Zarrow Pointe

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.

52.2% 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 104 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 66.7% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 45 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 0.58 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 87% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 3% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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 62 beds and averages 59.2 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 3 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. 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 5.57 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.66 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.89 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 4.98 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.80 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.77 to 0.41 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 41% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are 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.

19 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 7 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · Gcited before2025-05-19 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  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 observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive care plan was developed to include the amount of assistance needed for incontinent care and bed mobility for 1 (#1) of 3 sampled residents whose care plans were reviewed. The DON identified 56 residents resided in the facility. Findings: On 05/08/25 at 2:30 p.m., Resident #1 was observed in bed. Signage was observed on the wall by the resident's bed that showed the resident required the assistance of two staff for all personal care while in bed. On 05/12/25 at 2:04 p.m., CMA #1 and CNA #2 were observed to provide incontinent care to Resident #1. A policy titled Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered, dated December 2016, read in part, A comprehensive, person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs is developed and implemented for each resident.The care plan interventions are derived from a thorough analysis of the…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Actual harm · Gcited before2025-05-19 · 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 Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from falls during incontinent care for 1 (#1) of 3 sampled residents who were reviewed for falls. The DON identified 18 residents who required the assistance of two staff during incontinent care. Findings: On 05/08/25 at 2:30 p.m., Resident #1 was observed in bed. The bed was observed to be low with the left side of the bed against the wall and a fall mat was observed to be on the floor on the right side of the bed. Signage was observed on the wall by the resident's bed that showed the resident required the assistance of two staff for all personal care while in bed. On 05/12/25 at 2:04 p.m., CMA #1 and CNA #2 were observed to provide incontinent care to Resident #1. One staff member was observed on each side of the bed during the care. An annual assessment, dated 11/02/24, showed Resident #1 had a BIMS score of 03, which indicated the resident was severely impaired in cognition for daily decision making, 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · D2025-08-29 · tag F0640 — isolated
  Encode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure assessments were completed for 1 (#20) of 16 sampled residents whose assessments were reviewed.The administrator identified 55 residents resided in the facility. Findings: A 5-day assessment, dated 02/26/25, showed Resident #20 had a BIMS score of 13 which indicated their cognition was intact and active discharge planning was occurring for the resident to return to the community. A Transfer/Discharge Report, dated 03/14/25, showed Resident #20 had been discharged from the facility to home. Review of the assessments in the electronic clinical record did not show a discharge assessment had been completed. On 08/22/25 at 12:59 p.m., MDS coordinator #1 stated they had reviewed the electronic clinical record and should have completed a discharge assessment for Resident #20.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-29 · tag F0641 — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to accurately code a significant change MDS assessment for 1 (#41) of 14 sampled residents who were reviewed for accuracy of assessments. The administrator identified 55 residents resided in the facility. Findings:Resident #41's significant change assessment, dated 07/28/25, showed cognitively intact cognition with a BIMS score of 15. The assessment showed the life expectancy of less than 6 months coded as no.A physician's order, dated 07/22/25, showed to admit Resident #41 to hospice for late affect cerebrovascular accident.On 08/21/25 at 1:34 p.m., MDS coordinator #1 stated the significant change assessment was related to the resident going on hospice. They stated the resident went on hospice services on 07/22/25. MDS coordinator #1 reviewed the MDS and stated the MDS did not have life expectancy of six months coded and was not accurately coded to reflect the resident's status at that time.On 08/21/25 at 1:43 p.m., the administrator stated the MDS was expected to be coded accurately.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-05-19 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
  Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure responsible parties were notified immediately after an accident/fall for 1 (#1) of 3 sampled residents who were reviewed for notification after an accident/fall. The DON identified 56 residents resided in the facility. Findings: A policy titled Change in a Resident's Condition or Status, dated May 2017, read in part, Unless otherwise instructed by the resident, a nurse will notify the resident's representative when: a. The resident is involved in any accident or incident that results in an injury including injuries of an unknown source. A quarterly assessment, dated 02/03/25, showed Resident #1 had a BIMS score of 03, which indicated the resident was severely impaired in cognition for daily decision making ,and had a diagnosis of dementia. An incident note, dated 02/23/25 at 8:33 a.m., showed at 4:35 a.m., a CNA (CNA #1) had notified the nurse Resident #1 had fallen out of bed when the CNA (CNA #1) had repositioned the resident. The note showed the resident had a dark purple hematoma to the right hand between right…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-04-05 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — pattern
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to: a. speak to a resident in a respectful manner for one (#28); and b. ensure resident clothing labels were not visible for one (#39) of three sampled residents reviewed for dignity. The DON identified a census of 58. Findings: A Quality of Life-Dignity policy, revised 08/09, read in part, .Each resident shall be cared for in a manner that promotes and enhances quality of life, dignity, respect and individuality .Residents shall be treated with dignity and respect at all times .Treated with dignity .means the resident will be assisted in maintaining and enhancing his or her self-esteem and self-worth .Staff shall speak respectfully to residents at all times .Demeaning practices and standards of care that compromise dignity are prohibited . 1. Resident #28 had diagnosis which included Parkinson's and Dementia. On 04/02/24 at 9:10 a.m., CNA #6 was observed asking Resident #28 if they wanted to be fed like a baby, after the resident was observed sitting in wheel chair moving their fork around aimlessly in the air…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-04-05 · 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 record review and interview, the facility failed to revise care plans for two (#22 and #37) of 18 sampled residents reviewed for accuracy of care plans. The DON identified a census of 58. Findings: A Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered policy, dated 12/16, read in part, . A comprehensive, person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs is developed and implemented for each resident . 1. Resident #37 had diagnoses which included aftercare following surgical amputation. A progress note, dated 01/15/24, documented Resident #37 was readmitted to skilled care after a left above knee amputation had been performed on 01/11/24. It documented a wound vac was to be in place for seven days. A Care Plan, revised 05/18/23, documented the resident has a venous ulcer of the left lower calf related to peripheral vascular disease. There was no care plan for wound care related to left above knee amputation. On 04/02/24 at 3:33 p.m., MDS Coordinator #1 stated they had started a Performance…

  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 before2024-04-05 · 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 and interviews, the facility failed to ensure harmful chemicals were secured. The Administrator identified six residents that required wander guards to be worn for safety. The DON identified a census of 58. Findings: On 04/01/24 at 9:58 a.m., an observation of 1/10 of a gallon container of dish detergent, 1/10 of a 32 oz. bottle of lime and calcium remover, 1/2 full spray bottle labeled with black marker cleaner with bleach, and a full 15 oz. aerosol can of stainless steel cleaner were observed sitting on top of the dishwasher in the room which connected the two dining rooms. A one gallon container of dish detergent and a one gallon container of sanitizer on a rack that was attached to the sink were also observed in the room. Both doors to the room were observed to be open. On 04/01/24 at 9:59 a.m., Dietary Aide #1 stated the residents don't come in the room. They stated the staff did not lock the door. On 04/01/24 at 12:08 p.m., the Dietary Manager stated there was no key, so the door did not get locked. They stated staff were in and out of the room all day.…

  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 · D2024-04-05 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
  Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to insure an injury of unknown origin was reported to OSDH for one (#52) of three sampled residents reviewed for abuse. The DON identified a census of 58. Findings: An Abuse Prevention policy, updated 01/01/23, read in part, .[facility name] will make every attempt to protect our Resident's from abuse of any sort by striving to recognize signs and symptoms and potential for abuse or neglect .The facility has policies and procedures in place to identify events, such as suspicious bruising .Once a complaint or situation is identified involving .injuries of unknown source .the incident will be immediately reported .A full report will be prepared and forwarded to officials as required by state and federal regulations . Resident #52 had diagnoses which included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction and dysphagia. A Significant Change Resident Assessment, dated 01/11/24, documented Resident #58's cognition was moderately impaired. An Incident Report, dated 02/05/24 at 10:56 a.m., documented at approximately 9:30…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-04-05 · tag F0661 — isolated
  Ensure necessary information is communicated to the resident, and receiving health care provider at the time of a planned discharge.
  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 a discharge summary was developed for one (#61) of three sampled residents reviewed for discharge. The DON identified a census of 58. Findings: Resident #61 had diagnoses which included pneumonia and bronchitis. A Discharge Summary and Plan policy, dated 12/16, read in part, .a discharge summary and post-discharge plan will be developed to assist the resident to adjust to his/her new living environment .will include a recapitulation of the resident's stay at the facility and a final summary of the resident's status at the time of the discharge in accordance with established regulations governing release of resident information and as permitted by the resident . A Physician Order dated 01/10/24, documented the resident was to be discharged to an assisted living facility as of 01/16/24 with home health to include PT, OT, ST, skilled nursing and a home health aide. Resident #61 had no discharge summary in their medical record. On 04/04/24 at 2:00 p.m., the DON stated a discharge should include the condition of the…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-04-05 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolated
  Provide timely, quality laboratory services/tests to meet the needs of residents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to obtain physician ordered labs for one (#56) of five sampled residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The DON identified a census of 58. Findings: A Laboratory policy, undated, read in part, .It is the policy of this facility to ensure that laboratory .services meet the needs of the residents, that results are reported promptly to the ordering provider . Resident #56 had diagnoses which included severe protein-calorie malnutrition, hypertension, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. A Physician Order, dated 02/07/24, documented lab check chem eight for delirium one time only. There was no documentation in the resident's clinical record this lab was obtained. On 04/04/24 at 9:57 a.m., the DON stated if the physician wrote an order for a lab, staff would ensure the order was put in, place the order in the requisition book, and place it in the lab book for them to come and draw it. The DON stated lab came to the building Monday through Friday. On 04/04/24 at 10:38 a.m., the DON stated they were unable to find lab…

  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.

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-04-05 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolated
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure food items were properly secured, dated, and labeled for one of one kitchen observations. The DON identified a census of 58. Findings: A Food Receiving and Storage policy, dated 07/14, read in part, All foods stored in the refrigerator or freezer will be covered, labeled and dated .Other opened containers must be dated and sealed or covered during storage . On 04/01/24 at 9:55 a.m., bread in the dining room refrigerator was observed to have no label present. Dietary Aide #1 stated it was for the birds. On 04/01/24 at 10:03 a.m., a carton of au gratin potatoes was observed open and unlabeled in the dry storage area. The Food and Beverage Director stated the au gratin potatoes were opened and not labeled. On 04/01/24 at 10:07 a.m., frozen bread bowls and tri color pasta was observed in the walk in freezer. The Food and Beverage Director stated the frozen bread bowls and tri-color pasta had no expiration date or label.

  Nutrition and Dietary 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

$8,278 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $8,278 — penalty dated 2025-05-19

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 66 rows in the source record cover these 28 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

1 organizational owner 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.

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 2024. 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, FY2024). 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