Smithville Western Care Center
4110 East Smithville Western Road, Wooster, OH 44691 · For profit - Corporation · 127 certified beds · (330) 345-9050 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (35% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0604) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0569)
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (38) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $42,777 in federal fines (most recent 2024-10-31)
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- about 17% 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 | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 2 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 4.4% | 5.3% | 15.4% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.7% | 6.2% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.7% | 0.4% | 2.0% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 17.1% | 30.1% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.0% | 3.2% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 4.5% | 6.1% | 16.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 19.3% | 25.5% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.7% | 94.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.6% | 3.4% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 22.4% | 21.4% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 1.6% | 8.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.0% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.7% | 75.6% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 22.0% | 24.9% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 13.2% | 12.9% | 12.0% | 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.
42.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 82 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 36.7% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 30 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.33 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 54% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 9% 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 | 42.4%CMS range 32.4–51.6 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.5%CMS range 6.7–13.2 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 36.7% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 36.7% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 30.0% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.3%CMS range 4.1–12.5 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.12 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 127 beds and averages 91.5 residents a day — about 72% occupied, or roughly 36 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 3.63 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.59 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.80 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 3.26 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.79 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.65 to 0.43 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 35% is below the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are 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.
38 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 27 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-10-31 · 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 2. Review of the medical record for Resident #25 revealed an admission date of 06/23/22 with diagnoses including diabetes mellitus, pressure ulcer to the sacral region and hypertension. Review of the physician's orders revealed Resident #25 had an order dated 10/16/24 for an appointment at the wound center on 10/21/24 at 9:00 A.M. He was to go via his wheelchair by facility transportation. Interview and observation on 10/21/24 at 8:50 A.M. with Resident #25 revealed he was waiting for transportation to an appointment with the wound care center which had been rescheduled numerous times. He stated when he returned from the wound care center he would provide additional information. Interview on 10/21/24 at 10:04 A.M. with the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed Resident #25 was unable to go to his wound care center appointment on 10/21/24 due to a mix-up with their transportation. She stated the facility's back-up driver did not know Resident #25 had the appointment as their regular driver was off. Review of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-04-28 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure and maintain accurate and complete drug records for the residents. This affected four (Residents #38, #84, #95 and #99) of four residents reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility census was 89. Findings include: 1. Record review for Resident #38 revealed an admission date of 02/01/25. Diagnosis included Alzheimer's dementia, chronic pain syndrome, and anxiety. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #38 was rarely or never understood. Review of the physician orders for Resident #38 revealed an order for Ativan (a controlled medication) oral tablet 0.5 milligrams (mg) one tablet by mouth every eight hours as needed for anxiety/restlessness for 14 days. The order was initiated 01/10/25 to be discontinued after 01/23/24. Review of the Controlled Drug Record for Resident #38 revealed Ativan 0.5 mg dated 11/26/24 take one tablet by mouth every 12 hours as…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-28 · 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 resident and staff interview, review of the Almanac Weather History, medical record review, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a resident's room maintained a comfortable temperature for Resident #97. This affected one (Resident #97) of three residents reviewed for safe environment. The facility census was 89. Findings include: Record review for Resident #97 revealed an admission date of 03/20/25 and a discharge date of 04/09/25. Diagnoses included diabetes mellitus, depression, and anxiety disorder. Review of the Medicare five-day Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #97 was cognitively intact. Review of the census history revealed Resident #97 was admitted to [room [ROOM NUMBER]] on 03/20/25. On 03/24/25, Resident #97 was transferred to [room [ROOM NUMBER]]. Review of the Almanac Weather History for [NAME] Ohio revealed on 03/20/25, the outdoor temperature ranged from 35 to 71 degrees Fahrenheit (F); On 03/21/25, the temperature ranged from 28…
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 · D2025-01-15 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
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, record review and review of the facility policy the facility failed to ensure Resident #86 directed his own medical care. This affected one resident (Resident #86) out of three residents reviewed for resident rights. The facility census was 85. Findings include: Review of Resident #86's medical record revealed an admission date of 11/27/24 and a discharge date of 12/15/24. Diagnoses included pneumonia, acute respiratory failure with hypoxia and hypercapnia, morbid obesity, bacteremia and type two diabetes mellitus with hyperglycemia. Review of Resident #86's care plan dated 12/01/24 included Resident #86 had the potential for altered respiratory status related to pneumonia, acute respiratory failure with hypoxia and hypercapnia history of PE (pulmonary embolus) and other diagnoses. Resident #86 would have breathing comfort with no dyspnea. Interventions included to assess respiratory status, assess breath sounds, position to facilitate breathing and comfort, suction as needed, administer…
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 · D2025-01-15 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolatedKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
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 interview, record review, Self-Reported Incident (SRI) review, and review of facility policy the facility failed to ensure Resident #88's privacy was maintained. This affected one resident (Resident #88) out of three residents reviewed for privacy. The facility census was 88. Findings Include: Review of Resident #88's medical record revealed an admission date of 01/27/23, a re-entry date of 05/01/23 and a discharge date of 11/05/24. Diagnoses included paraplegia, type two diabetes mellitus with diabetic neuropathy, morbid obesity, bipolar disorder and anxiety disorder. Review of Resident #88's Quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #88 was cognitively intact. Resident #88 was dependent for toileting and personal hygiene, and upper and lower body dressing. Review of Resident #88's care plan dated 02/09/23 included Resident #88 had the potential 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 · Dcited before2025-01-15 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review, and review of the facility policy the facility failed to ensure Resident #81's physician's orders were followed to ensure proper diabetic insulin management, and failed to ensure Resident #86's open area to his abdominal fold was evaluated and treated. This affected two resident's (Resident #81 and Resident #86) out of three residents reviewed for quality of care. The facility census was 85. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #81's medical record revealed an admission date of 05/13/24 and diagnoses included type one diabetes mellitus with hyperglycemia, type two diabetes mellitus with hypoglycemia without coma, unspecified dementia, unspecified severity without behavioral disturbance, psychotic disturbance, mood disturbance, and anxiety. Review of Resident #81's care plan dated 05/14/24 included Resident #81 had the potential for hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia related to type one diabetes mellitus. Resident #81's blood sugars would remain stable, skin would…
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 · E2024-10-31 · tag F0712 — patternEnsure that the resident and his/her doctor meet face-to-face at all required visits.
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 residents were seen by their physician once at least every 30 days for the first 90 days after an admission. This affected four residents ( #9, #10, #78 and #84) of seven residents reviewed for physician visits. The facility census was 77. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #9 revealed an admission date of 08/24/24 with diagnoses including necrotizing fasciitis (a bacterial infection that results in the death of the body's soft tissue), sepsis, paraplegia and fracture of the left tibia. Review of the nursing progress notes (where the physician and nurse practitioner progress notes were also located) dated 08/24/24 through 10/29/24 revealed Resident #9 was not seen by his physician while at the facility. Resident #9 was seen by Nurse Practitioner (NP) #603 on 08/27/24, 09/19/24, 10/08/24 and 10/17/24. Interview on 10/29/24 at 1:55 P.M. with Resident #9 verified he had never seen Physician #600 while at the facility. He…
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 · D2024-10-31 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on closed medical record, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to notify the physician and/or nurse practitioner of abnormal lab results for Resident #78. This affected one resident (#78) of 17 residents reviewed for abnormal lab results. The census was 77. Findings include: Review of the closed medical record for Resident #78 revealed an admission date of 08/28/24 with diagnoses of acute ischemia (reduced blood flow) of small intestine, status post right hemicolectomy (removal of part of the large intestine), infectious gastroenteritis (inflammation of the lining of the stomach), acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, diastolic heart failure, hypothyroidism, and need for personal care. Resident #78 was discharged to the hospital on [DATE]. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 admission assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #78 was cognitively intact, needed setup or clean-up assistance with eating, and needed partial/moderate assistance with toileting. Review of the physician/nurse…
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 before2024-07-02 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to maintain a clean and sanitary kitchen area and ensure foods were properly stored. This had the potential to affect all 90 residents who received meals from the kitchen. The facility census was 90. Findings include: Observation on 06/24/24 at 8:22 A.M. with Dining Services Director (DSD) #505 of the facility's kitchen revealed a plastic storage container with oats in the dry storage room. A scoop was resting on top of the oats inside the container. Continued observation of the walk-in refrigerator revealed a box of cucumbers, with two molded cucumbers touching non-molded cucumbers, a quarter-full pan of tomato soup covered with plastic wrap without label or date, a pitcher of red juice without label or date, a pitcher of grape juice dated 06/13/24 and a pitcher of sweet tea dated 06/13/24. Concurrent interview with DSD #505 indicated pitchers of juices should be kept for no more than seven days in the cooler (the pitchers of grape juice and sweet tea were on day 11). Further observation of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-07-02 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespreadDispose of garbage and refuse properly.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure garbage was properly disposed of. This had the potential to affect all 90 residents of the facility. The facility census was 90. Findings include: Observation on 06/24/24 at 9:13 A.M. of the outside trash area, with Dining Services Director (DSD) #505, revealed two dumpsters. There were various plastic wrappers, gloves, plastic spoons and cigarette butts on the ground surrounding the dumpsters. Interview at the time of the observation with DSD #505 verified the findings. Review of the facility policy titled Dumpster/Trash Policy, dated January 2022, revealed the area around the dumpsters would be free from any debris and each employee was responsible for keeping the area clean and free of debris.
- Potential for harm · F2024-07-02 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — widespreadMake sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, review of pest control reports and review of facility policy, the facility failed to maintain a kitchen area free of pests. This had the potential to affect all 90 residents who received meals from the kitchen. The facility census was 90. Findings include: Observation on 06/24/24 at 8:22 A.M. of the kitchen, with Dining Services Director (DSD) #505, revealed large amounts of drain flies in the dish machine area. The drain flies were seen on the walls and equipment in the area and flying around the area. Interview on 06/24/24 at 9:12 A.M. with DSD #505 confirmed the findings of drain flies. DSD #505 indicated maintenance was aware of the drain flies and was supposed to have it treated. DSD #505 indicated it had been two weeks and nothing had been done yet. Interview on 06/27/24 at 11:07 A.M. with Maintenance Director (MD) #538 revealed he was unaware of the drain flies until 06/24/24, after the observation was made with DSD #505. Review of Pest Control Service Inspection Reports from 01/16/24, 02/09/24, 03/12/24, 04/08/24, 05/09/24, and 06/11/24…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 27 citations
- Potential for harm · E2024-07-02 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure 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, medical record review, staff interview and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to store medications in a safe manner. This affected one (#79) resident, with the potential to affect nine additional residents (#14, #28, #41, #52, #54, #62, #89, #197, and #198) who were identified by the facility as being independently mobile and cognitively impaired residing on the memory care unit. The facility census was 90. Findings include: Record review for Resident #79 revealed an admission date of 01/02/24. Diagnoses included metabolic encephalopathy, altered mental status, depression, alcohol dependence and anxiety disorder. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #79 was severely cognitively impaired. Resident #79 had no impairment to the upper or lower extremities. Resident#79 used a walker/wheelchair for mobility. Observation on 06/25/24 at 11:26 A.M. of medication administration on the secured memory care unit with Registered Nurse…
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 before2024-07-02 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — patternMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents rooms were maintained in a clean/sanitary manner and were in good repair. This affected 10 (#16, #17, #20, #21, #23, #33, #36, #39, #66, and #85) of 10 residents reviewed for physical environment. The facility census was 90. Findings include: Observation on 06/24/24 at 11:24 A.M. of Residents #33 and #66's room revealed the closet doors were hanging at a slant and off the track. Observation on 06/24/24 at 11:40 A.M. of Residents #17 and #39's room revealed several black markings and gashes across wall between the two residents' beds. Further observation of Resident #39's bed remote revealed the wiring was exposed and the bottom drawer of the resident's nightstand was off the track. Observation on 06/24/24 at 12:15 P.M. of Resident #85's room revealed several gashes and black marking along the wall that extended to bed two, which was unoccupied. Observation on 06/24/24 at 2:13 P.M. of Residents #16 and #23's room revealed the cover of the heating unit was missing, exposing the heating element. Continued…
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 · D2024-07-02 · tag F0569 — isolatedNotify each resident of certain balances and convey resident funds upon discharge, eviction, or death.
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 resident fund records and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure resident funds were conveyed timely upon resident discharge from the facility. This affected one (#148) of one resident reviewed for funds conveyance. The facility census was 90. Findings include: Resident #148 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a readmission date of [DATE]. Resident #148 was discharged [DATE]. Review of a progress note dated [DATE] revealed Resident #148 was transferred to the hospital. Review of a progress note dated [DATE] revealed the hospital informed the facility that Resident #148 expired. Review of Resident #148's resident funds records revealed on [DATE], a check in the amount of $1193.46 was dispersed to the state and one for $527.18 was dispersed to the funeral home handling Resident #148's arrangements. Interview on [DATE] at 7:17 A.M. with Business Office Manager (BOM) #522 verified Resident #148's funds were not conveyed within the required timeframe of 30…
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 · D2024-07-02 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents and/or resident representatives received written transfer notices when transferring to the hospital. This affected two residents (#11 and #51) of three residents reviewed for hospitalization. The facility census was 90. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #11 revealed an admission date of 07/22/23. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, chronic diastolic (congestive) heart failure and muscle weakness. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #11 had impaired cognition and required substantial/maximum assistance from staff for bed mobility and was dependent on staff for transfers. Review of the Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF)/Nursing Facility (NF) to Hospital Transfer Forms dated 03/27/24, 05/13/24, and 06/04/24 revealed Resident #11 was transferred to the hospital on those dates. Review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-02 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure dependent residents received nail care. This affected one resident (#89) of three residents reviewed for podiatry care. The facility census was 90. Findings include: Record review for Resident #89 revealed an admission date of 04/04/24. Diagnoses included unspecified dementia, muscle weakness and need for assistance with personal care. Review of the admission Medicare Five-Day Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #89 was severely cognitively impaired. Resident #89 had impairment to one side of the upper extremity and required substantial maximum assistants with personal hygiene. Further review of Resident #89's medical record revealed no evidence of an identified need for toenail care or that the resident received toenail care. Observation on 06/24/24 at 9:49 A.M. revealed Resident #89 was lying in bed. Resident #89's feet were sticking out from under the blanket at the end of the bed.…
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 · D2024-07-02 · 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 hospital records, staff interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure all fall interventions were implemented. This affected two (#41 and #45) of three residents reviewed for falls. In addition, the facility failed to follow procedures following a fall to prevent further injury. This affected one (#41) of three residents reviewed for falls. The facility census was 90. Findings include: 1. Record review for Resident #41 revealed an admission date of 03/18/21. Diagnoses included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following nontraumatic intracerebral hemorrhage affecting right dominant side, subsequent encounter epilepsy, and epilepticus pseudobulbar affect vascular dementia. An additional diagnosis of displaced simple supracondylar fracture of right the humerus was added on 05/16/24. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #41 was severely cognitively impaired. Resident #41 had no impairment to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-02 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, resident interview and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were free of unnecessary medication increases. This affected one (#74) of six residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 90. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #74 revealed an admission date of 12/02/23. Diagnoses included end stage renal disease, depression, insomnia and anxiety disorder. Further review of census information revealed Resident #74 was moved to a new room on 03/19/24. Review of the plan of care revised 01/04/24 revealed Resident #74 had altered sleep pattern and difficulty falling asleep. Interventions included identifying regular sleep schedule, give measures of comfort including turn out lights, provide quiet and darkness and turn off television, give hypnotics per orders, and report complaints of sleeplessness to the charge nurse. Review of a physician's order dated 03/18/24 revealed Resident #74 had an order for Trazodone (an anti-depressant medication that can be used off-label for patients with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-02 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard 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 2. Review of the medical record for Resident #79 revealed an admission date of 01/02/24. Diagnoses included, but not limited to, altered mental status, depression and anxiety disorder. Review of the comprehensive MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #79 had severe impaired cognition and required moderate assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs). Review of the care plan meeting documentation, completed by Social Services Designee (SSD) #900 with an effective date of 01/29/24 at 4:19 P.M., revealed a care conference meeting was held on 01/29/24 at 12:00 A.M. and the resident and resident representative attended. Review of the care plan meeting documentation, completed by Social Services Designee (SSD) #611 with an effective date of 04/29/24 at 10:32 P.M., revealed a care conference meeting was held on 01/29/24 at 12:00 A.M. and the resident and resident representative attended. Interview on 06/27/24 at 11:02 A.M. with Director of Nursing (DON) verified the care conferences dated 01/29/24 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 · D2024-04-11 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, staff interview, review of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) guidelines, and review of the Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC), the facility failed to ensure proper liability notices were received timely. This affected one resident (#104) of three residents reviewed for liability notices. The facility census was 101. Findings Include: Review of the closed medical record for Resident #104 revealed an admission date of 01/04/24 with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease, dementia, and COVID-19. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #104 was discharged on 02/23/24. Review of the NOMNC revealed Resident #104 received notification that his skilled services would end effective 02/19/24 with the option to appeal no later than noon of the day before the effective date. Review of the NOMNC revealed Resident #104 signed and dated the NOMNC on 02/19/24 and was not given proper notice in order to appeal, if so wished. Review of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) guidelines found at www.cms.gov revealed the NOMNC must be…
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 · D2024-02-08 · 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 medical record review, interview, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were accurate regarding resident vaccination status. This affected three residents (#28, #38, and #99) out of five residents reviewed for vaccinations. The facility census was 107. Findings Include: 1. Medical record review revealed Resident #28 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including diabetes mellitus, encephalopathy, anxiety disorder, and hypertension. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #28 was not offered the influenza vaccine. Further review of Resident #28's medical record revealed that she was offered and received the influenza vaccine on 10/17/23. Interview on 02/08/24 at 2:42 P.M. with MDS Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #313 verified that Resident #28's quarterly MDS was coded incorrectly. MDS/LPN #313 modified the MDS to reflect that Resident #28 was given the influenza vaccine as requested on 10/16/23. 2.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2022-03-24 · 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 observations, interviews, record review, and policy review the facility failed to ensure the dishwasher provided sufficient sanitizer, all food was labeled, dated, and stored properly and food was prepared in a sanitary manner. This had the potential to affect all residents of the facility. The facility also failed to ensure all food in each of the three-unit resident refrigerators was covered and dated. This had the potential to affect all residents. The census was 93. Findings include: 1. Observation on 03/22/21 at 11:05 A.M. of the facility kitchen low-temperature dishwasher revealed the wash temperature of 120 Fahrenheit (F), rinse temperature of 130 F. The sanitizer revealed a level of 50 parts per million (ppm). Interview on 03/22/21 at 11:06 A.M. with Dietary Services Director (DSD) #628 verified the sanitizer was not at a sufficient level. He reported it had been low and a call was placed on 03/21/22 for service to adjust the level. Review of the dishwasher temperature logs from 01/01/22 to 03/22/22 revealed wash temperatures ranged from 125 F to 140 F. There were…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-03-24 · 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, interviews, and record review the facility failed to maintain the air temperature above 71 degrees in Resident #49's room. This affected one (Resident #49) of 31 residents on the 500-hall. Facility census was 93. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #49 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including chronic kidney disease, atherosclerotic heart disease, chronic kidney disease, and severe protein-calorie malnutrition. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #49 had mild cognitive impairment. Interview on 03/21/22 at 9:08 A.M. Resident #49 stated she was cold, and it was always cold in her room. The resident stated if the sun was shining and the blind to the window was raised, her room would warm up. Observation and interview on 03/22/22 at 2:21 P.M. revealed Resident #49 was sitting in a chair with long sleeves and a jacket on. Resident #49 stated she was cold. Interview on 03/22/22 at 3:43 P.M. with State…
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 · D2022-03-24 · 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 record review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident's #28 and #34 had a comprehensive care plan for smoking. This affected two of 21 residents reviewed for care plans. The facility census was 93. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #28 revealed an admission date of 12/01/20. Diagnoses included anemia, hypokalemia, right eye blindness, unsteadiness on feet, need for assistance with personal care, history of falling, abnormalities of gait and mobility, muscle weakness, and nicotine dependence. The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #28 had moderately impaired cognition and impaired vision. Review of Resident #28's current care plan revealed it was silent to smoking. Review of the smoking assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #28 was identified as a smoker and was assessed as not at risk for injury related to smoking. Resident #28 has no history of burns or smoking problems. Resident #28 was able to identify locations…
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 · D2022-03-24 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — isolatedEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, taste test, and recipe review the facility failed to prepare pureed foods at a consistency appropriate for safe swallowing. This had the potential to affect eight residents (Resident's #6, #12, #20, #31, #47, #72, #74 and #386) who were prescribed a pureed diet and consumed meals from the facility's kitchen. The facility census was 93. Findings include: Observation on 03/22/22 at 3:05 P.M. of the puree preparation revealed Dietary Services Director (DSD) #628 was preparing pureed corn chowder for the dinner meal. DSD #628 was noted preparing one half gallon of corn chowder with 35 packages (two per pack) crackers. He confirmed the recipe was cut in half from 25 servings to 12. The recipe called for one gallon and three cups with 75 two-per-pack crackers. Confirmed he was looking for mashed potato-like consistency. Taste test of finished product revealed final product was smooth, however extremely thick. Regional Dietary Services Director #681 confirmed the consistency of the corn chowder upon tasting as being extremely thick. Interview at the time of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-03-24 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual 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, and record review the facility failed to ensure fortified soup was of honey thick consistency for Resident #6. This affected one (Resident #6) of two residents (Resident's #6 and #30) who received honey thick liquids and fortified foods. The facility census was 93. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #6 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including hemiplegia and hemiparesis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and diabetes type II. Review of the physician's order dated 12/08/21 revealed Resident #6 received a pureed texture diet with honey consistency liquids. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #6 had significant cognitive impairment, required supervision and set-up for eating. Review of the care plan dated 12/13/21 revealed Resident #6 received a pureed diet with honey thick liquids and fortified foods and a care area for eating/nutrition that included honey thickened liquids, no straws,…
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 · D2022-03-24 · tag F0810 — isolatedProvide special eating equipment and utensils for residents who need them and appropriate assistance.
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 Resident #40 received assistive devices for meals. This affected one of three residents (Residents #15, #40 and #72) reviewed for nutrition. The facility census was 93. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #40 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (COPD), adult failure to thrive, hypertension, dementia with unspecified psychosis, and high blood pressure. Review of the physician's orders revealed an order dated 04/28/21 for a sippy cup at all meals. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #40 had severe cognitive impairment requiring supervision/assist of one staff for meals. Review of the care plan dated 01/12/19 revealed a care area for nutrition which included an intervention dated 07/08/21 for a sipper cup with meals. Review of the dietary progress note dated 03/09/22 written by Dietary Technician (DT) #690…
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 · D2022-03-24 · 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 observations, medical record review, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident exhibiting symptoms of new onset shortness of breath, cough, and decreased oxygen saturation levels was tested to rule out COVID-19. This affected one (Resident #69) of 24 residents reviewed for infections. The facility census was 93. Findings include: Review of Resident #69's medical record revealed diagnoses including acute or chronic congestive heart failure (CHF), atrial fibrillation, and malignant neoplasm of the prostate, acute cholecystitis, chronic myeloproliferative disease, diverticulitis of intestine, acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, acute kidney failure, and obesity. Upon admission, an order was written for oxygen at two to five liters per minute via nasal cannula to maintain an oxygen saturation level above 92% if Resident #69 had shortness of breath as needed. A physician's progress note dated 02/11/22 indicated Resident #69 had new onset of atrial fibrillation. Breath sounds…
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 before2022-03-24 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — isolatedMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
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 and interviews the facility failed to provide a safe and homelike environment. This affected three (Resident's #35, #66, and #77) of 24 residents reviewed for environment. The facility census was 93. Findings include: Review of medical record revealed Resident #77 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including syncope and collapse, encephalopathy, and dementia. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #77 had mildly impaired cognition. The resident required extensive assistance of two staff for transfers and toileting. Review of medical record revealed Resident #66 was admitted [DATE] with diagnoses including end stage renal disease, respiratory failure, dependence on renal dialysis, and history of transient ischemic attack. Review of the quarterly MDS 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #66 had mildly impaired cognition. The resident required limited assistance of one staff for transfers and toilet use. Review of medical record…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2019-04-18 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the operation of the kitchen was maintained in a sanitary manner related to the dish machine, cleaning of the thermometers and monitoring appropriate food temperatures prior to service in the north dining room. This had the potential to affect the 102 residents who received meals from the facility and the 15 residents (Residents #40, #55, #94, #3, #104, #102, #15, #67, #71, #69, #97, #41, #75, #43 and #7) who received meals from the north dining room. Findings included: 1. Review of the dish washer temperature/sanitation logs policy, not dated, revealed the logs would be maintained for wash/rinse temperatures daily. Test strips for chlorine would be used weekly for testing of the final rinse sanitation level for low temperature dish machines. The required chlorine levels were 50 parts per million (ppm). Review of the in-service dated 11/27/18 revealed the staff were educated on dish machine soap and reading the temperature (not the chemical levels). Further review of the sign in revealed dietary aids…
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 · E2019-04-18 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — patternHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents were afforded dignified dining experiences in the north dining room including receiving timely meals, adequate supplies of service ware such as silverware, plates, cups, bowls, and ordered/requested food items. This had the potential to affect the 15 residents (Residents #40, #55, #94, #3, #104, #102, #15, #67, #71, #69, #97, #41, #75, #43 and #7) who received meals from the north dining room and one of one resident reviewed for food concerns (Resident #3). Findings include: Review of the meal service times for the north dining room revealed breakfast was to be served at 8:15 A.M. and dinner at 5:15 P.M. Review of the monthly food committee meetings dated 12/26/18, 01/23/19, 02/27/19 and 03/27/19 revealed various, vague concerns but there was no evidence of any resolution to any of the concerns. Review of the care conference meeting, dated 03/27/19, revealed Resident #3 and family had concerns that were not written out and were very vague. Further review revealed there was no evidence of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-04-18 · 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 observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure resident's code status were clearly and/or easily identified. This affected two of two residents reviewed for accuracy of code status (Residents #57 and #71). Findings include: 1. Record review revealed Resident #57 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included end stage renal disease required hemodialysis, atrial fibrillation and respiratory failure. On admission the resident had an order for a full code. The resident was admitted to the hospital 10/30/17 and Do Not Resuscitate Comfort Care Arrest (DNR CCA) paperwork was signed. When the resident returned to the facility on [DATE] an order for a full code was written. Review of the physician's order dated 10/29/18 revealed to change from full code to DNR CCA. Review of the occupational therapy evaluation dated 02/21/19 revealed the resident was a full code status. Review of the quarterly minimum data set (MDS) 3.0 dated 02/27/19 revealed the resident 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 · D2019-04-18 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolatedEnsure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
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 a resident was comprehensively assessed, care planned and had a physicians order for the use of a seatbelt while in his electric wheelchair. This affected one of one residents reviewed for restraints (Resident #57). Findings include: Record review revealed Resident #57 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included end stage renal disease that required hemodialysis, atrial fibrillation and respiratory failure. The resident was morbidly obese and required the use of an electric wheelchair for mobility. Review of the occupational therapy evaluation dated 02/21/19 revealed the resident was referred to therapy to instruct the resident on the use of the new electric wheelchair. There was no mention of a seatbelt with the wheelchair. Further review of the therapy re-evaluation from 04/12/19 through 05/10/19 revealed the resident needed additional education on use of the electric wheelchair because he have having…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-04-18 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to re-evaluate a resident via a Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) after being newly diagnosed with psychosis. This affected one (Resident #6) of one resident reviewed for PASARR assessments. Findings include: A record review of the medical record of Resident #6 revealed he was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of delusional disorders, hallucinations, bipolar disorder, psychosis and mild cognitive impairment. His diagnosis of bipolar disorder was entered on 12/29/16 and diagnosis of unspecified psychosis entered on 05/21/18. Record review of the PASARR assessment dated [DATE] revealed there were no indications of serious mental illness. There were no other PASARR assessments completed since 06/28/16. The care plan of Resident #6 dated 07/05/18 revealed this resident had psychotic symptoms and staff were to monitor his behaviors. He had the potential for altered behavior patterns, disruptive interactions, disruptive verbal behaviors,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-04-18 · 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 observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive care conference for a resident to ensure all concerns were addressed. This affected one of one residents reviewed for care conferences (Resident #3). Findings include: Record review revealed Resident #3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Traumatic Brain Injury and Cerebral Vascular Accident with right sided hemiparesis. Review of the care conference meeting, dated 03/27/19, revealed Resident #3 and family had concerns with dietary and nursing that were not written out and were very vague. Review of the sign in sheet revealed there were only three staff involved in the meeting including Social Service Designee (SSD) #117, activities aid (AA) #122 and wound nurse, Licensed Practical Nurse, (LPN ) #123. Further review revealed there was no evidence of the facility addressing the concerns. Review of the communication from Social Service Designee (SSD) # 117 to Dietary Manager (DM) #118…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-04-18 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident had a comprehensive bladder program in place when the resident needed assistance of staff for toileting to ensure the resident was able to maintain as much continence as possible. This affected one of one residents reviewed for bladder incontinence (Resident #12). Findings include: Record review revealed Resident #12 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease requiring continuous oxygen and respiratory failure with hypoxia. Review of the three day tracker revealed it was only completed one day on 07/06/18 which indicated the resident was continent of bladder. Further review revealed no comprehensive assessment or care plan were completed and implemented. Review of the admission minimum data set (MDS) 3.0 dated 07/11/18 revealed the resident was cognitively intact but needed extensive assistance of two staff for activities of daily living (ADL) including…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-04-18 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide timely and effective pain management for Resident #60's continued pain following a fall. This affected one (Resident #60) of three residents reviewed for falls. The facility census was 102 residents. Findings include: Review of Resident #60's medical record revealed an admission date of 03/30/18 with diagnoses that included dementia and unsteadiness on feet. An annual Minimum Data Set 3.0 (MDS) assessment revealed Resident #60 had severely impaired cognition and required extensive assist with transfers and ambulation. The resident had a physician's order dated 03/30/18 for acetaminophen 650 milligrams (mg) every four hours for pain as needed (PRN). Review of the medication administration record (MAR) since January, 2019 indicated Resident #60 used the PRN acetaminophen one time prior to 02/07/19. Review of the progress notes revealed on 02/07/19 at 8:00 A.M. Resident #60 was found on the floor next to her bed by staff members. The resident complained of pain to the shoulder at that time. 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 · D2019-04-18 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure coordination of care for a resident who received hemodialysis from an outside facility. This affected one of one residents reviewed for dialysis (Resident #57) and affected four of four residents on fluid restrictions (Resident's #96, #2, #10 and #57) . Findings include: Record review revealed Resident #57 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included end stage renal disease requiring hemodialysis (HD). The resident had physician ordered medications to be given daily in the morning as well as a physician's order to monitor fluid intake. Review of the quarterly minimum data set (MDS) 3.0 dated 02/27/19 revealed the resident was cognitively intact. a) Review of the facility's Intake and Output Recoding Tool Guidelines, revised May 2014, revealed measurements of fluid would be initiated with a physicians order. Review of the physicians order dated 08/13/18 revealed the resident was to be on an 1800 cubic…
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
$42,777 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $42,777 — penalty dated 2024-10-31
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 SPRENGER HEALTH CARE SYSTEMS — 12 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 | 2 of 5 | 3.3 | -1.3 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 3.1 | -1.1 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 2.8 | +1.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
The other 11 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.3★, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WAYNE MANOR, INC. | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 10/01/2001 |
| BLUESKY HEALTHCARE INC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 10/01/2001 |
| SPRENGER ENTERPRISES, INC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 10/01/2001 |
| HUTSENPILLER, WENDIE | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 07/01/2008 |
| MALANOWSKI, KENNETH | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 07/01/2008 |
| SPRENGER, NICOLE | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 07/01/2008 |
| SPRENGER, TRACEY | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 07/01/2008 |
| FOX, EMILY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/31/2024 |
| KUHN, SHANNON | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/31/2024 |
| MALANOWKI, BRANDON | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/31/2024 |
| CMS & CO. MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC. | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/22/2001 |
| CHILDS, ROBERT | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/06/2025 |
| TYLER, CHRISTY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/14/2022 |
| WILKINS, SCOTT | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/15/2025 |
| BSH INVESTMENTS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/04/2003 |
| CITRIN COOPERMAN AND COMPANY, LLP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2025 |
| DELTA HEALTH CARE CONSULTANTS, INC. | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2008 |
| HUNTINGTON | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2001 |
| SPRENGER WAYNE LTD. CO. | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2001 |
| WELLSPRING STAFFING, INC. | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/15/2021 |
| MALLETT, CHRISTOPHER | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2008 |
| SPRENGER, MARK | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2008 |
| SPRENGER, TIMOTHY | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2008 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 37 rows in the source record cover these 23 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
10 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 $1.7M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 17% 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.
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 365317. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-07-02, 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.