Ashland Post Acute
135 Maple Street, Ashland, OR 97520 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 87 certified beds · (541) 482-2341 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0602) — most recent Apr 2024
- 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
- it has 2 actual-harm citations
- a high number of inspection citations overall (56) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $31,369 in federal fines (most recent 2024-01-22)
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection 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 | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 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 2 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 | 18.9% | 14.9% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 0.5% | 4.7% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.4% | 1.4% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 3.4% | 2.0% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 5.3% | 4.9% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 4.3% | 2.4% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 22.8% | 20.6% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 21.9% | 12.4% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 94.0% | 95.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.4% | 5.8% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 25.7% | 21.8% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 18.2% | 13.9% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 2.6% | 1.4% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.1% | 81.2% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 23.5% | 21.4% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 12.8% | 16.1% | 12.0% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.03 | 1.48 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.62 | 2.35 | 1.80 | better |
§ 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.
50.5% 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 199 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 64.2% 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 106 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 0.51 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 82% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 32% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 50.5%CMS range 43.7–56.9 | 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 | 11.1%CMS range 7.9–16.1 | 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 | 64.2% | 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 | 50.0% | 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 | 39.6% | 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 | 99.4% | 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 | 99.0% | 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 | 96.4% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this 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 | 6.3%CMS range 4.2–9.0 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.97 | 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 87 beds and averages 80.8 residents a day — about 93% occupied, or roughly 6 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 4.48 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.58 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.03 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 4.25 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.58 on weekdays — 7% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.69 to 0.29 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%.
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 unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.
56 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 44 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · G2024-01-22 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide pain medications and clarify physician orders for 2 of 6 sampled resident (#s 2 and 212) reviewed for pain management and medications. Resident 212 experienced severe pain. Findings include: 1. Resident 212 admitted to the facility in 2024 with diagnosis which included osteomyelitis (infection of the bone). A 1/3/24 care plan revealed Resident 212 had pain with interventions including to administer medications as ordered, anticipate Resident 212's need for pain relief and respond immediately to any complaint of pain. A 1/8/24 Pain evaluation indicated Resident 212 had back pain with a pain level of three on a scale of one to 10. A 1/2024 MAR instructed staff to administer one tablet of Norco (to relieve moderate to severe pain) two times a day for pain at 7:00 AM and 11:00 AM with a start date of 1/9/24. On 1/9/24 at 8:12 AM Resident 212 stated she/he did not receive her/his 7:00 AM Norco on 1/9/24. A review of the MAR at 8:12 AM on 1/9/24 indicated the 7:00 AM Norco was not…
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.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2022-10-07 · 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
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to follow physician's orders for 2 of 8 sampled residents (#s 8 and 23) reviewed for hospitalization and medications. This failure resulted in Resident 8 requiring admission to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) for recurrent seizures. Findings include: 1. Resident 8 admitted to the facility in 4/2022 with diagnoses including epilepsy (a neurological disorder). An 4/6/22 physician's order indicated the resident was to receive 20 ml of Vimpat (an anti-seizure medication) twice a day. According to Vimpat's website, Stopping seizure medication suddenly in a patient who has epilepsy can cause seizures that will not stop. Resident 8's 8/2022 TAR revealed the resident did not receive the Vimpat on the evening of 8/19/22, the morning of 8/20/22 or the evening of 8/20/22. Progress notes related to the missed doses of Vimpat revealed the medication was not available at the facility. According to the resident's Progress Notes, on 8/21/22 at 7:10 AM Resident 8 was found having a seizure. The resident was transferred to the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-06-08 · 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 observation and interview it was determined the facility failed to ensure a clean and homelike environment was provided for 1 of 2 shower rooms (West shower room) and 1 of 1 dining room reviewed for environment. This placed residents at risk for lack of homelike environment. Findings include:1. On 1/20/26, the State Survey agency received a complaint indicating there were environmental safety concerns, which included fallen tiles from the wall in the west shower room replaced with plastic cutting boards applied with foam glue. On 6/2/26 at 11:09 AM, four broken tiles measuring approximately five by six inches were observed in the west shower room. The joint where the wall and floor met contained a black substance, with the surrounding area appearing lighter. Additionally, on the opposite side of the wall, a metal shelving unit had a plant growing from the joint beneath its bottom shelf. On 6/2/26 at 11:14 AM, Staff 15 (RN) confirmed the cracked tiles and what appeared to be black mildew. Staff 15 got on the floor and pulled on the plant and confirmed it was growing from the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-06-08 · tag F0730 — patternObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure annual performance reviews for CNA staff were completed for 3 of 3 sampled CNA staff (#s 30, 31, and 32) reviewed for competent staff. This placed residents at risk for receiving care from staff who may have unidentified performance concerns. Findings include:A review of personnel profile records revealed the following.-Staff 30 (CNA) (hired on 7/23/18): No performance review provided.-Staff 31 (CNA) (hired on 9/15/23): No performance review provided.-Staff 32 (CNA) (hired on 12/7/20): No performance review provided. On 6/5/26 at 11:34 AM, Staff 32 stated she had worked at the facility approximately five years and she did not think she ever completed a performance review since she was hired. On 6/8/26 at 10:23 AM, Staff 1 (Administrator) confirmed annual performances reviews should be completed.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-08 · 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
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to notify a resident's responsible party for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#1) reviewed for UTIs. This placed residents at risk for lack of representative involvement. Findings include: Resident 1 was admitted to the facility in 11/2024 with a diagnosis of UTI.a. Resident 1's Progress Notes revealed on 4/28/25 Resident 1 had a change in mental status, had abdominal pain, did not urinate, and was sent to the emergency department.Resident 1's clinical record had no evidence her/his representative was notified of her/his hospital transfer. On 10/22/25 at 10:54 AM Staff 2 (DNS) stated families were to be notified when residents were transferred to the hospital and Resident 1's family was not notified. b. Resident 1's Progress Notes revealed on 5/27/25 she/he reported abdominal pain but agreed to stay in the facility for lab tests. On 5/28/25 Resident 1 had continued abdominal pain and was transported to the hospital for evaluation and treatment. Resident 1's clinical record had no evidence her/his representative was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-08 · tag F0627 — isolatedEnsure the transfer/discharge meets the resident's needs/preferences and that the resident is prepared for a safe transfer/discharge.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a safe discharge for 2 of 3 sampled residents (#s2 and 6) reviewed for discharge. This placed residents at risk for unmet post-discharge care needs. Findings include: 1.Resident 2 was admitted to the facility in 3/2025 with a diagnosis of cellulitis (bacterial skin infection) of the legs.Resident 2's 6/4/25 Conference Notes revealed she/he was medically stable and reported she/he wanted to go home soon. Resident 2 reported she/he could pay for caregivers and had a friend who could also help.Resident 2's 6/18/25 PT Discharge Summary indicated discharge recommendations were for Resident 2 to have 24-hour care and home health services. The summary indicated Resident 2 was discharged home with support from others. Resident 2's 6/18/25 Discharge summary revealed she/he was discharged home with home health. The discharge summary did not indicate Witness 2 (Friend) was notified of the discharge or if Resident 2 was provided resources for in-home caregivers. On 10/21/25 at 9:20 AM Witness 2 stated the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-11-14 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to inform residents of the risks and benefits of psychotropic medication use for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#7) reviewed for medications. This placed residents at risk for being uninformed. Findings include:Resident 7 was admitted to the facility in 5/2025 with diagnoses including depression. A review of a 5/3/25 physician order revealed she/he received Lexapro (antidepressant) daily.A review of the medical record revealed no documentation of the risks or benefits for Lexapro and her/his signed consent for the medication.On 11/13/25 at 11:23 AM Staff 2 (DNS) verified the risks and benefits information was not reviewed with Resident 7 and there was no signed consent to receive the medication.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-11-14 · tag F0557 — isolatedHonor the resident's right to be treated with respect and dignity and to retain and use personal possessions.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to treat a resident with respect for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#7) reviewed for dignity. This placed residents at risk for lack of dignified treatment. Findings include: Resident 7 was admitted to the facility in 5/2025 with diagnoses including stroke and feeding tube placement.The 5/5/25 admission MDS indicated Resident 7 was cognitively intact. On 11/13/25 at 6:39 PM Witness 1 (Family) indicated staff took her/him to the dining room during meals. Resident had a new feeding tube and was prohibited from eating but was hungry. Witness 1 asserted complaints were made to staff, but she/he continued to be situated in the dining room during mealsOn 11/14/25 at 10:42 AM Staff 14 (CNA) stated she took Resident 7 to the dining room during meals for interaction with other residents. Staff 14 stated Resident 7 was unable to ingest food and acknowledged escorting her/him to the dining room was undignified and inappropriate. Staff 14 further stated Resident 7 expressed a desire not to go to the dining room because she/he…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-11-14 · 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 interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide wound care and assess a resident for use of a motorized wheelchair for 2 of 5 sampled residents (#s 2 and 4) reviewed for wounds and resident rights. This placed residents at risk for wound complications and lack of resident rights. Findings include: 1.Resident 2 was re-admitted to the facility in 1/27/2025 with a diagnosis of infection.Resident 2's 1/27/25 Nursing Admission/readmission Evaluation/Assessment form revealed she/he had a surgical incision to the neck that was almost healed and open to air. The incision was 18 cm long by 0.2 cm wide. Resident 2's Nurse Practitioner Encounter note indicated Resident 2 had a surgical incision to the neck which was covered with a dressing. Resident 2's clinical record had no orders for dressing changes and no additional wound assessments after her/his readmission. Resident 2's 2/7/25 Progress Note revealed her/his surgical incision fully dehisced (surgical complication when a wound…
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 before2025-11-14 · 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 interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide necessary care and services for pressure ulcers for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#3) reviewed for pressure ulcers. This placed residents at risk for worsening pressure ulcers. Findings include:Resident 3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including a left femur fracture.CMS defines a Stage II Pressure Injury as a wound with partial thickness loss of dermis presenting as a shallow open ulcer with a red or pink wound bed.CMS defines an Unstageable Pressure Injury as pressure wound that cannot be staged due to slough/eschar (dead or dying tissue) covering the wound bed.A 2/4/25 admission Evaluation indicated Resident 3 was admitted with a pressure wound to her/his coccyx.A 2/4/25 Skin and Wound Evaluation indicated Resident 3 had a stage 2 pressure injury to her/his sacrum.A 3/3/25 Skin and Wound Evaluation indicated Resident 3 had an unstageable pressure injury to her/his sacrum. The wound was described 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 · E2025-05-09 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — patternProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
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 it was determined the facility failed to ensure resident needs were met for 4 of 4 sampled residents (#13, 17, 41 and 54) observed during dining and staffing observations. This placed residents at risk for late meals and pain. Findings include: 1. Resident 13 was admitted to the facility in 10/2024 with a diagnosis of chronic lung disease. Resident 13's 1/29/25 Quarterly MDS revealed she/he was cognitively intact. Resident 13's clinical record revealed she/he resided in room [ROOM NUMBER]. Dining observations on the [NAME] wing revealed the following: -On 5/5/25 at 7:46 AM two food trays were observed on a open cart in front of room [ROOM NUMBER]. Both trays had oatmeal on the trays. The room was identified to require TBP. -On 5/5/25 at 8:09 AM the two food trays with oatmeal were observed to be on the cart in front of room [ROOM NUMBER]. -On 5/5/25 at 8:19 AM Staff 36 (CMA) put on PPE and entered the room with a medication cup but did not take a food tray into…
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 before2025-05-09 · 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 observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to properly follow dish sanitation practices for 1 of 1 kitchen. This placed residents at risk for food borne illnesses. Findings include: The American Dish Service Installation Instructions for the facility's low temperature dish machine revealed to set and maintain the sanitizer (chlorine) concentration at 50 parts per million. A 12/19/2024 training note by Staff 19 (Maintenance Director) indicated Staff 6 (Dietary Manager)and general dietary staff were present when the new dishwasher was installed. Staff were instructed on how to operate the dishwasher and what chemicals were required. A 4/9/25 report (most recent) completed by Witness 5 (Dishwasher Technician) verified the facility's dishwasher sanitizer level was at 50 parts per million. On 5/8/25 at 10:27 AM Staff 23 (Cook) was observed to wash and sanitize dishes using the facility's low temperature dishwasher. Staff 23 stated she ensured the dishwasher operated correctly each shift by looking at the temperature gauges on the machine.…
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 44 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-09 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to obtain a consent for use of a mood stabilizer prior to administration for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#54) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This placed residents at risk for lack of consent. Findings include: Resident 54 was admitted to the facility in 10/2024 with a diagnosis of a stroke. Resident 54's Physician Order Details revealed she/he was to be administered Depakote (anti-seizure medication which can be used to treat manic depression) for her/his mental health diagnosis. Resident 54's 2/1/25 Quarterly MDS revealed she/he was cognitively intact. Review of Resident 54's clinical record did not reveal a consent for the use of Depakote to treat her/his mental health diagnosis. On 5/9/25 at 9:09 AM Staff 4 (Resident Care Manager) stated on 1/31/25 Resident 54 was started on Depakote as a mood stabilizer. Staff 4 stated Depakote was classified as an anti-seizure medication. Therefore, she did not obtain a consent and did not review the risks and benefits of the medication with Resident 54. On 5/9/25…
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 before2025-05-09 · 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, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident had a bed to accommodate her/his needs, a room had adequate room for transfers, and a resident's call light was within reach for 3 of 4 sampled residents (#s 17, 26, and 54) reviewed for environment. This placed residents at risk for lack of a homelike environment and inability to call for assistance. Findings include: 1. Resident 17 was admitted to the facility in 6/2021 with a diagnosis of shoulder surgery. Resident 17's 4/4/25 Quarterly MDS revealed she/he was cognitively intact and was at risk for pressure ulcers. On 5/5/25 at 10:50 AM Resident 17 stated her/his bed was not comfortable and she/he reported her/his concerns to staff. On 5/7/25 at 3:29 PM Resident 17 was observed on an air mattress on her/his back with her/his arms resting at her/his side. Residents 17's arms were at the edge of the bed. Resident 17 stated she/he needed a bigger bed. On 5/8/25 at 9:30 AM Staff 1 (Administrator) stated Resident 17 always had a 36 inch wide bed and was not aware of concerns…
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 before2025-05-09 · 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 interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident was offered information to formulate an advance directive (AD) for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#54) reviewed for AD. This placed Residents at risk for end-of-life choices not being honored. Findings include: The facility's Advance Directives policy last revised on 9/2022 revealed if a resident did not have an AD the resident or representative was given the option to accept or decline assistance in establishing ADs. Nursing staff would document in the medical record the offer to assist and the resident's decision to accept or decline assistance. Resident 54 was admitted to the facility in 10/2024 with a diagnosis of a stroke. Resident 54's care plan revised on 12/16/24 revealed Resident 54's Advance Directive indicated a POLST [physician orders for life sustaining treatment] indicated she/he was to be treated if found without a pulse and respirations and the residents AD and/or POLST for treatment would be in the resident's medical record at all times. Resident 54's 1/30/25 Quarterly Social…
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 · D2025-05-09 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolatedHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to have a grievance policy which included a reasonable time frame to complete review of grievances and timely resolution for a resident's grievance for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#26) reviewed for oxygen. This placed residents at risk for unaddressed concerns and grievances. Findings include: Resident 26 was admitted to the facility in 4/2025 with diagnoses including respiratory failure and chronic pain. The facility's 8/1/2024 Grievance Policy and Procedure indicated to complete grievances with appropriate action and follow-up. The 4/12/25 admission MDS indicated Resident 26 had a BIMS score of 13 (cognitively intact) and required assistance with eating. A 4/9/25 physician order indicated Resident 26 was to receive continuous oxygen at 2.5 liters per minute. A 4/23/25 Grievance/Complaint Report, submitted by Witness 3 (Family), indicated there were concerns related to Resident 26's oxygen, meal assistance, pressure ulcer interventions, and missing items. The grievance report indicated Resident 26's care 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 · D2025-05-09 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents were free from unnecessary medications for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#31) reviewed for medications. This placed residents at risk for adverse side effects of medication. Findings include: Resident 31 was admitted to the facility in 9/2023 with diagnoses including PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) and insomnia. The 4/16/25 clinical psychologist management plan indicated Resident 31 should transition from Ambien (sedative) to an alternative sleep aid and indicated Resident 31 was open to try something else. The 4/2025 and 5/2025 MAR indicated Resident 31 received Ambien nightly from 4/1/25 through 4/30/25, and 5/1/25 through 5/7/25. On 5/8/25 at 4:01 PM Staff 3 (Regional Nurse) acknowledged Resident 31 had not stopped her/his Ambien and her expectation was for staff to follow-up with the psychologist's recommendation.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-09 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident's PASRR II (Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review) recommendations were incorporated into her/his care plan for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#54) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This placed residents at risk for unmet behavioral health needs. Findings include: Resident 54 was admitted to the facility in 10/2024 with a diagnosis of a stroke. Resident 54's PASRR II was completed on 1/8/25. The evaluation indicated Resident 54 was assessed due to a history of mental health disorders, suicidal ideations, and aggressive behavior toward staff. Recommendations included: -Environmental and social structuring to assist with Resident 54's behaviors. Encourage the resident to engage with staff and peers and spend time in the fresh air. -Memory cues: place photos of loved ones in her/his room and/or create a memory book with the resident. -Provide art supplies at the bedside to allow her/his ability for creative self expression. -Given Resident 54's reports of being an avid…
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 before2025-05-09 · 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 interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to develop a resident centered care plan for 3 of 4 sampled residents (#s 17, 47, and 62) reviewed for hospice, smoking and incontinence. This placed residents at risk for unmet care needs. Findings include: 1. Resident 17 was admitted to the facility in 6/2021 with a diagnosis of arthritis. Resident 17's 7/2/24 Annual MDS revealed Resident 17 did not refuse care, required substantial assistance with toileting hygiene, and was frequently incontinent. Resident 17's Care Plan last revised 10/12/24 revealed she/he was occasionally incontinent of urine, and staff were to provide incontinence care. Resident 17's care plan also indicated she/he was depressed and behaviors exhibited could include false accusations made against staff, refusing basic care, and increased anxiety with new staff. The care plan instructed staff to re-approach the resident at a later time. Resident 17's 4/4/25 Quarterly MDS revealed she/he was cognitively intact and did not have behaviors, including refusing cares. On 5/5/25 at 11:01 AM…
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 before2025-05-09 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a dependent resident received assistance with ADLs for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#26) reviewed for oxygen. This placed residents at risk for unmet needs and injuries. Findings include: Resident 26 was admitted to the facility in 4/2025 with diagnoses including respiratory failure and chronic pain. A 3/26/25 Hospital Encounter note indicated Resident 26 had a lumbar spinal fusion (surgical procedure that joins two or more sections in the lower back) in 2011 and cervical spine (neck area) surgery in 2015. A 4/10/25 through 5/9/25 CNA Bathing Task indicated Resident 26 refused her/his shower on 4/17/25 and received one shower on 4/21/25. All additional shower opportunties were identified as no (not scheduled for this shift). The 4/12/25 admission MDS indicated Resident 26 had a BIMS score of 13 (cognitively intact), the resident required one staff to assist with bathing and bed mobility, and a shower was not attempted during the seven day review period due to medical concerns. A 4/23/25…
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 · D2025-05-09 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolatedProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide meaningful activities for dependent residents for 2 of 2 sampled residents (#s 2 and 62) reviewed for activities. This placed residents at risk for lack of social interaction and isolation. Findings include: 1. Resident 2 was admitted to the facility in 3/2025 with diagnoses including anxiety and sepsis (extreme immune response to an infection). The 3/12/25 Activity Assessment indicated Resident 2 liked easy crossword books, painting, and it was very important to do activities with others. The 3/14/25 admission MDS indicated Resident 2 had a BIMS score of 14 (cognitively intact), was at risk for lack of socialization, and required two staff to transfer the resident out of bed. Resident 2 had no activity care plan related to her/his interest in activities. The 4/5/25 through 5/6/25 CNA Activities Task indicated Resident 2 participated in no activities for 30 days. On 5/5/25 at 2:19 PM Resident 2 was observed in bed watching television. Resident 2 stated art activities were not offered…
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 before2025-05-09 · 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
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to assess a resident and failed to follow physician orders for a follow-up doctor's appointment for 2 of 3 sampled residents (#s 17 and 24) reviewed for catheter care and hospitalization. This placed residents at risk for tooth decay and delayed care. Findings include: 1. Resident 17 was admitted to the facility in 6/2021 with a diagnosis of arthritis. A 4/4/25 Quarterly MDS revealed Resident 17 was cognitively intact. On 5/5/25 at 10:51 AM Resident 17 stated in 2/2025 she/he had a lung x-ray at 9:00 AM but the physician was not notified of the results until late in the evening. Resident 17 stated she/he was really sickwhen she/he was admitted to the hospital. Progress Notes revealed the following: -2/3/25 the facility physician assessed Resident 17 and an order was obtained for a chest x-ray which was scheduled for 2/4/25. Resident 17's Progress Notes did not have a nursing assessment of her/his respiratory status or the physical condition which warranted a chest X-ray. A radiology results report revealed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-09 · 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
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a fall investigation was completed timely for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#54) reviewed for falls. This placed residents at risk for a delay in implementing new interventions. Findings include: Resident 54 was admitted to the facility in 10/2024 with a diagnosis of a stroke. Resident 54's 11/1/24 admission MDS revealed she/he was cognitively intact, required assistance with ADLs, did not have a history of falls but was at high risk for falls due to her/his diagnosis of stroke and weakness. Resident 54 required two staff and the use of a mechanical lift for transfers. Resident 54's care plan initiated on 10/25/24 revealed she/he was at risk for falls. Interventions included Resident 54 was to call for assistance for transfers, her/his call light was to be kept within reach, and appropriate footwear was to be worn. A 12/27/24 Progress Note revealed Resident 54 completed working with therapy and was sitting in her/his wheelchair in her/his room. Staff left the room to find additional staff to assist with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-09 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident's medication was available to administer for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#17) reviewed for pharmacy services. This placed residents at risk for pain. Resident 17 was admitted to the facility in 6/2021 with a diagnosis of arthritis. Resident 17's Encounter Note revealed a Nurse Practitioner visit for her/his medication review and to refill her/his Norco (narcotic medication) prescription. Resident 17's 1/2025 MAR revealed Resident 17 was to be administered Norco every four hours for pain. The MAR revealed it was not administered on 1/30/25 at 4:00 AM, 1/30/25 at 8:00 AM, 1/30/25 at 12:00 PM or 1/30/25 at 4:00 PM. Progress notes revealed the following: -1/30/25 at 5:40 AM waiting for Norco delivery. Physician notified of missed dose. -1/30/25 at 8:39 AM physician was faxed for a new prescription for Norco. -1/30/25 at 3:45 PM Norco-not applicable, nurse notified. Resident 17's 4/4/25 Quarterly MDS revealed she/he was cognitively intact. On 5/8/25 at 8:09 AM Staff 38 (CMA) stated if 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-09 · 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
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide dental services for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#24) reviewed for dental services. This placed residents at risk for unmet dental needs. Findings include: Resident 24 was admitted to the facility in 12/2023 with diagnoses including heart failure and kidney disease. The 3/26/25 Care Conference notes indicated Resident 24 requested a dental appointment. The 4/15/25 care plan revealed Resident 24 had oral/dental health problems and staff were to coordinate arrangements for dental care and transportation as needed. On 5/7/25 at 3:47 PM Resident 24 stated she/he asked staff to schedule her/him a dental appointment for a while but staff had not scheduled one. On 5/9/25 at 12:32 PM Staff 5 (Social Services) stated she was in charge of making dental appointments for residents. Staff 5 acknowledged Resident 24 asked during the 3/26/25 Care Conference for a dental appointment and the appointment was not scheduled. On 5/9/25 at 1:41 PM Staff 3 (Regional Nurse) stated her expectation was for staff to follow-up…
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 before2025-05-09 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — isolatedEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure food was served at palatable temperatures for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#56) and 1 of 1 kitchen. This placed residents at risk for food that was not palatable, safe, or appetizing. Findings include: 1. Resident 56 was admitted to the facility in 12/2024 with diagnoses including stroke and heart disease. The 12/23/24 admission MDS indicated Resident 56 was assessed with a BIMS score of 13 (cognitively intact) and required supervision for eating. A 3/26/25 Nutritional Risk Assessment indicated Resident 56 was at risk for decreased food intake because she/he was unable to feed herself/himself. A 4/22/25 revised care plan indicated Resident 56 required one person to assist her/him with meals. A 5/8/25 Diet Slip for Resident 56 indicated no information related to her/his need for dining assistance. On 5/5/25 at 8:29 AM Resident 56 was observed in bed with a meal in front of her/him on the bedside table. Resident 56 stated she/he was waiting for a CNA to return and her/his food was getting…
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 before2024-08-30 · tag F0557 — isolatedHonor the resident's right to be treated with respect and dignity and to retain and use personal possessions.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to treat residents with dignity and respect for 1 of 3 (#19) sampled residents reviewed for dignity and respect. This placed residents at risk for loss of dignity. Findings include: Resident 19 admitted to the facility in 1/2024, with diagnoses including palliative (end of life) care. Resident 19's 1/11/24 MDS admission Assessment revealed a BIMS score of 8, indicating moderate impairment. Resident 19's care plan dated 1/9/24 revealed she/he was incontinent of bowel and bladder and required two persons to assist her/him with a bedpan. On 1/11/24, the facility reported to the State Survey Agency (SSA), which noted on 1/11/24 at 2:05 PM, Resident 19 requested assistance as she/he needed to use the bathroom. She/he was told by Staff 10 (Former CNA) to go in her/his incontinence brief rather than use the bedpan. Staff 1 (Administrator) had walked by the resident's room and overheard the conversation. Staff 1 intervened, asked Staff 10 to exit the room and requested Staff 3 (RCM) and another aide to assist the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-30 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to accurately assess MDS assessments for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#16) reviewed for pressure ulcers. This placed residents at risk for unassessed pressure ulcer care needs. Findings include: Resident 16 admitted to the facility in 7/2024, with diagnoses including diabetes and heart failure. The 7/3/24 admission Assessment indicated Resident 16 admitted to the facility with a coccyx pressure ulcer. The 7/2024 TARS revealed physician orders to treat Resident 16's coccyx wound from 7/5/24 through the resident's discharge on [DATE]. The 7/9/24 admission MDS indicated Resident 16 did not have a pressure ulcer. The 7/24/24 Discharge MDS indicated Resident 16 did not have a pressure ulcer. On 8/29/24 at 2:00 PM, Staff 2 (DNS) verified the 7/9/24 admission MDS and the 7/24/24 Discharge MDS were coded inaccurately.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-30 · tag F0661 — isolatedEnsure necessary information is communicated to the resident, and receiving health care provider at the time of a planned discharge.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide necessary information to continuing care providers pertaining to the coccyx pressure ulcer treatment for 1 of 3 sampled resident (#16) reviewed for skin conditions. This placed residents at risk for unmet treatment care needs after discharge. Findings include: Resident 16 admitted to the facility in 7/2024, with diagnoses including diabetes. The 7/2024 TARS revealed Resident 16 had a coccyx pressure ulcer. The 7/30/24 Discharge Summary indicated Resident 16 had macerated skin to the coccyx. There was no treatment listed for the care of Resident 16's pressure ulcer to her/his coccyx. On 8/29/24 at 2:00 PM, Staff 2 (DNS) verified Resident 16's Discharge Summary did not include information about Resident 16's coccyx pressure ulcer and treatment.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-30 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to bathe residents for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#2) reviewed for ADL assistance. This placed residents at risk for lack of hygiene. Findings include: Resident 2 admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including heart failure. Resident 2's 4/2023 ADL Bathing documentation revealed from 4/14/23 through 4/30/23, staff did not offer the resident the opportunity to bathe. On 8/27/24 at 9:27 AM, Staff 2 (DNS) verified Resident 2 was not offered the opportunity to bathe from 4/14/23 through 4/30/23.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-30 · 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 interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to properly assess and treat a pressure ulcer for 1 of 4 sampled residents (#16) reviewed for pressure ulcers. This placed residents at risk for worsening pressure ulcers. Findings include: The National Pressure Injury Advisory Panel defines pressure ulcers as: *Stage I: Non-blanchable erythema (redness) of intact skin. *Stage II: Partial-thickness skin loss with exposed dermis. *Stage III: Full-thickness skin loss in which adipose (fat) tissue is visible. Slough and/or eschar may be visible. *Stage IV: Full-thickness skin and tissue loss with exposed or directly palpable fascia, muscle, tendon, ligament, cartilage or bone in the ulcer. Slough and/or eschar may be visible. *Unstageable: Obscured full-thickness skin and tissue loss in which the extent of tissue damage within the ulcer cannot be confirmed because it is obscured by slough or eschar. When slough or eschar is removed, a Stage III or Stage IV pressure injury will be revealed.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-30 · 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
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to accurately document in the medical record for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#16) reviewed for pressure ulcers. This placed residents at risk for inaccurate medical records. Findings include: Resident 16 admitted to the facility in 7/2024, with diagnoses including diabetes and heart failure. Review of Resident 16's medical record found the following inaccurate records related to the resident's pressure ulcer staging: -The 7/3/24 admission Assessment indicated the resident admitted to the facility with a Stage III, measuring 1.5 cm x 2.2 cm. -The 7/3/24 Skin Assessment indicated the resident had a Stage II pressure ulcer to her/his coccyx, measuring 1.5 cm x 2.2 cm x 0.5 cm. -The 7/2024 TARS revealed treatment orders for a DTI (Deep Tissue Injury - purple or maroon localized area of discolored intact skin or a blood-filled blister) coccyx wound. -The 7/6/24 Care Plan did not indicate the resident had a pressure ulcer to her/his coccyx. -The 7/9/24 admission MDS indicated the resident did not have any pressure…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-19 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolatedProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents were free from misappropriation of controlled (medications that are counted and stored in a locked area) narcotic and sedative medications for 2 of 2 sampled residents (#s 4 and 6) reviewed for drug diversion. This placed residents at risk for unmet medication care needs. Findings include: Correction of noncompliance related to misappropriation of resident medications was completed on 2/2/22 after the facility conducted an investigation including staff interviews, review of the incident by QAPI and training for staff who monitored and administered medications. On 1/28/22 the facility submitted a FRI to the State Agency related to Witness 1 (Agency Nurse) who was observed by other facility nursing staff to appear impaired. Staff 2 (DNS) and Staff 4 (Resident Care Manager - LPN) checked the controlled medications and discovered two bottles of Resident 6's methadone (used to treat opiod dependence) were missing from a locked container. Staff 2 and Staff 4 further discovered Resident 4's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-01-22 · tag F0730 — patternObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure CNA staff annual performance reviews were completed for 4 of 5 sampled CNA staff (#s 10, 11, 12, and 13) reviewed for staffing. This placed residents at risk for a lack of competent staff. Findings include: A review of personnel records on 1/11/24 indicated the following employees did not receive their annual performance evaluations: -Staff 10 (CNA), hired on 11/18/21, no evaluation on file for 11/18/22 through 11/18/23. -Staff 11 (CNA), hired on 1/4/22, no evaluation on file for 1/4/23 through 1/4/24. -Staff 12 (CNA), hired on 1/3/17, no evaluation on file for 1/3/23 through 1/3/24. -Staff 13 (CNA), hired on 1/4/13, no evaluation on file for 1/4/23 through 1/4/24. On 1/11/24 at 12:29 PM and 2:10 PM Staff 9 (Infection Control Nurse) stated she would review information and stated no additional annual performance reviews were found for the above staff.
- Potential for harm · E2024-01-22 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — patternEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure food for menus were available for 1 of 1 un-sampled resident (#12) observed during kitchen observations. This place residents at risk for lack of honored preferences and nutrition. Findings include: The 11/29/23 Resident Council Minutes revealed group concerns related to the kitchen running out of things including: bacon, sausage, butter, hamburger, and baked potatoes. A 11/29/23 Resident Council Grievance/Concern indicated a concern related to small portions with a response on 12/8/23 by Staff 21 (Dietary Manager) for residents to ask for an additional serving after all residents were served if residents were still hungry. The 12/28/23 Resident Council Minutes revealed the kitchen was always out of stuff and there were no additional servings available if residents requested additional food after all residents were served. 1. Resident 12 was admitted to the facility in 2022 with diagnoses including diabetes and heart failure. On 1/9/24 at 8:33 AM Staff 16 (CNA) stated over the last few…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-01-22 · 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 observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure meals were served at appriopriate temperatures for 2 of 4 sampled residents (#s 38 and 53) reviewed for food. This place residents at risk for lack of meal palatability and satisfaction. Findings include: The 10/26/23 Resident Council Minutes indicated group concerns of cold food including the temperature of food delivered to rooms. The 12/28/23 Resident Council Minutes indicated meals were cold in the dining room. 1. Resident 38 was admitted to the facility in 2023 with diagnoses including UTI and failure to thrive. On 1/8/24 at 1:24 PM Resident 38 was observed in her/his bed with a hamburger on her/his meal plate located on her/his bedside table. Resident 38 stated the food was often too cold to eat. On 1/8/24 during the evening meal the following occurred: -5:23 PM the meal cart arrived to the hall and no staff were observed to assist with the distribution of resident meals until 5:32 PM (nine minutes later). -5:50 PM a meal tray was delivered to Resident 38's room by 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 · E2024-01-22 · tag F0947 — failed to train nurse aides adequately — patternEnsure nurse aides have the skills they need to care for residents, and give nurse aides education in dementia care and abuse prevention.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, it was determined the facility failed to have a system in place to ensure CNA staff received the required 12 hours of in-service training annually for 3 of 5 sampled CNAs (#s 10, 11, and 13) reviewed for sufficient and competent nurse staffing. This placed residents at risk for lack of competent staff. Findings include: A review of the facility's staff training records revealed the following: -Staff 10 (CNA), hired 11/18/21, had 10 hours of documented training from 11/18/22 through 11/18/23. -Staff 11 (CNA), hired 1/4/22, had two hours of documented training from 1/4/23 through 1/4/24. -Staff 13 (CNA), hired 1/4/13, had two hours of documented training from 1/4/23 through 1/4/24. On 1/11/24 at 12:29 PM and 2:10 PM Staff 9 (Infection Control Nurse) stated she would review information and later stated no additional training hours were found for the above staff.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-22 · 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, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to accommodate resident needs for 1 of 7 sampled residents (#13) reviewed for environment. This placed residents at risk for not being able to call for assistance. Findings include: 1. Resident 13 was admitted to the facility in 2018 with diagnosis including contractures. A 12/23/24 Quarterly MDS revealed Resident 13 had impairment to one side of the upper extremities. A revised 10/8/23 care plan indicated Resident 13 had a contracture of the left hand, was at risk for falls with interventions including to anticipate and meet her/his needs. Resident 13's call light was to be within reach for fall prevention, and staff were to respond promptly to all requests for assistance. On 1/8/24 at 1:15 PM Resident 13 was in bed with her/his call light pad clipped to the upper part of her/his mattress above her/his head on her/his left side. On 1/10/24 the following was observed: -9:30 AM Resident 13 was in bed with bedside table in front of her/him with a cup lying on its side, a reddish liquid was spilled…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-01-22 · 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
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from physical abuse for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#21) reviewed for abuse. This placed residents at risk for abuse. Findings include: Resident 21 was admitted to the facility in 2023 with diagnosis including cellulitis (infection involving the inner skin layer). A 12/2/23 care plan for ADL care indicated Resident 21 required one staff to provide extensive assistance for toileting. A 12/23/23 FRI investigation included a statement by Staff 25 (former CNA) indicating she requested assistance from Staff 15 (CNA) to reposition Resident 21 in bed. Resident 21 hit her/his head on the headboard in the process, and Staff 25 was asked to go home three hours later. The investigation indicated abuse was substantiated for Resident 21. On 1/8/23 at 4:19 PM and 1/10/24 at 1:15 PM Resident 21 stated she/he filed a complaint related to Staff 25 who was rough during her/his care for toileting and when Staff 25 was asked to stop she did not. Resident 21 further stated Staff 25 did not…
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 before2024-01-22 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to accurately assess 3 of 9 sampled residents (#s 2, 15 and 43) reviewed for medications and ROM. This placed residents at risk for unmet and unidentified needs. Findings include: 1. Resident 2 was admitted to the facility in 2023 with diagnoses including UTI and Parkinson's disease (degenerative disease of the nervous system). The 12/21/23 admission MDS indicated Resident 2 received no antibiotic medication during the last seven days. The 12/2023 MAR indicated Resident 2's last dose of Ciprofloxacin (antibiotic medication) was administered on 12/19/23. On 1/11/24 at 4:36 PM Staff 3 (Resident Care Manager-LPN) acknowledged Resident 2's MDS assessment for antibiotic medication was incorrectly coded. 2. Resident 15 was admitted to the facility in 2022 with diagnoses including muscle weakness, hemiplegia, and hemiparesis (weakness or inability to move one side of the body). The 8/18/23 care plan indicated staff were to apply Resident 15's splint to her/his right hand and right leg. The ROM care plan, last…
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 before2024-01-22 · 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 interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#2) reviewed for medications. This placed residents at risk for lack of medical interventions. Findings include: Resident 2 was admitted to the facility in 2023 with diagnoses including UTI and Parkinson's disease (degenerative disease of the nervous system). The 12/2023 MAR indicated Resident 2 was administered Lamictal (medication to treat seizures) daily since admission for Parkinson's Disease. A 12/14/23 admission Nursing [Database] had no indication Lamictal was used for Resident 2. The 12/14/23 initial care plan did not indicate Resident 2 had Parkinson's disease. On 1/10/24 at 3:38 PM Staff 15 (CNA) stated she was not aware Resident 2 had Parkinson's disease and thought her/his occasional shakiness was due to lack of food. Staff 15 confirmed information related to Resident 2's Parkinson's disease was not in her/his care plan. On 1/11/24 at 9:22 AM Resident 2 stated her/his symptoms of Parkinson's disease included occasional shaking and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-01-22 · 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
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to revise care plan interventions for 1 of 5 sampled residents (# 29) reviewed for hearing and ROM. This placed residents at risk for unmet needs. Findings include: 2. Resident 29 was admitted to the facility in 2023 with diagnoses including diabetes and heart failure. A 12/11/23 Alert Note indicated Resident 29 complained of hearing loss, dizziness and the physician was notified. The 12/2023 MAR revealed Resident 29 had orders for meclizine (medication for motion sickness) as needed for dizziness since 12/19/23 and none was provided. A 1/10/24 revised care plan had no indication Resident 29 had dizziness or hearing loss. On 1/8/24 at 3:37 PM and 1/11/24 at 2:11 PM Resident 29 stated she/he had little assistance with loss of her/his hearing and vertigo (sensation of movement not cause by the physical environment) since she/he arrived to the facility. Resident 29 stated her/his vertigo often impacted her/his success with therapy, her/his ability to move and was unaware of any available medication. On 1/9/24 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-22 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure dependent residents received required assistance with ADLs for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#18) reviewed for ADLs. This placed resident at risk for unmet needs. Findings include: Resident 18 was admitted to the facility in 2023 with diagnoses including diabetes. The 12/2023 and 1/2024 TARs instructed staff to have a licensed nurse check Resident 18's fingernails on bath days and trim as needed every Friday for diabetic nail checks. Staff were to document (+) for nails trimmed and (-) for nail trim not needed. The 12/2023 TAR was documented as a check mark completed every Friday. The 1/2024 TAR was documented as a check mark on 1/5/24. There were no + or - documented as instructed. On 1/9/24 Resident 18 was observed to have approximately one-half inch long fingernails with dark debris under her/his index fingers and middle fingers. Resident 18 stated she/he would like to have her/his nails trimmed. On 1/11/24 at 9:32 AM Staff 19 (CNA) stated he observed Resident 18 with long fingernails…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-01-22 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide 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, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide a restorative program to prevent decline in range of motion for 1 of 4 sampled residents (#15) reviewed for ROM. This placed residents at risk for decline in their range of motion abilities. Findings include: Resident 15 was re-admitted to the facility in 2022 with diagnoses including muscle weakness, hemiplegia, and hemiparesis (weakness or inability to move one side of the body). The ROM care plan, last revised on 9/5/20, indicated staff were to provide the resident with active and passive ROM. -Active ROM, set up bike in PT gym three times a week. -Passive ROM, right ankle stretches along calf to manage contractor for 30 to 60 seconds. -Apply splint to her/his right hand and right leg. -Set up at the pull bar in the room for five minutes. Restorative Program Notes reviewed from 12/12/23 through 1/10/24 revealed the following: - Staff were instructed to stretch Resident 15's right ankle for 30 to 60 seconds to manage contraction. The documentation indicated Resident 15 did not…
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 before2024-01-22 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure interventions for smoking safety were followed for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#30) reviewed for smoking. This placed residents at risk for smoking accidents. Findings include: Resident 30 was admitted to the facility in 2022 with diagnoses including stroke and anxiety disorder. A 6/21/23 Smoking Safety Evaluation indicated Resident 30 was safe to smoke independently and acknowledged understanding of the facility's smoking expectations. An 10/19/23 revised care plan indicated Resident 30 smoked unsupervised, signed in and out at the nurse's station prior to leaving the facility and returned all smoking items to the nurse's station upon her/his return. A 11/11/23 Quarterly MDS revealed Resident 30 was cognitively intact. On 1/10/24 at 4:20 PM Resident 30 was observed in her/his room. Staff 31 (LPN) stated Resident 30 last signed out of the facility on 10/31/23 based on the observation of the log and she could not locate Resident 30's cigarettes and lighter at the East Nurse's station. 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 · D2024-01-22 · tag F0699 — isolatedProvide care or services that was trauma informed and/or culturally competent.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident who was a trauma survivor received trauma-informed care for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#6) reviewed for PASRR. This placed residents at risk for unmet trauma needs and a decrease in their quality of life. Findings include: Resident 6 was admitted to the facility in 2021 with diagnoses including PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder), depression, and anxiety. The 10/14/23 Quarterly MDS revealed Resident 6's BIMS score was 14 indicating she/he was cognitively intact, and she/he had a diagnosis of PTSD. The 10/20/21 behavior care plan indicated Resident 6 had a history of anxiety, depression, and PTSD. Interventions indicated staff were to monitor for changes in behavior, and effectiveness of interventions. The care plan also included in the intervention portion self-isolation, threatening statements, agitated/aggressive behavior, upset from loud noises, and difficulty with sleeping. The care plan did not describe the history of trauma, or triggers. On 1/8/24 at 1:05 PM Resident 6…
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 before2024-01-22 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to address pharmacy recommendations for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#29) reviewed for medications. This placed residents at risk for inappropriate medication dosing. Findings include: Resident 29 was admitted to the facility in 2023 with diagnoses including diabetes and cardiac disease. On 11/8/23 a pharmacy review identified Resident 29 had an order for Isosorbide (a cardiac medication) extended release formula (ER) 30 mg twice a day. The pharmacist noted this extended release medication should be dosed one time a day and recommended the dose be changed to 60 mg once a day. On 1/10/24 a review of current physician orders included Isosorbide ER 30 mg twice a day for cardiac disease. On 1/11/24 at 3:31 PM Staff 3 (Resident Care Manager-LPN) was asked about the recommendation for Isosorbide. Staff 3 stated she could not locate information the recommendation was addressed with the provider.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-22 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to monitor psychotropic medications for adverse side effects, monitor for medication effecacy, and receive a consent prior to administration for 2 of 9 sampled residents (#s 6 and 15) reviewed for psychotropic medications and ROM. This placed residents at risk for receiving unnecessary psychotropic medications. Findings include: 1. Resident 6 was admitted to the facility in 2021 with diagnoses including PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder), depression and anxiety. a. A 7/19/23 physician order indicated the resident received Lorazepam (to treat anxiety) daily and trazodone (to treat depression) daily. A 7/26/23 Psychoactive Drug Consent indicated Resident 6 received trazadone. There was no indication of use related to behaviors, actions and thoughts. Resident 6 also received Lorazepam and hydroxyzine (to treat PTSD). Indication of use was for fidgeting. The form indicated the following: -Resident 6 accepted the use of the medication. -Written consent was given by Resident 6. The form did not include 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 · Fcited before2022-10-07 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide a clean and sanitary kitchen and food service related to floors, surfaces, refrigeration, beverage service and food storage and failed to provide a system for nutritionally appropriate food substitutions for 1 of 1 kitchen and 1 of 1 dining room. This placed residents at risk for food borne illnesses and compromised nutrition. Findings include: On 10/3/22 at approximately 2:00 PM the kitchen walk-in refrigerator was observed with the following: -A tub of fruit mixed with a white dressing labeled with a date of 9/26/22 and a pull date of 9/30/22. -A tub of butterscotch pudding labeled with a pull date of 9/30/22. -A metal container of chopped meat and bag of meat links with no label or date. -The floor at the entrance to the refrigerator had an area approximately 12 inches by eight inches without flooring and the flooring edges were rough. The exposed surface was black and bumpy. On 10/3/22 at 2:11 PM a large box of barley was open in the dry storage room and the contents were fully…
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 before2022-10-07 · 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 observation and interview it was determined the facility failed to provided finished and cleanable window sills in 4 of 34 rooms. This place residents at risk for lack of a sanitary and homelike environment. Findings include: Review of the 5/2018 facility floor plan revealed the facility had 34 resident rooms. On 10/4/22 random observations revealed the window sills in rooms four and five were unfinished and unpainted. In Resident 30's room a line of caulking and water rings were observed on the window sill. On 10/4/22 at 10:49 AM Resident 30 stated her/his window sill was unfinished for some time and remarked that the window sill should be painted to feel more like home. On 10/4/22 at 12:12 PM Staff 16 (Maintenance Director) stated a painter was contracted to finish and paint window sills in residents' rooms during the summer. Staff 16 stated he completed weekly visual audits of rooms and believed all window sills were now finished and painted. On 10/5/22 at 10:31 AM Staff 17 (Housekeeper) stated she told Staff 16 routinely about unpainted window sills in residents' rooms…
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 before2022-10-07 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — patternImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents were evaluated prior to receiving an antipsychotic medication, had appropriate indications for use, consented to the medication, had behaviors monitored, medications monitored for effectiveness and all psychotropic (drugs that effect brain chemistry) medications were evaluated for 4 of 6 sampled residents (#s 23, 30, 34 and 38) reviewed for medications. This placed residents at risk for lack of consent, indications for use, monitoring of behaviors, evaluation for effectiveness as well as risk for medication side effects. Findings include: 1. Resident 23 was admitted to the facility in early 2022 with diagnoses including stroke and mood disorder. A pharmacist review dated 8/2/22 indicated the need for an AIMS (a scale used to assess the presence of abnormal involuntary movements as a side effect of antipsychotic medications) test to be completed as a result of starting Seroquel (an antipsychotic). A pharmacist review dated 9/6/22 repeated the request to complete an AIMS test.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-10-07 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to follow up regarding Advance Directives for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#30) reviewed for Advance Directives. This placed residents at risk for not having their healthcare wishes honored. Findings include: 1. Resident 30 was admitted to the facility in 2022 with diagnoses including diabetes and post-traumatic stress disorder. A 3/23/22 care plan indicated Resident 30 did not want to execute an Advance Directive. Review of the medical record revealed no information related to Resident 30's education or follow up regarding an advance directive. On 10/6/22 at 10:25 AM Resident 30 stated she/he did not have an Advance Directive and the information she/he received about an Advance Directive was provided to her/him at the hospital. On 10/6/22 at 5:19 PM Staff 5 (Social Services Coordinator) confirmed there was no evidence education related to Advance Directives was provided to Resident 30.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-10-07 · 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
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to notify the physician of blood sugar levels outside of parameters and insulin refusals for 2 of 6 sampled residents (#s 30 and 34) reviewed for medications. This placed residents at risk for physicians being uninformed. Findings include: 1. Resident 34 was admitted to the facility in 2022 with diagnoses including diabetes. Resident 34 had an order for blood sugar level parameters of under 70 or over 400 to notify the physician. A review of the 8/2022 diabetic administration record (DAR) identified 12 times when blood sugar levels were outside of acceptable parameters and the physician notification was noted to be no six times. A review of the 9/2022 DAR identified 31 times when blood sugar levels were outside of acceptable parameters and the physician notification was noted to be no 24 times. On 10/7/22 at 12:29 PM Staff 2 (DNS) stated she expected the physician to be contacted if blood sugars were outside of acceptable parameters. Staff 2 added Resident 34 had orders for parameters for blood sugars over…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-10-07 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to address respiratory care recommendations and to document oxygen use and care for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#38) reviewed for respiratory care. This placed residents at risk for complications from improper respiratory management. Findings include: Resident 38 admitted to the facility in 6/2022 with diagnoses including sleep apnea (a potentially serious sleep disorder in which breathing repeatedly stops and restarts) and congestive heart failure. a. The 9/6/22 Quarterly MDS Assessment indicated the resident did not use a continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) machine (a machine used to keep breathing airways open while asleep). On 6/6/22 Resident 38 was admitted to the hospital. According to the 6/10/22 hospital Discharge Summary the resident was treated for acute on chronic hypoxic (too little oxygen) respiratory failure likely due to being non-compliant with the continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) machine (a machine used to keep breathing airways open while asleep) for her/his sleep apnea. The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-10-07 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide dialysis services for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#13) reviewed for dialysis. This placed residents at risk for lack of dialysis services. Findings include: Resident 13 was admitted to the facility in 2022 with diagnoses including end stage renal disease (ESRD). a. An admission order dated 7/14/22 indicated Resident 13 was to receive a renal diet and a 2000 ml fluid restriction. On 9/9/22 Resident 13 was readmitted to the facility and was to the continue her/his current diet including a 2000 ml fluid restriction. On 10/4/22 at 10:07 AM Resident 13 was asked about fluid restriction and stated she/he was not on a fluid restriction. On 10/6/22 at 1:36 PM Staff 7 (CNA) stated Resident 13 was not on a fluid restriction. On 10/6/22 at 3:16 PM Staff 8 (CNA) was asked about fluid restriction and stated she was not aware of Resident 13 having a fluid restriction and offered to review the [NAME] (CNA care directives). Staff 8…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-10-07 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to address pharmacy recommendations timely for 1 of 6 sampled residents (#23) reviewed for medications. This placed residents at risk for unnecessary medications. Findings include: Resident 23 was admitted to the facility in early 2022 with diagnoses including stroke and mood disorder. On 6/9/22 an order was received for Seroquel (an antipsychotic). On 8/2/22 a Consultant Pharmacist's Medication Regimen Review instructed staff to complete an AIMS (abnormal involuntary movement scale) test as a result of the Seroquel order. On 9/6/22 a Consultant Pharmacist's Medication Regimen Review repeated the request to complete an AIMS test. The medical record indicated an AIMS test was completed for Resident 23 on 9/12/22. On 10/7/22 at 12:04 PM Staff 2 (DNS) was asked about the delay in completing the AIMS test for Resident 23. Staff 2 stated it was completed on 9/12/22 because that was when she realized it was not completed.
“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
$31,369 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $31,369 — penalty dated 2024-01-22
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 PACS GROUP — 274 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 | 2.9 | -1.9 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 2.5 | -1.5 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 2.5 | +1.5 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.4 | -0.4 vs chain |
The other 273 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 273; lowest-rated first.
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 | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| TRUIST BANK | Organization | 5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTEREST | since 09/01/2024 |
| APT, FREDERICK | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 05/10/2024 |
| HAMILTON, MATTHEW | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/27/2025 |
| HINDERMAN, VICTORIA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/20/2025 |
| JERGENSEN, JOSHUA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 05/10/2024 |
| KAHN, KAREN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/27/2025 |
| MITCHELL, JOHN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 05/10/2024 |
| ASHLAND 135 REALTY LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/01/2024 |
| PROVIDENCE ADMINISTRATIVE CONSULTING SERVICES INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/01/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 11 rows in the source record cover these 9 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.
3 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $1.1M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
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 OR
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 Oregon Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 385197. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-05-09, 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.