Adams Lane Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center
1856 Adams Lane, Zanesville, OH 43701 · For profit - Corporation · 114 certified beds · (740) 454-9769 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Jul 2025
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- inspectors recorded 2 serious findings as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (37) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $17,610 in federal fines (most recent 2025-07-23)
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
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) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
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 | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 1 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 1 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 | 2.0% | 5.3% | 15.4% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 11.2% | 6.2% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.3% | 0.4% | 2.0% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 15.7% | 30.1% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 4.0% | 3.2% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 0.7% | 6.1% | 16.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 32.7% | 25.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 99.1% | 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 | 24.4% | 21.4% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 4.3% | 8.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.8% | 1.2% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 75.6% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 23.5% | 24.9% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 14.9% | 12.9% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.42 | 1.73 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.27 | 1.80 | 1.80 | better |
‡ 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.
51.8% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 34 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 24.0% 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 25 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 0.18 therapist hours per resident per day in 2025Q4 — more than 19% of the 13,714 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 5% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 14% — 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 | 51.8%CMS range 38.0–66.1 | 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 | 11.0%CMS range 7.3–17.8 | 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 | 24.0% | 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 | 24.0% | 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 | 8.0% | 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 | 97.6% | 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 | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.78 | 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 114 beds and averages 105.1 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 9 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 2.80 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.28 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.45 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 2.59 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.01 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.28 to 0.21 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 46% 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 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.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
37 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 25 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2025-07-23 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY THE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCY REPRESENTS AN INCIDENT OF PAST NONCOMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY.Based on record review, review of a facility self-reporting incident (SRI), review of the facility's related investigation, staff interview, resident interview, family interview, and review of the facility's Abuse Policy, the facility failed to protect Resident #14's right to be free from sexual abuse by Resident #97. This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy and actual harm beginning on 07/08/25 at 7:20 P.M. when Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #119 observed Resident #97, who had a history of sexually inappropriate behaviors engaged in non-consensual sexual intercourse with Resident #14, a cognitively impaired and non-interviewable female resident, who lacked the cognitive ability to provide consent to sexual activity. CNA #119 observed Resident #97 lying on top of Resident #14 with his shorts pulled down to his ankles and Resident #14 was noted to be completely naked. Resident #14 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.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2023-09-06 · tag F0678 — failed to provide CPR when needed — isolatedProvide basic life support, including CPR, prior to the arrival of emergency medical personnel , subject to physician orders and the resident’s advance directives.
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 NONCOMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY. Based on closed medical record review, review of an emergency medical services (EMS) report, interviews with facility staff and review of facility Code Status policy the facility failed to immediately initiate cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for Resident #94. This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy and the actual serious life-threatening harm and death on [DATE] beginning at 5:22 A.M. when Resident #94, who had advance directives for cardiopulmonary resuscitation/full code status, was found unresponsive, without a pulse, and was not provided CPR. The facility notified EMS for hospital transport without completing a comprehensive assessment of the resident ' s status. Resident #94 was assessed to be deceased by EMS without evidence of having received life saving measures. This affected one resident (#94) of two residents reviewed for an emergent change in condition and death. The facility…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-06-10 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — patternKeep 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 Based on observations, staff interview, family interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the residents right to privacy of personal and clinical information. This affected four residents (#17, #29, #33, and #35) of 38 residents reviewed for personal privacy. The facility census was 107. Findings include:1.Review of the record for Resident #35 revealed an admission date of 12/03/24 with diagnoses including memory deficit following cerebral infarction, post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), hypertension, and chronic kidney disease. There was a physician's order of 10/24/25 for the resident to reside on the secured Blue Sky Living Community to meet the physical, mental, spiritual, and emotional well-being and safety needs of the resident. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment completed 04/25/26 revealed the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3, indicating severe cognitive impairment. Observations on 06/01/26 at 12:07 P.M. revealed a sign posted on the wall…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-06-10 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and facility policy and procedure review, the facility failed to maintain a clean and homelike environment. This was observed in four units (100, 200, 300 and 700) of seven units in the facility and affected five residents (#26, #33, #85, #97, and #107) of 107 residents reviewed for their environment. The census was 107. Findings include: 1. Observation on 06/03/26 at 12:50 P.M. revealed in room [ROOM NUMBER] the baseboard by the closet was coming loose, and area on the ceiling by the closet patched and stained a light colored brown. This was verified during interview with Maintenance Director #228 on 06/03/26 at 12:55 P.M. 2. Observation on 06/03/26 at 12:56 P.M. revealed in room [ROOM NUMBER] paint scuffed off the wall in multiple places. This was verified during interview with Maintenance Director #228 on 06/03/26 at 12:56 P.M. 3. Observation on 06/03/26 at 12:57 P.M. revealed in room [ROOM NUMBER] paint was scuffed off the walls in multiple…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-06-10 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure 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 observations, staff interview, and review of menus and recipes, the facility failed to ensure food was prepared by methods that conserve nutritive value. This affected four of four residents who received a pureed diet (Residents #9, #31, #33, and #80). The facility census was 107. Findings include:Review of the menu for the lunch meal on 06/03/26 revealed residents were to receive a beef taco salad with corn chips and cake. Observation of the pureeing of food for the lunch meal on 06/03/26 at 10:00 A.M. revealed [NAME] #183 to place five 3 ounce servings of taco meat into the food processor. She added water to the meat to blend it and get it to the correct consistency. She removed the meat from the food processor. She then placed eight bags of corn chips into the food processor. She added water to get it to the correct consistency. Review of the recipe for beef taco salad revealed staff were to process in food processor until smooth pudding like consistency is achieved. Add juice, milk, or broth, whichever is most appropriate for the item being pureed, a little at a time 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 · E2026-06-10 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure that resident personal food items were stored appropriately in nursing unit refrigerators. This affected Resident #79 but had the potential to affect the residents residing on four (Unit 300, 400, 600 and 700) of five nursing units. The facility census was 107. Observations on 06/03/26 at 8:30 A.M. of the nursing unit refrigerator on the 300/400 unit revealed two takeout food containers containing Chinese food and a burrito. The takeout containers were not labeled with a resident name and were not dated to indicate when they were placed in the refrigerator or when they were to be discarded. Observations on 06/03/26 at 8:35 A.M. of the nursing unit refrigerator on the 600 unit revealed a bag containing food from Taco Bell dated 05/28/26. The food was not labeled with a resident name and did not have a date of when it was to be discarded. Interview with Licensed Practical Nurse Supervisor #261, at that time, confirmed the food was not labeled and should have been thrown away after three days.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-06-10 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review and review of facility policy the facility failed to maintain infection control principles as evidenced by open packages of incontinence products stored on the floor, gloves not being changed when needed while checking a finger stick blood sugar, not covering the end of a tube feeding line after unhooking it from a resident and not maintaining a resident's urinary catheter tubing off of the floor. This affected five resident's (#4, #43, #64, #85 and #92) of eight sampled for infection control. The facility census was 107.Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #64's medical records revealed an admission date of 06/09/25, a re-entry of 08/05/25 and diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, cervicalgia, hypertension, depression, unspecified diastolic (congestive) heart failure, peripheral vascular disease and acquired absence of left leg above the knee. Review of Resident #64's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed a brief…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-10 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview and review of facility policy and procedure, the facility failed to maintain a resident's dignity with use of an indwelling urinary catheter. This affected one resident (#4) four residents observed with indwelling urinary catheters. The census was 107. Findings include: Review of Resident #4's medical record revealed he was admitted to the facility 04/07/26. Diagnoses included dementia, depression, obstructive uropathy, diabetes, fracture of the seventh cervical vertebrae, fracture of the right mandible, and fracture of the neck of the left humerus. Review of the 5-day minimum data set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed his cognition was not intact. He required set up or clean up assistance for eating, dependent for oral hygiene, toileting, substantial/maximal assistance for shower/bathing dressing and turning and repositioning. He had an indwelling urinary catheter and was frequently incontinent of his bowel. Review of physician orders revealed an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-10 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to individualize a resident's room to allow the resident to access all areas of the room. This affected one resident (#64) of one resident reviewed for reasonable accommodation of need. The facility census was 107. Findings include:Review of Resident #64's medical records revealed an admission date of 06/09/25, a re-entry of 08/05/25 and diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, cervicalgia, hypertension, depression, unspecified diastolic (congestive) heart failure, peripheral vascular disease and acquired absence of left leg above the knee.Review of Resident #64's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed a brief interview for mental status score of 15 indicating the resident was cognitively intact. Further review of the MDS revealed Resident #64 used a wheelchair for mobility, was dependent on staff for toileting hygiene and transfers, required substantial/maximal assistance with 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 · D2026-06-10 · 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 record review, interview and review of facility policy the facility failed to ensure a resident's physician was notified when a resident was transferred to the hospital. This affected one resident (#112) of three residents reviewed for discharge. The facility census was 107. Findings include:Review of Resident #112's closed medical record revealed an admission date 03/02/26 and a discharge date [DATE] with diagnoses including but not limited to cellulitis of left lower leg, Pancreas cancer, and high blood pressure.Review of Resident #112's Discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #112 had intact cognition with a Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score or 15 out of possible 15.Review of Resident #112's progress notes dated 03/06/26 at 2:08 P.M. revealed Social Services spoke with Resident #112 concerning Resident #112's request to transfer to another facility. Social Services provided Resident #112 with a list of potential facilities and will follow-up with Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-10 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolatedPrevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
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 resident was free from chemical restraints when a psychoactive medication was given without attempting non-pharmacological interventions and without adequate indication for use. This affected one resident (#103) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 107. Findings include:Review of the record for Resident #103 revealed an admission date of 01/14/26 and diagnoses including dementia, epilepsy, chronic pain, anxiety disorder, and depression. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment completed 04/20/26 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 10, indicating moderately impaired cognition. It did not indicate any type of behaviors exhibited by the resident. The resident resided on the secure memory care unit. Observations on 06/04/26 at 8:13 A.M. revealed Resident #103 to be seated at a table and talking with three other residents. They had just finished breakfast. Resident #103 was well dressed and groomed. She was pleasant and smiling. Observations on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-10 · tag F0636 — isolatedAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
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 conduct a comprehensive assessment for a resident with a diagnosis of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). This affected one resident (#67) of 38 residents reviewed for comprehensive assessments. The facility census was 107. Findings include:Review of the medical record for Resident #67 revealed an admission date of 03/01/26 and diagnoses including PTSD, dementia, urinary retention, and malignant neoplasm of the prostate. Review of a Social Service History and Assessment form dated 03/02/26 revealed he had previously lived with his wife and daughter. The question: has the resident experienced a past trauma? had a response of military veteran. The question: does the resident have identified triggers? had a response of unable to identify at this time. The assessment indicated his wife was his contact. It stated his cognition was severely impaired. Review of a Minimum Data Set assessment completed 03/07/26 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 5, indicating severe cognitive impairment. It indicated 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.
Show the remaining 25 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-10 · 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
Based on observations, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan. This affected one resident (#33) of 38 residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans. The facility census was 107. Findings include:Review of the record for Resident #33 revealed an admission date of 06/02/25 and diagnoses including dementia, metabolic encephalopathy, adult failure to thrive, and hypertension. The resident resided on the secure memory care unit. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment completed 03/26/26 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 3, indicating severe cognitive impairment. It further stated the resident was dependent upon staff for personal hygiene and bathing. Review of the plan of care for Resident #33 revealed it did not address a behavior of rectal digging or the provision of personal hygiene by staff. Observations on 06/01/26 at 2:10 P.M. and 06/04/26 at 8:00 A.M. revealed Resident #33 to have a dark brown substance under her fingernails. Interview with Licensed Practical Nurse #184 on 06/04/26 8:00 A.M.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-10 · 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 medical record review and staff interview the facility failed have timely care conferences and invite family to care conferences. This affected two residents (#3, #35) of five residents reviewed for care plan timing and revision. The census was 107. Findings include:1.Review of Resident #3's medical record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included diabetes, gastroparesis, congestive heart failure, Chronic kidney disease, PTSD, ASHD, and chronic pain syndrome. Review of the quarterly minimum data set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed his cognition was intact. He required set up or clean up assistance for eating, oral hygiene, supervision or touching assistance for toileting, turning and repositioning and personal hygiene, substantial/maximal assistance for shower/bathing, Occasionally incontinent of urine and always continent of bowel. Review of the record revealed a care conference was held on 10/16/25 and not again until 03/18/26 identifying five months in between. On…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-10 · 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 medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to follow physician orders for monitoring urinary output. This affected one resident (#4) of four residents reviewed with indwelling urinary catheters. The census was 107. Findings include: Review of Resident #4's medical record revealed he was admitted to the facility 04/07/26. Diagnoses included dementia, depression, obstructive uropathy, diabetes, fracture of the seventh cervical vertebrae, fracture of the right mandible, and fracture of the neck of the left humerus. Review of physician orders revealed an order dated 04/07/26 for an Indwelling Urinary (Foley) Catheter: measure and record output. Review of the 5-day MDS dated [DATE] revealed his cognition was not intact, He required set up or clean up assistance for eating, dependent for oral hygiene, toileting, substantial/maximal assistance for shower/bathing dressing and turning and repositioning. He had an indwelling urinary catheter and was frequently incontinent of his bowel. Review…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-10 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation, interview and review of the manufacture user guide, the facility failed to ensure a physician ordered low air loss mattress for pressure ulcer prevention was was powered and inflated. This deficient practice affected one resident (Resident #27) of four residents reviewed for medical equipment. The census was 107. Findings include: Review of Resident #27's medical record revealed an admission date of 12/31/23 with diagnoses including but not limited to type two diabetes mellitus, heart failure, Alzheimer's Disease, and high blood pressure.Review of Resident #27's potential for skin impairment care plan dated 09/02/25 revealed Resident #27 refused to get out of bed at times, was at risk for skin impairment, and has a low air loss mattress (LAL) mattress to bed as an intervention for development of skin impairment.Review of Resident #27's signed physician orders revealed an order dated 11/06/25 for use of a LAL mattress to the bed. Check function/inflation every shift…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-10 · 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 record review, observations, interviews, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure safety of residents was maintained. This deficient practice affected one resident (Resident #12) out of four residents reviewed for safety adaptive equipment for cigarette smoking, affected one resident (Resident #44) out two residents for safety while out on the facility's campus, and affected one resident (Resident #71) out three residents reviewed for bed mattress safety. The facility census was 107. Findings Include: 1. Review of Resident #12's medical record revealed an admission date 09/29/25 with diagnoses including but not limited to Multiple Sclerosis, high blood pressure, depression, anxiety, and paraplegia. Review of Resident #12's smoking assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #12 was deemed supervision for smoking with no adaptive equipment or smoking apron required. Review of Resident #12's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #12 had intact cognition with a Brief…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-10 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview and facility policy and procedure review, the facility failed to follow physician orders for flushing the gastrostomy tube (tube through the abdominal wall into the stomach for nutrition) during medication administration . This affected one (Resident #85) of one resident observed for medication administration through a gastrostomy tube. The census was 107. Findings include: Review of Resident #85's medical record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included cerebral palsy, severe intellectual disability, seizures, encephalopathy, and gastrostomy. Review of the physicians orders for 10/23/2023 revealed an order for every shift to flush the gastrostomy tube with 30 milliliters (ml) of water pre/post medication administration and 5 to 10 mls of water between each medication. The resident was also ordered to receive dicyclomine hydrochloride (Bentyl used to treat spasms of the intestines) 10 milligrams (mg) per five ml 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 · D2026-06-10 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered within ordered physician parameters. This affected one (Resident #3) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The census was 107. Findings include: Review of Resident #3's medical record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included diabetes, congestive heart failure, chronic kidney disease,and chronic pain syndrome. Review of the quarterly minimum data set assessment dated [DATE] revealed his cognition was intact. He required set up or clean up assistance for eating and oral hygiene, Supervision or touching assistance for toileting, turning and repositioning and personal hygiene, substantial/maximal assistance for shower/bathing, Occasionally incontinent of urine and always continent of bowel. Review of the physician orders revealed an order dated 04/14/2026 for Humalog insulin Subcutaneous Solution Pen-injector 100 UNIT/ML (Insulin Lispro) Inject 17 units…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-10 · tag F0790 — failed to provide dental care — isolatedProvide routine and 24-hour emergency dental care for each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff, and resident interview, the facility failed to obtain dental services for one (Resident #3) of nine residents reviewed for dental services. The census was 107. Findings include: Review of Resident #3's medical record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included diabetes, gastroparesis, congestive heart failure, chronic kidney disease, and chronic pain syndrome. Review of the quarterly minimum data set assessment dated [DATE] revealed his cognition was intact. He requires set up or clean up assistance for eating, oral hygiene, Supervision or touching assistance for toileting, turning and repositioning and personal hygiene, substantial/maximal assistance for shower/bathing, Occasionally incontinent of urine and always continent of bowel. Interview with on 06/02/2026 at 9:35 A,M. with Resident #3 revealed he has been here a year and has asked to see a dentist and hasn't. There was one here yesterday and I thought they would come and get me.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-10 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolatedProvide or obtain dental services for each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff, and resident interview, the facility failed to obtain dental services for one (Resident #10) of nine residents reviewed for dental services. The census was 107. Findings include:Review of Resident #10's medical record revealed he admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included diabetes, encephalopathy, Downs syndrome, obstructive and reflux uropathy, urinary retention, chronic kidney disease, Stage 3. Review of the annual MDS dated [DATE] revealed his cognition is severely impaired. He requires supervision or touching assistance for eating, partial/moderate assistance for oral hygiene, personal hygiene and turning and repositioning, dependent for toileting, substantial/maximal assistance for shower/bathing and dressing. Indwelling urinary catheter and always incontinent of bowel. Review of the plan of care dated 03/31/2025 revealed the resident has oral/dental health problems due to he has his own teeth in poor condition with some broken 06/01/2026 5:07 P.M.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-10 · 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 Based on record review, observation, and interview the facility failed to maintain accurate medical records related to pressure relieving interventions. This deficient practice affected one resident (Resident #27) of four residents reviewed for medical equipment. The census was 107.Findings Include:Review of Resident #27's medical record revealed admission date 12/31/23 with diagnoses including but not limited to type two Diabetes Mellites, heart failure, Alzheimer's Disease, and high blood pressure.Review of Resident #27's signed physician orders revealed an order dated 11/06/25 for use of a Low Air Loss (LAL) mattress to bed. Check function/inflation every shift (QS).Review of Resident #27's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #27 had impaired cognition with a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3 out of possible 15, had impairment on one side of the body, used a wheelchair for mobility, was at risk for developing skin impairment, and was dependent on staff for Activities…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-07-23 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a safe homelike environment for the 22 (Residents #58, #59, #60, #61, #62, #62, #63, #64, #65, #68, #69, #70, #71, #72, #73, #74, #75, #76, #77, #78, #79, and #80) in the memory care unit when the unit was left with a black moldlike substance in the hallway, and there was a strong odor of urine noted throughout the unit. This affected 22 residents in memory care unit of 94 residents reviewed for environment. The facility census was 94.Findings include: Observations on 07/15/25 from 3:22 P.M.- to 4:05 P.M., a tour of the facility was completed. The facility had an East Unit that was comprised of 100 and 200 halls. They had a North Unit that included the 500, 600, and 700 halls. They had a secure memory care unit that included the 300 and 400 halls. No odors or evidence of residents not receiving proper incontinence care was noted when touring the East and the North Units. Those areas of the facility were free of any odors and none of the residents observed showed signs of incontinence as evidenced by saturated…
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 before2025-07-23 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, interview, and review of the facility policies, the facility failed to maintain appropriate infection control and enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) for one (Resident # 87) out of 41 residents in EBP. The facility census was 94. Findings include: Review of the medical record for Resident #87 revealed an admission date of 06/26/25. Diagnoses included metabolic encephalopathy, hypertension, peripheral vascular disease, major depressive disorder, cirrhosis of liver, type two diabetes mellitus, bipolar disorder, and chronic pain syndrome. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of three out of 15, indicating Resident #87 had severe cognitive impairment. The resident was assessed to require partial/moderate assistance for meals/eating, and oral hygiene. Resident #87 was dependent on staff for toileting, shower/bathing, dressing, and personal hygiene. Resident #87 was admitted with one Stage…
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 before2025-05-21 · tag F0745 — failed to provide medically-related social services — isolatedProvide medically-related social services to help each resident achieve the highest possible quality of life.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, resident interview, vendor staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide medically necessary social services regarding discharge processes. This affected one (Resident #11) of three residents reviewed for discharge. The census was 108. Findings Include: Resident #11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses were congestive heart failure, chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, hypo-osmolality and hyponatremia, atrial fibrillation, gout, anemia, hypertension, anxiety disorder, glaucoma, bipolar disorder, fibromyalgia, COPD, and depression. Review of her minimum data set (MDS) assessment, dated 03/14/25, revealed she was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #11's quarterly care conference notes, dated 11/04/24, 01/27/25, and 04/21/25 revealed the facility addressed on-going discharge questions. It stated, she was undecided as to whether she wanted to discharge, but she wanted to be asked at each care conference if she…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-19 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff and resident interviews, and record review the facility failed to provide reasonable accommodation of needs and preferences when a bedside chair, a bedside nightstand, and a call light were not within reach. This affected one of 108 residents (#26). The facility census was 108. Findings Include: Record review revealed Resident #26 had an admission date of 05/19/23 with diagnoses including: Type two diabetes, displaced intertrochanteric fracture of left femur, cervical disc degeneration, coronary artery bypass graft without angina, chronic atrial fibrillation, systolic congestive heart failure, muscle wasting multiple sites, posthemorrhagic anemia, Alzheimer's disease, major depressive disorder, dementia without behavioral disturbance, unsteadiness on feet, abnormalities of gait and mobility, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, venous insufficiency, cognitive communication deficit, wrist drop left wrist, lymphedema, hypertension, urinary tract infection, full incontinence of feces, urinary incontinence, retention of urine, cardiac pacemaker, and history 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 · Dcited before2025-02-19 · 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 record review, observation, staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment for two residents which allowed them to use their personal belongings to the extent possible This affected three residents (#33, #40, #75) of 108 residents residing in the facility. The census was 108. Findings Include: 1. Record review revealed Resident #40 had an admission date of 03/30/18 with diagnoses including: Cerebral infarction, dysphagia, influenza, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, morbid obesity, diverticulosis, muscle wasting and atrophy, intervertebral disc degeneration of the lumbar region, type two diabetes mellitus, chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, major depressive disorder, cardiac pacemaker, voice and resonance disorder, low back pain, abnormalities of gait and mobility, anemia, hyperlipidemia, anxiety disorder, left bundle branch block, constipation, gastroesophageal reflux disease, difficulty in walking, history of covid-19, urge…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-19 · 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 medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure pre-admission screening and resident reviews (PASSAR) were accurately completed. This affected one resident (#43) of two review for PASSAR accuracy. The census was 108. Findings include: Review of Resident #43's medical record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included Ogilvie syndrome ( acute colonic pseudo-obstruction, is the acute dilatation of the colon in the absence of any mechanical obstruction), colostomy, gastrostomy, nausea and vomiting, schizoaffective disorder , depression and anxiety. Review of the quarterly minimum data set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed his cognition was intact. He required partial/moderate assistance for oral hygiene, personal hygiene, and turning and repositioning, dependent for toileting and substantial/maximal assist for showers/bathing, lower body dressing and application of footwear. Resident #43 had an indwelling catheter and a colostomy. Receives…
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 before2025-02-19 · 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 develop and implement a comprehensive person centered care plan for diuretic medication for Resident #60. This affected one resident (#60) of five residents sampled for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 108. Findings include: Review of Resident #60's medical record revealed an admission date of 10/03/20 and a reentry date of 01/13/22. Further review revealed diagnoses including malignant neoplasm of overlapping sites of rectum, anus and anal canal, secondary malignant neoplasm of large intestine and rectum, diabetes, chronic respiratory failure, morbid obesity, heart failure, and hypertension. Review of Resident #60's quarterly minimum data set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed the resident had a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating that she is cognitively intact. Further review of the MDS revealed Resident #60 was receiving diuretic medication. Review of Resident #60's physician's orders revealed an order with a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-19 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure 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, staff interview and review of facility policy and procedure, the facility failed to ensure medications were locked against unauthorized access. This had the potential to affect one resident (#97) of 10 residents on the 200 hallway identified as cognitively impaired and independently mobile. The census was 108. Findings include: Observation on 02/12/25 at 10:39 A.M. revealed the medication cart in the hallway unlocked outside of room [ROOM NUMBER]-A with the door closed and no nurse in attendance of the cart. At 10:41 A.M. Registered Nurse #251 came out from the room and verified during interview she had left the medication cart unlocked and unattended in the hallway. Review of the facility Medication Storage policy and procedure (dated 04/18 and updated 01/03/25) revealed compartment (including, but not limited to, drawers, cabinets, rooms, refrigerators, carts and boxes) containing drugs and biological's shall be locked when not in use, and trays or carts used to transport such items shall…
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 before2025-02-19 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, medical record review, and staff interview the facility failed to maintain infection control with urinary catheters. This affected one resident (#3) of four residents reviewed for urinary catheters. The census was 108. Findings include Review of Resident #3's medical record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included metabolic encephalopathy, morbid obesity, heart failure, diabetes, atrial fibrillation, major depression, chronic kidney disease and anxiety. Review of the admission minimum data set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed her cognition was intact. She required set up or clean-up assistance for eating, oral hygiene, is dependent for toileting, and substantial/maximal assistance with shower/bathing, partial/moderate assistance for personal hygiene, dressing and turning and repositioning. The resident had a urinary catheter and was frequently incontinent of bowel. On 02/11/25 at 11:47 A.M. observation revealed the urinary catheter tubing was observed on the floor.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-06 · 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
Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure advance directive orders and documents were consistent in the medical record and reflective of the resident/resident representative wishes. This affected one (Resident #348) of 24 residents reviewed for advance directives. The facility census was 100. Findings include: Review of Resident #348's medical record revealed an admission date of 08/08/23 with diagnoses that included Alzheimer's disease with dementia, congestive heart failure and atherosclerotic heart disease. Further review of Resident #348's physician's orders revealed the resident's code status was full code (cardiopulmonary resuscitation). Review of the paper chart revealed an advance directive form which indicated do not resuscitate comfort care (DNR-CC) measures (comfort measures in the event of cardiac/respiratory arrest) chosen by Resident #348's responsible party and signed by the physician on 08/09/23. The paper chart also contained a full code paper which indicated to staff the resident was a full code in case of emergency.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-06 · tag F0637 — isolatedAssess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on medical record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a significant change assessment was initiated when a resident was admitted to hospice services. This affected one (Resident #91) of 21 residents who were reviewed regarding requirements for significant change assessments. The census was 100. Findings include: Review of Resident #91's medical record revealed diagnoses including malignant neoplasm of the prostate, secondary malignant neoplasm of the bone, abnormal weight loss, and depression. Review of hospice notes revealed an initial visit was made on 08/02/23. On 08/03/23 an order was written to admit Resident #91 to hospice. There was no evidence the facility initiated a significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment. On 08/29/23 at 8:57 A.M., Regional Nurse #206 verified Resident #91 had an order admitting him to hospice dated 08/03/23 and a significant change MDS had not been initiated but should have been.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-06 · tag F0745 — failed to provide medically-related social services — isolatedProvide medically-related social services to help each resident achieve the highest possible quality of life.
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, financial record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to provide an adequate plan to spend down resident finances when funds were above the Medicaid allowable limit. This affected three (Residents #19, #23, and #37) of six resident financial information reviewed. The census was 100. Findings Include: 1. Resident #19 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included atherosclerotic heart disease, major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, and cognitive communication deficit. Review of her Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 07/16/23, revealed she had a significant cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #19's quarterly financial statements, dated 07/01/22 to 06/30/23, revealed her total amount in her resident account varied between $2986.96 and $7191.37; it was never below $2000. Review of Resident #19's medical records, which included progress notes, social service notes, and care plans, revealed no documentation to support the facility had a plan…
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 before2023-09-06 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure 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 observations, policy review, review of drug reference information and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were appropriately labeled and stored. This affected six residents (Resident #21, #29, #65, #67, #89 and #93) of 100 residents residing in the facility. Findings include: 1. On [DATE] at 8:54 A.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #124 was observed preparing and administering medication to Resident #67. There was no expiration date on the bottle of enteric coated aspirin 81 milligram (mg) dose. LPN #124 verified she was unable to locate an expiration date on the aspirin bottle at the time of preparation/administration. 2. On [DATE] at 10:16 A.M., observation of the 400 hall medication cart revealed there was an open/used insulin pen for Resident #65 which was not dated. There was a box with an open vial of Humulin 70/30 insulin which was undated with no name. On [DATE] at 10:16 A.M., LPN #157 verified Resident #65's insulin pen did not contain a date when it was opened. LPN #157…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-06 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — isolatedImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure antibiotic stewardship guidelines were followed prior to antibiotic use. This affected one (Resident #299) of one resident reviewed for antibiotic stewardship. The census was 100. Findings Include: Resident #299 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses were sepsis, rectal abscess, difficulty walking, type II diabetes, muscle weakness, chest pain, obesity, anemia, vitamin D deficiency, tobacco use, hypertension, major depressive disorder, osteoarthritis, fibromyalgia, and headache. Review of her Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 08/14/23, revealed she was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #299 physician orders revealed she was prescribed Doxycycline Hyclate Oral Tablet 100 milligrams, twice daily for seven days. Initially, this medication justification was for infection, but then it was clarified to be for an abscess to her buttocks. Review of Resident #299 medication administration…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · B2025-02-19 · tag F0625 — patternNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure written information prior to transfer to the hospital of the bed hold notice. This affected three residents (#61, #71 and #106) of three residents reviewed for hospitalization. The census was 108. Findings included: 1. Review of Resident #71's medical record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included diabetes, encephalopathy, Down's syndrome, dysphagia, chronic kidney disease, and high blood pressure. Review of the quarterly minimum data set assessment (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed his cognition was not intact (BIM's-3). He required setup or clean-up assistance with oral hygiene, is dependent upon staff for toileting, dressing and personal hygiene and substantial/maximal assistance for shower bathing. The resident has an indwelling urinary catheter and is frequently incontinent of bowel. Review of the nursing progress notes revealed on 12/26/24 at 11:54 P.M. Resident #71 was mouth breathing, and an oxygen…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$17,610 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $17,610 — penalty dated 2025-07-23
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 CERTUS HEALTHCARE — 14 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 1 of 5 | 1.6 | -0.6 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 1.6 | +0.4 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 1.9 | -0.9 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 4.1 | -1.1 vs chain |
The other 13 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.6★, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHM OH WEST OPCO HOLDCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 12/28/2021 |
| OHIO CARE SKLD LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 50% | since 12/28/2021 |
| DIPASQUA, JASON | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/28/2021 |
| DUNDR, MICHAEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| FISHMAN, SHMUEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/28/2021 |
| HAWKINS, MARCUS | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 10 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
2 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.
About 74% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $1.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 11% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in OH
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Ohio Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-09-01 — CMS provider number 365394. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-06-10, 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.