West View Healthy Living

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

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.

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.

54.3% 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 147 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 43.9% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 41 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 0.50 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 81% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 19% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 93 beds and averages 85.3 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 8 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.75 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.35 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.44 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 3.30 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.94 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.41 to 0.22 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 54% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

20 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 10 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-01-30 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure isolation precautions were followed for Resident #7 and #25, and failed to properly monitor Resident #74's stools to ensure proper precautions were in place for Clostridioides Difficile. This affected three residents (Resident #7, Resident #25, and Resident #74) and had the potential to affect all 87 residents residing in the facility. Findings include: 1. Record review revealed Resident #25 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including but not limited to lung cancer, muscle wasting, and osteoarthritis. Review of the comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #25 had moderately impaired cognition and required partial assistance for activities of daily living. Review of Resident #25's physician's orders for January 2025 revealed on 01/25/25 droplet precautions were ordered to be maintained while COVID positive. Observation on 01/27/24 at 9:28 A.M. revealed Resident #25 had…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-01-30 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — pattern
  Honor the resident's right to manage his or her financial affairs.
  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 staff interview the facility failed to ensure residents received interest on resident funds greater than 100 dollars. This affected seven (Residents #5, #13, #20, #26, #30, #38 and #187) of seven residents reviewed for personal funds with the potential to affect all 16 residents whose funds were managed by the facility. The facility census was 87. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #5 revealed an admit date [DATE] and a readmission date of 01/09/25. Review of the quarterly statement from 07/01/2 through 09/30/24 revealed a balance of $983.31. No interest was noted credited to Resident #5's account during these three months. Review of the quarterly statement from 10/01/24 through 12/31/24 revealed that Resident #5 was given interest. Interview on 01/27/25 at 5:00 P.M. with Assistant Business Office Manager (ABOM) #193 revealed interest is only given at the end of the year. ABOM #193 verified Resident #5 did not receive interest within the quarter from 07/01/2…

  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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-01-30 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when 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 observation, interview, and record review the facility did not ensure oxygen tubing was dated and changed as required. This affected three residents (Residents #38, #59, and #71) out of five residents on respiratory care. The facility census was 87. Findings include: 1. Resident #59 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including but not limited to chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, unspecified dementia with unspecified severity and with other behavioral disturbances and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #59 was cognitively intact. She required substantial and partial assistance for all activities of daily living. Resident #59 had an order dated 11/13/24 and was open ended for oxygen at two liters per minute (lpm) via nasal cannula continuous at bedtime to maintain pulse oxygenation level of 90% or higher at bed time 6:00 P.M. through 11:00 P.M. Review of the care plan dated…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-20 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure staff implemented proper infection control practices related to hand hygiene. This affected two residents (Resident #14 and Resident #28) who were reviewed for incontinence care. The facility census was 84. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record for Resident #14 revealed an admission date of 07/08/21 with diagnoses including atherosclerotic heart disease, dementia, wheezing, benign prostatic hyperplasia with urinary tract symptoms, and contractures of bilateral hip, knees, and ankles. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment completed on 01/02/24 revealed Resident #14 had moderately impaired cognition. Further review revealed Resident #14 was always incontinent of bowel and bladder and was dependent on staff for toileting and bathing. Review of the current care plan revealed Resident #14 needed assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs). Interventions included assisting with ADLs as needed and reporting decline in ability to the physician and therapy…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2022-09-29 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — widespread
  Implement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on review of the infection control tracking log and staff interview the facility failed to ensure monthly completion of the infection control tracking log. This had the potential to affect all 72 residents residing in the facility. Findings include: Review of the Antibiotic Stewardship program revealed the facility would complete monthly tracking of resident antibiotic use/infection. However, the monthly antibiotic use tracking log form did not contain any evidence of location/room/unit of resident, signs and symptoms, x-ray and/or culture and results, healthcare acquired or community acquired infection, if the infection met antibiotic treatment criteria, resident isolation status if required and resolution date. In addition, review of the facility infection control tracking log revealed the last month recorded/completed was January 2020. The facility failed to provide any additional evidence of infection control tracking. On 09/29/22 at 11:20 A.M. interview with the Director of Nursing verified the facility was not completing a monthly infection log/tracking form with 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.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2022-09-29 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
  Honor 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

  Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure advance directives matched in the electronic health record and paper medical record. This affected one resident (#65) of 18 residents reviewed for advance directives. Findings include: Review of Resident #65's medical record revealed an admission date of 08/23/22 with diagnoses that included nontraumatic intracerebral hemorrhage in cerebellum, dysphagia and hypertension. Further review of the electronic health record (EHR) revealed physician's orders upon admission that Resident #65 had elected advance directives indicating she was a Do Not Resuscitate Comfort Care - Arrest (DNRCC-A). Review of the paper medical record found no evidence of any advance directives in place and a Full Code identification paper was in place under the Advance Directives section of the paper medical record. On 09/26/22 at 3:00 P.M. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #543 verified Advance Directives for Resident #65 did not match in the EHR and paper medical record. LPN #543 indicated Resident #65 should have a DNRCC-A form signed by 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2022-09-29 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
  Immediately 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

  Based on record review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #177's physician and the dietitian were notified of significant weight changes. This affected one resident (#177) of three residents reviewed for nutrition. Findings include: Review of Resident #177's medical record revealed an admission date of 09/12/22 with diagnoses including diabetes mellitus type two, chronic kidney disease, end stage renal disease and dependence on renal dialysis. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 09/16/22 revealed the resident had intact cognition. Review of Resident #177's weighs revealed: On 09/14/22 weight of 169.7 pounds On 09/15/22 weight of 168.4 pounds On 09/17/22 weight of 172.8 pounds On 09/20/22 weight of 193.3 pounds On 09/22/22 weight of 174.1 pounds On 09/24/11 weight of 191.5 pounds On 09/27/22 weight of 192.0 pounds Review of Resident #177's nutrition note, dated 09/23/22 revealed no documentation related to the resident's recent weight fluctuations. Review of Resident #177's nursing notes revealed…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2022-09-29 · tag F0644 — isolated
  Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure a Preadmission Screening and Review Review (PASARR) assessment was resubmitted for review after a new mental health diagnosis was added for Resident #14. This affected one resident (#14) of one resident reviewed for PASARR assessments. Findings include: Review of Resident #14's medical record revealed an admission date of 03/30/20 with admission diagnoses that included Parkinson's disease, atrial fibrillation and chronic kidney disease. Further review of the medical record revealed on 03/30/20 and 04/24/20 a PASARR review was completed which indicated the resident had no serious mental illness. Review of Resident #14's diagnosis list revealed on 03/20/22 a new diagnosis of psychotic disorder with hallucinations was added. On 06/28/22 a new diagnosis of dementia with behaviors was added. Further review of the medical record found no evidence of a PASARR being submitted after the new serious mental health diagnoses, psychotic disorder with hallucinations and dementia with behaviors were added. Interview 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-09-29 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure proper infection control practices were followed during Resident #53's dressing change to prevent a wound infection. This affected one resident (#53) of four residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. Findings include: Review of Resident #53's medical record revealed an admission date of 12/06/21 with diagnoses including paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, muscle weakness (generalized), and a Stage III pressure ulcer to left buttocks. Review of Resident #53's September 2022 physician's orders revealed an order to cleanse the resident's left buttock open area with house cleanser, pat dry, apply a nickel thick amount of Santyl (medicated ointment) topically to the wound bed, cover with Mesalt (wound dressing), place four by four gauze over area and secure with medipore tape. The dressing was to be changed daily. On 09/27/22 at 2:12 P.M. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #419 was observed to complete Resident #53's dressing/wound care. LPN #419 placed a barrier down on 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2022-09-29 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
  Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #65, who had a gastrostomy tube with enteral feeding, was provided water flushes as ordered by the physician. This affected one resident (#65) of one resident reviewed for enteral feedings. Findings include: Review of Resident #65's medical record revealed an admission date of 08/23/22 with admission diagnoses that included nontraumatic intracerebral hemorrhage in the cerebellum, dysphagia and gastrostomy. Review of the admission orders for Resident #65 revealed physician's orders which indicated the resident was to receive no nutritional sources by mouth (NPO) and was to receive enteral feedings via gastrostomy tube (feeding tube through the abdominal wall into the stomach). Further review of the admission physician's orders revealed an order for the enteral feeding product, Jevity 1.5 (nutritional supplement) 237 milliliters (ml) four times daily (QID) with 100 ml water flushes before and after the Jevity 1.5 was administered. Further review of the medical record revealed on 08/26/22, the enteral…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“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.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 8 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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.

A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in OH