Glenhaven Retirement Village

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

61.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 75 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 63.9% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 36 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 0.16 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 14% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 20% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 71.2 residents a day — about 59% occupied, or roughly 49 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 4.64 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.12 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.27 is at or above 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 4.11 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.86 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.11 to 0.14 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

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

Inspection trend

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

29 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 17 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-10-08 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure 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 On 10/07/24 an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) situation was determined to exist related to the facility's failure to ensure staff followed proper procedure for the use of a mechanical lift to prevent accidents. The failure resulted in a fractured hip for Res #1. An undated facility Hydraulic Lift policy documented to check to be sure hooks are secure. A care plan intervention, dated 11/03/23, documented Res #1 required two staff assistance with a Hoyer (full body mechanical lift) for transfers. On 09/08/24, Res #1 had a fall due to the strap on the transfer sling failing to remain attached to the Hoyer lift. The resident was sent to the hospital and diagnosed with a closed hip fracture. Staff were in-serviced on 09/08/24 regarding lift safety and operation, but no ongoing monitoring was completed to ensure staff compliance with safe utilization of mechanical lifts. During interviews with staff conducted on 10/07/24, the staff stated lift sling straps were to be checked to ensure placement prior to lifting a 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Actual harm · G2022-12-08 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to notify the physician of an unstageable pressure ulcer, provide appropriate treatment, and provide wound care in a way to help prevent infection for one (#33) of two residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility documented an unstageable ulcer on 11/04/22 and the physician was not notified. On 12/07/22, during an observation of wound care, an additional pressure ulcer was observed. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 12/06/22, documented two residents resided in the facility who had pressure ulcers. Findings: A Risk Assessment and Pressure Ulcer Policy revised 06/24/08, read in parts, .3. Residents with pressure ulcers will be reassessed on a daily basis to help identify any new impairment of skin integrity .8. Pressure Ulcer Weekly Summary .will be completed and forwarded to DON and Administrator for weekly review for QA purposes .10. All pressure ulcers will be staged according to MDS Assessment definitions. 11. Weekly Pressure ulcer documentation will include site, size (use…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-01-16 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — pattern
  Make sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program. The DON identified 52 residents resided in the facility. Findings: An undated facility Pest policy, read in part, [name of facility withheld] will have monthly pest services to ensure that the facility remains pest free. On 01/16/24 at 8:32 a.m., the DON stated they had reports of spiders, roaches, and mice at least four times a week. On 01/16/25 at 8:46 a.m. an initial tour of the building was conducted. The following observations were made, a. in room C16 there were 14 dead roaches on the floor and roach egg sacks were visible, b. in room C16 there was one live roach located inside the dresser drawer next to the bed with roach eggs and dead baby roaches, and c. dead roaches were located behind the juice machine in the kitchen. On 01/16/25 at 8:47 a.m., the DON was present in room C16. They stated they saw one live roach and all the dead roaches above during the intital tour. On 01/16/25 at…

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

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-12-19 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — pattern
  Develop 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

  Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure: a. a diuretic was included on the care plan for one (#23) of five sampled residents reviewed for unnecessary meds; and b. assist rails were included on the care plan for one (#43) of two sampled residents reviewed for restraints. The administrator in training identified 51 residents resided in the facility and 15 residents received diuretics. MDS Coordinator #1 identified three residents had assist rails. Findings: 1. Resident #23 had diagnoses which included hypertensive heart disease with heart failure. A physician order, dated 05/10/24, documented to administer hydrochlorothiazide (diuretic medication) 25 mg in the morning for hypertensive heart disease with heart failure. A physician order, dated 06/22/24, documented to administer furosemide (diuretic medication) 40 mg in the morning for hypertensive heart disease with heart failure. The resident's care plan was reviewed and did not document the use of diuretics. On 12/19/24 at 10:22 a.m., MDS Coordinator #1 stated they did not see diuretics on the…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2023-10-12 · tag F0851 — widespread
  Electronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to submit PBJ data to CMS for the third quarter of the fiscal year for 2023. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 10/10/23, documented 46 residents resided in the facility. Findings The PBJ Staffing Data Report documented the facility failed to submit data for the third quarter of 2023 (April 1 - June 30). On 10/10/23 at 9:43 a.m., the BOM was asked how often the facility submitted staffing data to CMS. They stated quarterly. They were asked if they had submitted data for the third quarter of 2023. 10/10/23 at 11:18 a.m., the BOM stated they did not submit the data for the quarter and should have.

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2023-10-12 · tag F0636 — pattern
  Assess 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure comprehensive assessment were accurate and/or completed timely for two (#6 and #44) of 13 sampled residents reviewed for assessments. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 10/10/23, documented 46 residents resided in the facility. Findings: 1. Res #6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included depression, insomnia, heart failure, and chronic kidney disease. An admission assessment, dated 05/03/23, documented on 06/15/23 the RN assessment coordinator signed the assessment as completed. On 10/11/23 at 2:49 p.m., MDS Coordinator #1 was asked about the type of assessment they had completed for the resident. They stated they would have to look. They stated the assessment should have been an annual assessment. They stated they marked the assessment incorrectly. MDS Coordinator #1 was made aware the assessment was completed on 06/15/23 when the ARD was 05/03/23. She stated they knew it was not completed…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-10-12 · tag F0638 — pattern
  Assure that each resident’s assessment is updated at least once every 3 months.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure quarterly assessments were completed once every three months and/or no later than 14 days after the ARD for two (#6 and #36) of 13 sampled residents reviewed for assessments. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 10/10/23, documented 46 residents resided in the facility. Findings: 1. Res #6 had diagnoses which included depression, insomnia, heart failure, and chronic kidney disease. A quarterly resident assessment, dated 07/28/23, documented on 09/09/23 the RN assessment coordinator signed the assessment as completed. On 10/11/23 at 2:49 p.m., MDS Coordinator #1 was made aware the resident had a quarterly assessment completed on 09/09/23 when the ARD was 07/28/23. They stated they knew the assessment had not been completed within 14 days of the ARD. 2. Res #36 had diagnoses which included abdominal aortic aneurysm without rupture, COPD, disorder of kidney and ureter, cerebral infarction, pure hypercholesterolemia, unspecified osteoarthritis, generalized anxiety disorder, chronic pain…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2023-10-12 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
  Develop 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 fully develop comprehensive care plans for four (#6, 8, 44, and #47) of 13 sampled residents reviewed for care plans. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 10/10/23, documented 46 residents resided in the facility. Findings: 1. Res #6 had diagnoses which included depression, insomnia, heart failure, and chronic kidney disease. A comprehensive resident assessment, dated 05/05/23, documented activities was a care planning decision on the CAA summary. There was no documentation activities was developed on the care plan. On 10/11/23 at 4:40 p.m., MDS Coordinator #1 was shown the resident's assessment where activities was a care planning decision. They were asked if the resident's care plan was developed to include activities. They reviewed the resident's care plan and stated it was not on the care plan and should have been. 2. Res #44 had diagnoses which included a pressure ulcer to the sacrum. An admission assessment, dated…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-10-12 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — pattern
  Develop 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

  Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to review and/or revise the care plan related to: a. a decrease in mobility for one (#3) of 13 residents whose care plans were reviewed, and b. fall prevention interventions for one (#28) of 13 residents who were reviewed for accidents. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 10/10/23, documented 46 residents resided in the facility. Findings: A Fall Focus Program policy, revised 04/23/07, read in parts, .Incident of fall: Consider and evaluate factors regarding fall and develop care plan using appropriate interventions .Review the fall at next safety committee meeting and gain input for interdisciplinary team members for other possible interventions to prevent falls. Make sure to update and revise plan of care as indicated .Schedule care plan meetings as indicated for review and revision . 1. Res #3 had diagnoses which included intellectual disabilities, convulsions, and thyrotoxicosis. An annual assessment, dated 06/20/23, documented the resident was severely cognitively impaired and…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-10-12 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — pattern
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide nail care for one (#34) of two sampled residents reviewed for activities of daily living. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, dated 10/10/23, documented 46 residents resided in the facility. Findings: Res #44 had diagnoses which included ventricular tachycardia, hypokalemia, chronic ischemic heart disease, unspecified diastolic congestive heart failure, hypotension, GERD, muscle weakness, and acute respiratory failure. A quarterly resident assessment, dated 09/08/23, documented their cognition was intact and they required extensive assistance with personal hygiene. On 10/09/23 at 11:58 a.m., the resident was observed in their bed with their left foot exposed. Their toenails were excessively long. The resident was asked when was the last time their toenails had been trimmed. They stated they did not know. They stated their toenails were extremely long and it caused pain to their left foot. On 10/10/23 at 1:04 p.m., CNA #2 was asked how often nail care was provided. They stated 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2023-10-12 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — pattern
  Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to turn and reposition a resident with limited range of motion (ROM) in order to increase ROM and/or prevent further decline for one (#1) of three residents reviewed for mobility. The Resident Census and Conditions of Residents report, documented 44 residents who required assistance with mobility. Findings: A Nursing Assistant Duties general guideline, undated, documented to turn and reposition all bed and chair residents every two hours and all wheelchair residents are to be checked frequently and taken to the bathroom at least every two hours as requested or per individual schedule. Res #1 was admitted with diagnoses which included restless leg syndrome, muscle spasms, and colon cancer. A care plan, dated 01/31/23, documented the resident required total assistance with most ADLs with an intervention of assistance and/or reminders to turn and reposition every two hours. A quarterly assessment, dated 07/11/23, documented the resident was cognitively intact, required extensive one person assistance with mobility,…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-10-12 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — pattern
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident received adequate supervision and assistance to prevent falls for one (#39) of three sampled residents reviewed for accidents. The facility failed to consistently implement interventions to prevent recurrence and evaluate interventions for effectiveness for a resident who had frequent falls. The Resident Census and Conditions of Resident report documented 46 residents resided in the facility. Findings: A Fall Focus Program policy, revised 04/23/07, read in parts, .Fall risk factor evaluation: Review any health problems or conditions that could contribute to a fall .Review the medications that could contribute to a fall .Review environmental hazards such as poor lighting, carpet, poorly arrange furniture .Review previous falls to determine patterns .Incident of fall: Consider and evaluate factors regarding fall and develop care plan using appropriate interventions .Review the fall at next safety committee meeting and gain input for interdisciplinary team members for other possible…

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

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

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Fines & penalties

$14,433 in federal fines across 1 penalty. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.

• $14,433 — penalty dated 2024-09-05
• Medicare payment denial — starting 2024-11-12 for 3 days

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.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 10 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

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

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

Cost & finances

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

What families pay in OK