mellitus type two, and hypertension. Review of the medical record for Resident #338 revealed a baseline care plan dated 01/26/22. The medical record contained no evidence of Resident #338 or of the resident's representative being provided a written summary of the baseline care plan. Review of an admission minimum data set (MDS) assessment target date 02/02/22, revealed Resident #338 had intact cognition. Interview on 02/14/22 at 9:53 A.M., with Resident #338 revealed the resident was not given a copy of 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 · E2022-02-18 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop 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 review of medical records, staff interview, family interviews, resident interviews and review of policy, the facility failed to revise care plans and failed to ensure residents/resident representatives were given the opportunity to participate in the care planning process. This affected five (#7, #32, #338, #36, #9) of 12 residents reviewed for care planning. The facility census was 39. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #7 had an admission date of 06/29/20. Diagnosis included multiple sclerosis, chronic pain syndrome and type two diabetes mellitus. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had intact cognition. Review of the care plan conference notes revealed the resident's last care conference meeting was completed 04/13/21. Interview on 02/17/22 at 9:11 A.M., Resident #7 revealed she had not been to a care plan meeting in a long time. Resident #7 revealed it was important to have the meeting to find out what is going…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2022-02-18 · tag F0800 — patternProvide each resident with a nourishing, palatable, well-balanced diet that meets his or her daily nutritional and special dietary needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interviews, review of dietary spreadsheets, and review of facility policies, the facility failed to prepare and serve pureed foods in a manner to maintain nutritional value. This affected five (#3, #4, #20, #28, and #287) of five residents on a pureed diet. The facility census was 39. Findings include: Observation on 02/15/22 at 11:04 A.M., revealed the [NAME] #60 placed five Salisbury steaks in a food processor and used an unknown amount of water to make pureed meat. Interview at that time of the observation, with the [NAME] #60, revealed there were six residents on a pureed diet, and he confirmed he used five Salisbury steaks, not one for each resident. Observation on 02/15/22 at approximately 11:35 A.M., revealed one resident on a pureed diet received double protein portions, and the [NAME] #60 provided two scoops of a two-ounce scoop of pureed Salisbury steak on the tray. Two additional residents were served one two-ounce scoop of pureed meat. Interview on 02/15/22 at 11:40 A.M., with the [NAME] #60 revealed he used a two-ounce scoop for the pureed…
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 before2022-02-18 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record reviews, observations, staff interviews and policy review, the facility failed to provide care in a manner to promote dignity. This affected two (#337 and #11) of 39 sampled residents. The facility census was 39. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #337 revealed an admission date of 02/10/22. Diagnoses for Resident #337 included spina bifida, pressure ulcer of right hip stage four, morbid (severe) obesity due to excess calories, hypertensive retinopathy, bilateral, type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic polyneuropathy, other chronic osteomyelitis, history of COVID-19, acquired absence of left leg below knee, and unspecified convulsions. Further review of the medical record revealed the Minimum Data Set (MDS) and the Comprehensive Care Plan had not been completed. Observation on 02/14/22 at 11:10 A.M., revealed Resident #337's catheter bag was uncovered with visible urine in the bag, the door was closed and not in view from the hallway. Observation on 02/15/22 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-02-18 · 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 observations, medical record resident and staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident was provided assistance with shaving. This affected one (#5) of three residents reviewed for assistance with activities of daily living (ADL). The census was 39. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #5 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses include arthropathy, disturbances of skin sensation, muscle weakness, hypertension. osteoarthritis, and lesion of the median nerve. Review of a care plan dated 02/21/20 revealed Resident #5 had an ADL self care deficit as evidenced by need for assistance related to inability to stand for any length of time secondary to bilateral leg weakness, decreased endurance, decreased activity tolerance, and limited range of motion in hands related to arthritis. Interventions include assist with daily hygiene, grooming, dressing, oral care, and eating as needed. Review of a quarterly minimum data set (MDS)…
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 · D2022-02-18 · 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, staff interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident received hydration per physician orders for tube feeding flushes. This affected one (#36) of one resident reviewed for hydration. The facility census was 39. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #36 revealed an admission date of 01/20/22 and medical diagnoses of cerebral infarction, type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, dysphagia, persistent vegetative state, and cognitive communication deficit. Review of the comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #36 was in a persistent vegetative state, required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, toileting, and personal hygiene, and was totally dependent for eating. Review of the physician orders for Resident #36 revealed an order dated 02/11/22 for enteral feed every shift for nutrition 80 milliliters (mL) per hour continuous infusion, flush with 40 mL per hour. Further review revealed a diet…
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 before2022-02-18 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview and review of the dialysis agreement, the facility failed to ensure communication to correlate care was provided by the dialysis clinic for residents receiving hemodialysis. This affected one (#9) of one resident reviewed for hemodialysis. The facility identified two residents on hemodialysis. The facility census was 39. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #9 revealed an admission date of 06/29/20 and medical diagnoses of end stage renal disease, type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, and dependence on renal dialysis. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #9 had intact cognition. Resident #9 required supervision with setup help only for transfers, walking, eating, toileting and hygiene. Review of the progress notes revealed no documentation the facility received updates from the dialysis clinic. Review of the hemodialysis communication book for Resident #9 revealed no communication sheets from 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 before2022-02-18 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on resident record review and staff interview, the facility failed ensure medication was timely administer as ordered by the physician. This affected one (#338) of six residents reviewed for unnecessary medication. The census was 39. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #338 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses include respiratory failure, Diabetes Mellitus type two, and hypertension. Review of the hospital discharge instructions dated 01/26/22, revealed the Resident #338 was admitted to the facility with orders to receive the following medication on 01/26/22: famotidine 20 milligram (mg) tablet at 9:00 P.M. and insulin glargine 35 units subcutaneous as directed. Review of the medical record for Resident #338 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] at approximately 4:20 P.M. Review of the medication administration record (MAR) dated January 2022, revealed an order for famotidine table 20 mg give one tablet by mouth every morning…
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 · D2022-02-18 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure as needed (PRN) psychotropic medications had a stop date after 14 days of use. This affected one (#13) of five sampled residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility identified 18 residents that receive psychotropic medications. The facility census was 39. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed an admission date of 12/09/20. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with acute exacerbation, emphysema, essential hypertension, anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, recurrent, urinary incontinence, and gastro-esophageal reflux disease without esophagitis. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #13 had moderate cognitive impairment. No behaviors were exhibited during the assessment period. Resident received antipsychotic, antianxiety, and opioids seven days during the assessment period and diuretics three days during 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 · F2019-06-06 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — widespreadEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to timely respond to a pharmacist recommendation for three residents (#5, #17 and #21). Furthermore, the facility failed to ensure the policy included the specific time frames for the steps of the Medication Regimen Review process. This had the potential to affect all 40 residents residing in the facility. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record of Resident #5 revealed an admission date of 11/01/06. Diagnoses included dementia with behavioral disturbance and type two diabetes mellitus. Review of the progress notes revealed a Medication Regimen Review Note dated 09/05/18. The note indicated an order indicated fasting blood sugar and hemoglobin A1C (a lab test that tells you the average level of blood sugar over the past two to three months) every six months in February and July. At the time of the review, a Hemoglobin A1C and fasting blood sugar could not be located in the clinical record. Please consider the recommendation to follow up with the lab and monitoring fasting blood sugar and Hemoglobin A1C…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2019-06-06 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, facility record review and review of facility policies, the facility failed to ensure appropriate kitchen sanitation and proper food storage. This had the potential to affect all 40 residents in the facility. The facility stated all residents ate food from the kitchen. Findings include: 1. Observation of the facility refrigerator with Dietary Manager (DM) #200 on 06/03/19 at 9:40 A.M. revealed unlabeled chopped turkey pieces in a clear zip top bag, one unlabeled plastic container of sweet potatoes, one unlabeled plastic container of coleslaw, one unlabeled plastic container of peach crisp, one unlabeled clear bag of cheese slices, and one opened zip bag of sliced turkey labeled 05/20/19. Dietary Manager #200 at time of the above observations verified these findings. She stated opened containers of food should be labeled and used within five days. Review of a facility policy titled Food Storage, dated 03/2017, revealed leftover food is stored in covered containers or wrapped carefully and securely. Each item is clearly labeled and dated before…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2019-06-06 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — patternEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and review of a facility dietary spreadsheet, the facility failed to ensure the dietary spreadsheet was followed as approved by the dietitian. This affected 13 residents (#1, #5, #7, #12, #21, #22, #24, #33, #37, #39, #42, #43 and #197) who received a regular meat entree and five residents (#1, #21, #23, #24, and #43) who received a puree diet. The facility census was 40. Findings include: 1. Observation of lunch service on 06/04/19 at 11:15 A.M. with Dietary Manager #200 revealed residents were served a very small chicken breast. Review of the facility spreadsheet revealed residents were to receive a four ounce chicken breast. Interview with Dietary Manager #200 at time of service revealed the chicken breast served was three ounces. She verified the dietary spreadsheet indicated a four ounce chicken breast for those who received the regular entrée. She stated she did not have a policy regarding following the dietary spreadsheet. Review of the facility's list of residents on a regular diet revealed Resident #1, #5, #7, #12, #21, #22, #24, #33,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2019-06-06 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, review of the infection control log, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to re-educate staff members when a trend of urinary tract infections was noted in 04/2019. This affected five residents (#14, #29, #35, #42 and #43). The facility census was 40. Findings include: Review of the medical record of Resident #14 revealed an admission date of 09/08/18. Review of the facility log for infections for 04/2019 revealed Resident #14 had an onset date of 04/01/19 and 04/30/19 with a urinary tract infection (UTI.) The form revealed the organisms to be Proteus Mirabilis and Escherichia coli. Review of the medical record of Resident #29 revealed an admission date of 03/11/19. Review of the facility log for infections for 04/2019 revealed Resident #29 had an onset date of 04/03/19 with a urinary tract infection (UTI.) The form revealed the organism to be Escherichia coli. Review of the medical record of Resident #35 revealed an admission date of 03/29/19. Review of the facility log for infections for 04/2019 revealed Resident #35 had an onset…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-06-06 · 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 medical record review, observation, staff interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to notify the physician of new pressure wounds for a resident. This affected one (Resident #35) of one resident reviewed for physician notification. The facility census was 40. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #35 revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted [DATE]. Diagnoses included chronic kidney disease, diabetes, hypertension, anemia and urinary tract infection. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 04/05/19, revealed she was cognitively impaired and was not interviewable. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #35 had pressure wounds at her right heel, left heel and left ischium. There was no documentation of any wounds on Resident #35's coccyx. Review of the physician order dated 05/01/19 revealed to apply barrier cream to coccyx twice daily and as needed. Interview on 06/04/19 at 1:13 P.M. with Licensed Practical…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-06-06 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
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 facility policy review, the facility failed to issue a bed hold notice to a resident. This affected one (Resident #44) of one resident reviewed for hospitalization. The facility census was 40. Findings include: Review of the medical record of Resident #44 revealed an admission date of 01/14/19 and a discharge date of 04/05/19. Diagnoses included obstructive and reflux uropathy, dementia, hypertension, atrial fibrillation and presence of automatic cardiac defibrillator. Review of the progress notes, dated 04/05/19 at 4:18 A.M., revealed Resident #44 had a change in condition with heart rate of 136 beats per minute, respirations of 43 breaths per minute, a temperature of 102.6 degrees Fahrenheit and a low peripheral capillary oxygen saturation. Resident #44 was not responding as was normal for him. The doctor was notified and an order was received to send Resident #44 to the emergency room for an evaluation. Resident #44's wife was notified and apprised of 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 before2019-06-06 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide care and treatment of new pressure wounds for a resident. This affected one (Resident #35) of three residents reviewed for pressure wounds. The facility identified four residents with pressure ulcer wounds. The facility census was 40. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #35 revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted [DATE]. Diagnoses included chronic kidney disease, diabetes, hypertension, anemia and urinary tract infection. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 04/05/19, revealed she was cognitively impaired and was not interviewable. The resident required extensive assistance of two staff with her activities of daily living. Review of the Braden Scale for Predicting Pressure Sore Risk, dated 03/30/19, revealed she was at moderate risk of developing pressure wounds. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #35 had…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-06-06 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff and resident interview, and review of a facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a resident's respiratory equipment was properly maintained. This affected one (Resident #40) of two residents reviewed for respiratory care. The facility identified 17 residents receiving oxygen and/or nebulizer therapy. The facility census was 40. Findings include: Review of Resident #40's medical record revealed an admission date of 10/01/17. Medical diagnoses included myocardial infarction, pleurisy, acute bronchitis, acute respiratory failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and polyneuropathy. Review of the resident's physician's order revealed an order dated 03/18/19 for oxygen at three liters per minute via nasal cannula continuously. Observation of the resident on 06/03/19 at 10:43 A.M. revealed her nebulizer and oxygen tubing were both labeled with a piece of tape marked 04/19/19. Interview with Resident #40 on 06/03/19 at 10:43 A.M. revealed the staff only change her oxygen and nebulizer tubing when she requests it. Interview with Registered Nurse #230…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-06-06 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to administer medication as directed by the physician for a resident. This affected one (Resident #21) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 40. Findings include: Review of the medical record of Resident #21 revealed an admission date of 11/08/11 and a readmission date of 12/29/11. Diagnoses included intracranial injury without loss of consciousness, Alzheimer's disease, anxiety, unspecified psychosis, unspecified dementia with behavioral disturbances. peripheral vascular disease, tremor, hyperlipidemia, major depressive disorder and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 04/08/19, revealed the resident was severely cognitively impaired. Review of the physician orders dated 01/23/19 revealed an order for gentamicin eye drops three milligrams per milliliter to be administered one to two drops in each eye twice daily for 14 days. Review of the medication administration record (MAR) for 01/2019 revealed the medication…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · C2022-02-18 · tag F0570 — widespreadAssure the security of all personal funds of residents deposited with the facility.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on review of resident funds, review of surety bond, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure the amount of the surety bond was equal to or greater than the total amount of resident funds. This affected affect 12 (#4, #7, #8, #13, #18, #19, #20, #24, #29, #31, #32, #33) residents with current accounts and had the potential to affect all residents. Facility census was 39. Findings include: Review of resident funds on 02/14/22 at 4:15 P.M., revealed a total account balance of $28,460.30 for twelve residents (#4, #7, #8, #13, #18, #19, #20, #24, #29, #31, #32, #33). Review of the surety bond on 02/14/22 at 4:25 P.M., revealed a surety bond in the amount of $25,000.00. Interview on 02/14/22 at 4:26 P.M., with the Business Office Manager #4 verified the current total amount of resident funds was $28,460.30 with a surety bond amount of $25,000.00. The Business Office Manager #4 further added she knew the surety bond must be greater than the current total amount of resident funds.
- No harm found · C2022-02-18 · tag F0732 — widespreadPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of staff schedules, staff on duty hours daily postings, staff timecards and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure the staffing information posted on the staff on duty hours was accurately reported. This has the potential to affect 39 of 39 residents in the facility. The census is 39. Findings include: Review on 02/15/22 at 9:00 A.M., of the staff schedules for 02/12/22 revealed no Registered Nurse (RN) was scheduled to work. (RN) #56 was scheduled from 2:30 A.M. until 6:30 A.M. on 02/13/22. Further review of staff schedules for Sunday, 02/13/22 revealed one (RN) #39 scheduled from 6:30 A.M. until 12:30 P.M. Review of staff on duty hour postings on 02/15/22 at 9:05 A.M., revealed zero registered nurse hours on Saturday, 02/12/22 and six register nurse hours on Sunday, 02/13/22. Review of timecard on 02/16/22 at 8:48 A.M., for RN #56 revealed a clocked in at 2:58 A.M. on 02/13/22 and clocked out at 7:09 A.M. on 02/13/22 for a total of 4.08 hours. Review of timecard on 02/16/22 at 8:50 A.M., for RN #39 revealed a clocked in on 02/13/22 at 6:29 A.M. and clocked…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · C2022-02-18 · tag F0838 — failed to assess facility resources and resident needs — widespreadConduct and document a facility-wide assessment to determine what resources are necessary to care for residents competently during both day-to-day operations (including nights and weekends) and emergencies.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to annually review and update the facility assessment to determine what resources are necessary to care for its residents. This had the potential to affect 39 of 39 residents in the facility. The facility census was 39. Findings include: Review of the facility assessment revealed it had not been reviewed or updated since 10/29/18. Interview on 02/17/22 at 11:35 A.M., with the Administrator verified the facility had not conducted a review or update of the facility assessment since 10/29/18.
“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.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to AYDEN HEALTHCARE — 11 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 3 of 5 | 2.1 | +0.9 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 1.9 | +0.1 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 1.8 | +2.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.5 | +0.5 vs chain |
The other 10 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.1★, 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 / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BUCKEYE FAMILY TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | 51% | since 12/31/2025 |
| ASCHENDORF, JONATHAN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2023 |
| KAPLAN, YISROEL | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 12/31/2021 |
| DUNLAP, KIM | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/12/2024 |
| KAYYALI, AMMAR | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/01/2021 |
| LAHASKY, EPHRAM | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 12/31/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 12 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
1 organizational owner 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 79% 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 $372K 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 365330. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-08-22, 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.