Glendora Health Care Center
1552 North Honeytown Road, Wooster, OH 44691 · For profit - Corporation · 49 certified beds · (330) 264-0912 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited May 2026
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (37) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $17,080 in federal fines (most recent 2024-07-03)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (68%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- about 19% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
- 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 | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 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 — 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 | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 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 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 10.7% | 5.3% | 15.4% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.0% | 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 | 1.4% | 0.4% | 2.0% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 71.8% | 30.1% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 4.3% | 3.2% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 9.1% | 6.1% | 16.1% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 37.9% | 25.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.3% | 94.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.6% | 3.4% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 19.1% | 21.4% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 18.1% | 8.8% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 76.0% | 75.6% | 79.4% | typical |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.14 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 11% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 7% 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 49 beds and averages 36.2 residents a day — about 74% occupied, or roughly 13 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.34 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.56 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.76 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 3.20 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.40 on weekdays — 6% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.61 to 0.44 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 68% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
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.
37 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 26 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-07-03 · 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, medical record review, review of a facility investigation, facility fall policy review, facility assessment review and interviews, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to Resident #1, who had a diagnosis of dementia with intermittent confusion and resided on the facility secured memory care unit on 06/08/24 to prevent a fall into a shallow pond outside the facility. This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy and actual harm on 06/08/24 when Resident #1 was unattended/unsupervised outside and fell into a pond. Upon assessment, the resident's hair and clothing were wet and she was observed to be coughing. The resident was subsequently transferred to the hospital for evaluation and treatment of aspiration (of pond water). Resident #1 returned from the hospital with an order for an antibiotic. Following the incident, Resident #1 also had emesis that looked like pond water per the nurse. The lack of supervision, at the time of the incident placed Resident #1 at risk for additional…
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 · D2026-05-12 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the medical record, interview with the staff, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure the mail was delivered daily to Resident #1. This affected one resident (#1) out of three residents reviewed for resident rights; however it had the potential to affect all the residents in the facility. The facility census was 41.Findings Include:Review of the medical record revealed Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included borderline personality disorder, schizoaffective disorder bipolar type, asthma, obstructive sleep apnea, hypertension, obsessive compulsive disorder, insomnia, and anxiety disorder. Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #1 had intact cognition and no behaviors.On 05/07/26 at 10:15 A.M, an interview with the Administrator verified the mail was passed out to the residents by the activity department. She stated Business Office Manager (BOM) #62 worked Monday, Wednesday and Friday at the other…
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 before2026-05-12 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY THE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCY REPRESENTS AN INCIDENT OF PAST NON-COMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY.Based on review of the medical record, review of the Self-Reported Incident, review of facility policy, and interview with staff, the facility failed to protect Resident #27 from abuse and video recording by an agency staff member. This affected one resident (#27) of three reviewed for abuse.Findings Include:Review of the medical record revealed Resident #27 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included diabetes, hypertension, depression, heart failure, mild dementia, neuropathy, major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, and hyperlipidemia. The resident resided on the [NAME] Hall. Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #27 had intact cognition and had physical and verbal behaviors towards others.Review of the plan of care dated 08/08/25 with a revision date of 03/18/26 revealed Resident #27 had a behavior problem, chooses to use…
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 · E2026-03-19 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed ensure the resident's received the proper portion size on the diet tickets. This affected Resident #20 and had the potential to affect eight other residents who were to receive ground chicken salad for the meal. The facility census was 38.Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #20 revealed an admission date of 5/28/25. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease and diabetes mellitus.Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #20 was moderately cognitively impaired and required set up assistance from staff for eating.Review of the physician's orders for March 2026 revealed Resident #20 was ordered a regular diet with dysphasia advanced texture and thin consistency liquids.Observation of lunch tray line service on 03/19/26 at 12:15 P.M. revealed Resident #20's meal ticket stated she was supposed to get ground chicken salad utilizing #10 scoop (3.75 ounce). [NAME] #107 plated…
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 before2025-02-12 · 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
Based on observation, interview and facility policy review the facility failed to properly label and store frozen food items in the facility kitchen. This deficient practice had the potential of affecting all residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 36. Findings Include: An observation during the initial kitchen tour on 02/10/25 from 12:40 P.M. to 12:55 P.M. revealed a plastic bag with 10 frozen pork fritters sitting on top of a cardboard box on the second shelf of the freezer. The plastic bag had no date when it had been opened and/or placed in the freezer. The bag was not sealed but loosely wrapped. An interview on 02/10/25 at 12:50 P.M. with [NAME] #218 confirmed the wrapped up open plastic bag with 10 frozen pork fritters was not dated when it had been opened and/or placed in the freezer. [NAME] #218 removed the opened bag of pork fritters and discarded them in the garbage pail. [NAME] #218 stated the bag should have been closed securely and a date should have been placed on the bag to reflect when the bag had been opened. A review of the facility's policy…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-12 · 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 medical record review, observation, interview and facility policy review the facility failed to properly maintain breathing treatment (nebulizer) tubing and medication delivery device (mask) by not changing, cleaning and securing in a bag prior to and following administration of medication. This deficient practice affected two residents (Residents #22 and #23) of two residents reviewed for respiratory care. The facility census was 36. Findings Include: 1. A review of Resident #22's medical record revealed the initial admission date of 07/24/24 and a re-admission date of 10/15/24 with diagnoses including but not limited to opioid abuse, acute respiratory infection, anxiety and shortness of breath. Resident #22 had impaired cognition with a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 11 out of a possible 15 dated 12/18/24. Resident #22 required staff assistance with activities of daily living (ADL) tasks including medication administration. A review of Resident #22's at risk for respiratory status/difficulty breathing care plan dated 08/16/24 revealed an intervention for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-09-24 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — widespreadEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to store and monitor medications in a safe manner. This had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 36. Findings include: 1. Observation on [DATE] at 3:43 P.M. with the Director of Nursing (DON) of the west medication storage room revealed two boxes (100 per box) of bisacodyl (10 milligram) suppositories. Each partially used box had an expiration date of 06/2024. The DON confirmed the suppositories were a stock medication for residents as needed and they were expired. Observation of the refrigerator revealed multiple boxes of influenza vaccines (stock), six tuberculin vials (stock) 28 haldol injections vials and multiple resident insulin pens. 2. Record review of the refrigerator temperature log for [DATE] for the [NAME] medication room revealed the refrigerator temperature were not monitored for the A.M. or P.M. on [DATE] or [DATE]. The temperature was also not monitored for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-09-24 · 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, interview, review of the temperature logs, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure food items were stored and labeled appropriately, refrigerator temperatures were monitored and recorded, and spoiled foods were discarded appropriately. This had the potential to affect all 36 residents in the facility. Findings include: 1. On 09/15/24 at 9:41 A.M., during the initial tour of the kitchen, the following were observed in the dry storage room: one opened bag of raspberry gelatin mix with no label indicating the open date, one open bag of dry pasta unsealed and with no label indicating the open date, one open bag of dry pasta with a paperclip holding it closed and no label indicating the open date, two plastic storage containers labeled bread crumbs with no label indicating the open date, and one unopened bag of rolls on the bread rack with visible green mold. These observations were verified by [NAME] #127 at the time of observation. 2. On 09/16/24 at 10:40 A.M., an observation of the refrigerator in the nurse's station on the [NAME] unit…
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 before2024-09-24 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to maintain infection control practices to include Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for six residents, Resident #5, #8, #9, #12, #27, and #187 of six residents reviewed for EBP and the facility failed to ensure infection control practices were maintained during laundry services which had the potential to affect all 36 residents residing at the facility and the facility failed to disinfect the glucometer used to assess Resident #138's blood sugar prior to and after use. This affected one resident, Resident #138 of one resident reviewed for blood sugar assessments. The facility census was 36. Findings include: 1. Record review for Resident #12 revealed an admission date of 08/04/24. Diagnosis included colostomy status, personal history of malignant neoplasm of large intestine, and need for assistants with personal care. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #12 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 before2024-09-24 · 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
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain comfortable temperatures on the [NAME] unit and South unit and failed to maintain resident equipment in good repair. This affected three residents (#6, #22, and #24) of three reviewed for environment The facility census was 36. Findings include: 1.On 09/15/24 at 12:36 P.M., Residents #6, #22, and #24 were observed sitting in the common area by the [NAME] unit nurses station and they all stated it was freezing in the facility and they requested blankets. On 09/15/24 at 12:46 P.M., an interview with State Tested Nurse Aide (STNA) #125 confirmed it felt cold on the [NAME] unit and STNA #125 had to obtain blankets for Residents #6, #22, and #24. On 09/15/24 at 12:50 P.M., an observation of facility air temperatures with Housekeeping Supervisor #156 revealed the temperature of the [NAME] unit common area by the nurses station was 70 degrees Fahrenheit (F). Further observations of air temperatures throughout the facility revealed the hallway of the South unit was 69 degrees F and spot checks of resident rooms on the South…
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 · E2024-09-24 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — patternProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
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, interview, activity calendar review, activity director job description review and record review, the facility failed to provide individualized activities in accordance with assessments for five residents (#9, #12, #22, #27, and #32) of six residents reviewed for activities. The facility census was 36. Findings include: 1. Record review for Resident #9 revealed an admission date of 02/26/24. Diagnosis included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting right dominant side. Aphasia following cerebral infarction, cognitive communication deficit and need for assistants with personal care. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #9 was cognitively intact. The resident had impairment on both sides of the upper and lower extremities and required assistants for all activities of daily living (ADL). Review of the care plan dated 08/09/24 for Resident #9 included the resident had little or no group activity involvement related…
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 26 citations
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-09-24 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — patternImplement 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, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure psychotropic medications were only administered when needed, failed to ensure approval for gradual dose reductions were addressed in a timely manner, and failed to ensure monitoring of target symptoms were documented. This affected three (Residents #10, #21 and #27) of five residents whose records were reviewed for medication use. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #10's medical record revealed diagnoses including schizoaffective disorder (bipolar type), affective mood disorder, mild cognitive impairment, anxiety disorder, dementia with mood disorder, and depression. A significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #10 was usually able to make herself understood and was usually able to understand others. The memory/cognitive skills were not assessed. The MDS indicated Resident #10 had exhibited behavioral symptoms not directed toward others one to three days. The behaviors pur…
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 · E2024-09-24 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — patternMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure call lights were in place in three restrooms that were available for resident's use. This had the potential to affect seven residents, Resident #2, #3, #6, #15, #19, #28, and #30 who were identified by the facility as independent with mobility and transfers. The facility census was 36. Findings include: Observation on 09/15/24 at 9:11 A.M. revealed two restrooms located near the middle of the extended hall open to residents with a vending machine for Resident use at the end of the hall. A third restroom was located on the [NAME] residential hall. All three restrooms were identified as male or female restrooms and was wheelchair accessible, no further information was posted on the doors. Multiple observations from 09/15/24 through 09/19/24 revealed all three restrooms were unlocked at all times except when in use and none had a call system in place. Observation and interview on 09/19/24 at 8:32 A.M. with Maintenance Director #116 verified all three restrooms were kept unlocked at all…
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 · D2024-09-24 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's code status was consistent amongst documents. This affected one (Resident #21) of 16 residents reviewed for advanced directives. Findings include: Review of Resident #21's medical record revealed diagnoses including vascular dementia, basal cell carcinoma of the skin, chronic kidney disease, hypertension, cerebrovascular disease and anxiety disorder. Review of a signed Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) form dated 10/06/23 revealed the option of Do Not Resuscitate Comfort Care (DNRCC) was chosen and was effective immediately. Review of Resident #21's electronic health record revealed a heading with a code status of Do Not Resuscitate Comfort Care Arrest (DNRCC-A) (allows for the use of life-saving measures before cardiac or respiratory arrest, but only comfort care after). Review of the facility's report sheet revealed code status was indicated on the report sheets. Resident #21's code status was listed as DNRCC-A. Review of 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 · D2024-09-24 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on medical record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents and their representatives were provided a summary of the baseline care plan. This affected one (Resident #32) of four residents reviewed for baseline care plans. Findings include: Review of Resident #32's medical record revealed diagnoses including epilepsy, depression, delirium, dementia, and mood disorder. Resident #32 was admitted to the facility 05/10/24. No baseline care plan was located. On 09/18/24 at 11:48 A.M., the Administrator verified she was unable to find a baseline care plan or evidence a summary of a baseline care plan was provided to the resident/representative. The Administrator stated she would have the Director of Nursing search to determine if there was one located elsewhere. On 09/18/24 at 1:26 P.M., the Administrator provided Resident #32's baseline care plan but no evidence a summary was provided to Resident #32 and his representative.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-24 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure individualized care plans were developed for two (Residents #1 and #6) of 14 residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans. The facility census was 36. Findings include: Record review for Resident #1 revealed an admission date of 06/24/22. Diagnosis included pneumonitis due to inhalation of food and vomit. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #1 was moderately cognitively impaired. Resident #1 required set up or clean up assistants with meals. Review of the physician orders for Resident #1 revealed an order dated 05/21/24 for Heart Healthy diet, pureed texture, nectar consistency, Resident may request thin water 30 minutes after oral (PO) intake. No thin water with PO intake for aspiration precaution. Review of the care plan updated 04/09/24 revealed Resident #1 was at nutritional risk. Interventions included to provide the diet as ordered. The care plan did not include nectar thickened…
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 · D2024-09-24 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop 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 record review and interview, the facility failed ensure care plan revision for one resident, Resident #34 to reflect current functional abilities and weight bearing status. This affected one resident (Resident #34) of three residents reviewed for care plan revision. The facility census was 36. Findings include: Record review for Resident #34 revealed an admission date of 07/24/24. Diagnosis include fracture of the right femur, fracture of the shaft of the right tibia, fracture of shaft of right fibula, presence of right artificial wrist joint, displaced fracture of the shaft of first metacarpal bone, left hand. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #34 was cognitively intact. Resident #34 had impairment on both sides, upper and lower extremities. The resident used a wheelchair for mobility, was dependent for all activities of daily living (ADL) including eating, toileting, upper and lower body dressing, personal hygiene, sit to lying, lying to sit, and showers.…
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 before2024-09-24 · 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 observations, medical record review, and interview, the facility failed to implement fall interventions per resident care plans for one (Resident #12) of three residents reviewed for accidents. The facility also failed to ensure one resident, Resident #1 received thickened liquids as ordered. This affected one resident, Resident #1, of three residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility census was 36. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #12's medical record revealed diagnoses including atherosclerotic heart disease, hypertension, history of falling, depression, visual loss in both eyes, mild dementia, generalized muscle weakness and abnormalities of gait and mobility. Review of a care plan initiated 08/05/24 revealed Resident #12 was at risk for falls related to confusion and lack of awareness of safety needs. An intervention was initiated for a fall mat to the exit side of the bed and to verify placement. On 08/23/24 an order was written for a fall mat to the exit side of bed and to verify…
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 before2024-09-24 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure 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, review of pharmacy recommendations, policy review and interview, the facility failed to ensure all pharmacy recommendations were addressed by physicians. This affected one (Resident #27) of five residents reviewed for medication use. Findings include: Review of Resident #27's medical record revealed diagnoses including dementia with behavioral disturbance, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, heart disease, presence of coronary angioplasty implant and graft, anemia, anxiety disorder, restlessness and agitation. Review of a medication regimen review dated 09/22/23 revealed Resident #27 was receiving two antipsychotic medications, olanzapine and risperidone. The pharmacist asked for a diagnosis to support use. The pharmacist also indicated the medical record indicated the olanzapine and risperidone were used for psychosis and asked if the physician would consider discontinuing one of the medications to avoid duplicative therapy. The response dated 09/29/23 had a notation to change the diagnosis to dementia. The request regarding considering discontinuing one…
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 · D2024-09-24 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, review of physician orders, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered in accordance with physician orders and policy. This affected two (Residents #15 and #138) of seven residents observed receiving medication. Two errors of 30 opportunities for error were identified resulting in a medication error rate of 6.6%. Findings include: 1. On 09/15/24 at 9:00 A.M., Registered Nurse (RN) #109 was observed administering medication to Resident #15. Among medication administered was colace (stool softener) 100 milligrams (mg). Review of Resident #15's physician orders revealed no order for colace 100 mg. There was an order dated 10/04/23 for two sennosides-docusate sodium 8.6-50 mg to be administered every morning for constipation that was not observed to be administered. On 09/15/24 at 12:40 P.M., RN #109 verified she had administered colace instead of sennosides-docusate as ordered. Review of the facility's Medication Administration policy (implementation date not recorded) revealed instructions to ensure the right drug…
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 · D2024-09-24 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — isolatedImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, review of infection surveillance records, policy review and interview, the facility failed to address use of a prophylactic antibiotic for a resident with recent use of multiple antibiotics. This affected one (Resident #27) of five residents revealed for medication use. Findings include: Review of Resident #27's medical record revealed diagnoses including dementia with behavioral disturbance, benign prostatic hypertrophy (BPH), neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder and heart disease. Review of physician orders since admission on [DATE] revealed the following orders for antibiotics: 02/16/24: cipro 500 milligrams (mg) twice a day for ten days for a urinary tract infection (UTI) 04/07/24: bactrim DS 800-160 mg every 12 hours for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) with lower urinary tract symptoms for seven days 04/10/24 nitrofurantoin 100 mg twice a day for seven days for infection in the urine 04/12/24 nitrofurantoin 100 mg twice a day for urinary tract infection for seven days…
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 · E2024-07-03 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — patternProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to maintain sufficient levels of staff on the secured care unit to meet the supervisory and total care needs of all residents. This affected two residents (#1 and #2) and had the potential to affect the 11 residents residing on the facility secured memory care unit. Findings include: On 07/01/24 at 8:11 A.M. the surveyor entered the facility to conduct the complaint investigation. There were two licensed nurses and three State Tested Nursing Assistants (STNA) on duty to provide care for 33 residents currently residing in the facility. Eleven of the resident's resided on the memory care unit. Staffing on the memory care unit included one Registered Nurse (RN) and one STNA. Review of the facility staffing schedules and assignment sheets from May and June, through 06/27/24 revealed the facility only staffed one nurse on the secured memory care unit, with no other assigned/dedicated staff. Interview on 07/01/24 at 8:31 A.M. with STNA #120 revealed…
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 before2023-11-07 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and policy review, the facility failed that kitchen staff wore hair restraints while serving food and in the kitchen. This had the potential to affect all 30 residents who received food from the facility. No residents were identified as receiving nothing by mouth (NPO). The facility census was 30. Findings include: Observation on 11/06/23 at 8:02 A.M. revealed that [NAME] #114 was serving food without a hair restraint or beard net on and Dietary Manager #112 was walking in front of the steamtable with her hair not in a hair restraint. DM #112 and [NAME] #114 stated that they should have been wearing hair nets. Interview on 11/07/23 at 8:17 A.M. with Dietary Manager revealed that staff forgets to wear hairnets because they have so much to do in the morning like roll silverware. Review of the undated facility policy titled, Maintaining a Sanitary Tray Line, revealed that staff should wear hair restraints.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-11-07 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interview and facility policy, the facility failed to ensure that Resident #33 was free from verbal abuse. This affected one resident (Resident #33) out of five residents reviewed for abuse. This had the potential to affect all 30 residents that resided in the facility. The facility census was 30. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #33 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 11/02/23. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment was not completed. Review of the admission assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #33 was oriented to person, place, time, and orientation. Review of the concern form dated 11/02/23 revealed family of Resident #33 alleged that on 11/01/23 State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #108 was a kind of rough and rude. The investigation portion of concern on the form revealed Director of Nursing (DON) met with STNA #108 and discussed the incident. STNA #108 confirmed that she had a bad day, didn't perform…
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 · D2023-11-07 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview and facility policy, the facility failed to implement its abuse policy to appropriately protect Resident #33 from verbal abuse. This affected one resident (Resident #33) out of five residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 30. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #33 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 11/02/23. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment was not completed. Review of the admission assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #33 was oriented to person, place, time, and orientation. Review of the concern form dated 11/02/23 revealed family of Resident #33 alleged that on 11/01/23 State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #108 was a kind of rough and rude. The investigation portion of concern on the form revealed Director of Nursing (DON) met with STNA #108 and discussed the incident. STNA #108 confirmed that she had a bad day, didn't perform her best and admitted to being rude to staff…
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 · D2023-11-07 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interview and facility policy, the facility failed to complete an investigation of an allegation of verbal abuse. This affected one resident (Resident #33) out of five residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 30. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #33 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 11/02/23. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment was not completed. Review of the admission assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #33 was oriented to person, place, time, and orientation. Review of the concern form dated 11/02/23 revealed family of Resident #33 alleged that on 11/01/23 State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #108 was kind of rough and rude. The investigation portion of concern on the form revealed Director of Nursing (DON) met with STNA #108 and discussed the incident. STNA #108 confirmed that she had a bad day, didn't perform her best and admitted to being rude to staff and residents. Further review…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-11-21 · 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
Based on observation and interview the facility failed to properly maintain comfortable temperatures throughout the facility. This affected eleven residents (Residents #16, #19, #20, #23, #26, #31, #34, #37, #40, #95 and #96) residing on the memory care as well as ten (Residents #2, #10, #18, #21, #32, #35, #38, #93 #94, and #193) outside of the memory care unit. The facility census was 39. Findings include: 1. Observation of the memory care unit on 11/14/22 beginning at 9:11 A.M. revealed Residents #16 and #19's room was cold. State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #654 confirmed the room was cold and stated the unit had been cold for a few days when she was present. Observation of thermostat outside of the resident's room revealed a reading of 65 degrees Fahrenheit (F). Residents #16 and #19 were not interviewable. Further interview with STNA #654 revealed the shower room was also cold and she was running the hot water in an attempt to heat it up prior to giving Resident #96 a shower. Observation at time of interview revealed the shower room was cold and there was hot water…
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 · E2022-11-21 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted 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, record review, and interview the facility failed to ensure resident records were accurate. This affected four residents (Resident #6, Resident #11, Resident #39, and Resident #144) of 20 residents whose medical records were reviewed for accuracy. The facility census was 39. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #6 had an admission date of 09/04/20 with diagnoses including schizophrenia, type II diabetes, heart failure and metabolic encephalopathy. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had moderate cognitive impairment. Functionally, she required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toilet use, and personal hygiene. Review of the fall risk assessment dated [DATE] stated Resident #6's last fall occurred on 04/03/33. This was inaccurate as the resident had a fall on 06/11/22. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 11/16/22 1:30 P.M. verified the above finding. 2. Review…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-11-21 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure resident assessments were accurate. This affected one resident (Resident #144) of 16 residents (Resident #1, Resident #4, Resident #6, Resident #11, Resident #12, Resident #16, Resident #19, Resident #29, Resident #32, Resident #33, Resident #34, Resident #38, Resident #39, Resident #40, Resident #96 and Resident #97) reviewed for accuracy of assessments. The facility census was 39. Findings include: Medical Record review for Resident #144 revealed an admission date of 10/26/22 with diagnoses including osteomyelitis of the left ankle and foot, Type II diabetes, depression, and chronic respiratory failure. The comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #144 had impaired cognition and required extensive assistance for mobility and total assistance with transfers. Resident #144 had no falls in the past 90 days. Review of the nurses note dated 10/26/22 at 3:10 P.M. revealed Resident #144 was admitted to 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 before2022-11-21 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure resident care plans were comprehensive. This affected two residents (Resident #6, and Resident#11) of 16 residents (Resident #1, Resident #4, Resident #12, Resident #16, Resident #19, Resident #29, Resident #32, Resident #33, Resident #34, Resident #38, Resident #39, Resident #40, Resident #96, and Resident #97) whose care plans were reviewed. The facility census was 39. Findings Include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #6 had an admission date of 09/04/20 with diagnoses including schizophrenia, type II diabetes, heart failure, bipolar disorder, and metabolic encephalopathy. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #6 had moderate cognitive impairment. Resident #6 required extensive assistance of two staff for most activities of daily living including, bed mobility, dressing, toilet use, and personal hygiene. Review of Resident #6's physician orders revealed on 10/27/22 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 · D2022-11-21 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure antibiotic treatment was administered in a timely manner and failed to ensure a physician's order was updated and canceled timely when it no longer pertained to the resident. This affected one resident (Resident #40) of three reviewed for antibiotic treatment and one resident, (Resident #11) of 19 residents reviewed for accuracy of physician orders. The facility census was 39. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #40's medical records revealed an admission date of 08/19/22 with diagnoses including dementia and schizophrenia. Review of laboratory results dated [DATE] revealed Resident #40 had a urine specimen collected on 09/25/22 and the results were reported on 09/28/22. Further review revealed the results were faxed to the physician on 09/30/22 at 2:29 P.M. Urine results were reported Resident #40 was positive for a Escherichia coli (E-coli) (bacterial infection). Review of the progress note dated 09/30/22 at 2:41 P.M. authored by Licensed…
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 before2022-11-21 · 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, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure fall risk assessments were accurate, failed to ensure fall investigations were complete and thorough, and failed to ensure fall mats were in place. This affected three residents (Resident #6, Resident #19, and Resident #144) of four resident's reviewed for accidents. The facility census was 39. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #6 had an admission date of 09/04/20 with diagnoses including schizophrenia, type II diabetes, heart failure, bipolar disorder, and metabolic encephalopathy. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #6 had moderate cognitive impairment. Resident #6 required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, dressing, toilet use, and personal hygiene. Review of the fall risk scores dated 04/03/22 and 08/14/22 state Resident #6 had no falls; however, the resident had falls on 04/03/22 and 06/11/22. Review of Resident #6's fall…
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 · D2022-11-21 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolatedEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to ensure State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #657 was adequately trained to apply a resident's splint. This affected one resident (Resident #11) of three residents who were ordered a splint. The facility census was 39. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including cerebral infarction, type II diabetes, depression, hemiplegia, and dysphagia. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #11 had severe cognitive impairment. She was totally dependent on two staff members for toileting and personal hygiene. For bed mobility, dressing, and eating Resident #11 required extensive assistance of two staff. Observation on 11/15/22 at 7:30 A.M. revealed STNA #657 got Resident #11 changed and dressed for the day. When STNA #657 was asked about her arm splint, STNA #657 stated she did not know if Resident #11 wore an arm splint.…
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 before2022-11-21 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure the rationale for why a gradual dose reduction was not approved was documented in the physician's notes. This affected one resident (Resident #6) of five residents (Resident #1, Resident #34, Resident #40, and Resident #144) reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 39. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #6 had an admission date of 09/04/20 with diagnoses including schizophrenia, type II diabetes, heart failure, bipolar disorder, and metabolic encephalopathy. Review of this resident's Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #6 had moderate cognitive impairment. She required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, dressing, toilet use, and personal hygiene. Review of the physician orders revealed on 08/15/21 Resident #6 was ordered trazodone 50 milligrams (mg) (antidepressant and sedative) at bedtime for insomnia. This order was still in effect today. Review…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-11-21 · 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 record review and interview the facility failed to ensure psychotropic medications were only ordered with an appropriate diagnosis. This effected one (Resident #144) of five residents reviewed for psychotropic medications. The facility census was 39. Finding include: Medical record review for Resident #144 revealed an admission date of 10/26/22 with diagnoses including osteomyelitis of the left ankle and foot, type II diabetes, depression, chronic respiratory failure, heart failure, and anemia. There was no diagnoses for anxiety or insomnia. The comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #144 had intact cognition and behaviors. The resident rejected evaluations and had wandering behaviors that had gotten worse. Review of the physician orders for November 2022 revealed orders for scheduled lorazepam one milligram (mg) for anxiety at bedtime. Trazodone 100 mg was scheduled at bedtime for insomnia. Interview on 11/17/22 at 2:30 P.M. with the Director of Nursing (DON)…
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 before2022-11-21 · 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 observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure proper hand hygiene was maintained during a wound dressing change. This affected one resident (Resident #144) of two residents reviewed for wound care. The facility census was 39. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #144 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses included osteomyelitis, type II diabetes, chronic respiratory failure, and atherosclerotic heart disease. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #144 was cognitively intact. The resident rejected evaluations and had wandering behaviors that had gotten worse. Review of the plan of care dated 11/16/22 revealed Resident #144 had potential for skin impairment related to osteomyelitis, diabetes, and incontinence of bowel and bladder. Interventions included: educate the resident on causative factors and measures to promote and maintain skin integrity; observe the resident's skin and keep clean and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-10-09 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor 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 observation, record review and interview the facility failed to provide a clean, comfortable and homelike environment for all residents. This affected three residents (#12, #32 and #136) of 16 residents whose rooms were observed. The facility census was 35. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #136's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of morbid obesity, high blood pressure, major depression and subdural hemorrhage. An admission assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was alert and oriented, and required two staff assistance for transfers and was continent of bowel and bladder. An interview and observation on 10/06/19 at 9:32 A.M. with Resident #136 and her family member revealed concerns that the bathroom was not clean and it did not feel homelike in their opinion. An observation with the family member revealed black particles floating in the commode water, a black caked substance inside the commode tank, yellow discolored floor/tiles, and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“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
$17,080 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $17,080 — penalty dated 2024-07-03
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to DIVINE HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT — 9 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 | 1 of 5 | 2.0 | -1.0 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 1.4 | -0.4 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 1.9 | +0.1 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.4 | -0.4 vs chain |
The other 8 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.0★, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PROGRESSIVE 3 OPCO HOLDCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 05/01/2022 |
| AMF OHIO HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/01/2022 |
| APEX HEALTHCARE GROUP LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/01/2022 |
| DIVINE PROGRESSIVE HOLDCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/01/2022 |
| GOLDSTAR CAPITAL PARTNERS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/01/2022 |
| GOLDSTAR DIVINE HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/01/2022 |
| GOLDSTAR OHIO ASSOCIATES LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/01/2022 |
| GSFB PARTNERS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/01/2022 |
| MARKOVITS, ISAAK | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/01/2022 |
| RICHLAND, ILAN | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/01/2022 |
| GOLDNER, DOV | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 05/01/2022 |
| PROGRESSIVE 3 MANAGEMENT OH LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 05/01/2022 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 12 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
9 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $841K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 19% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in OH
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 366036. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-09-24, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.