Independence Health And Rehabilitation

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.18 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 18% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 8% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 80 beds and averages 34.8 residents a day — about 43% occupied, or roughly 45 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 5.29 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.54 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.69 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 4.70 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.53 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.57 to 0.48 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 65% is well above the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

31 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 20 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · Gcited before2025-02-18 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident was transferred as care planned for 2 of 2 sampled residents (#s 2 and 31) reviewed for falls. this placed residents at risk for injury. Findings include: 1. Resident 2 admitted to the facility in 1/2007 with diagnoses including dementia (a group of symptoms affecting cognition, memory and social relationships) and hemiplegia following cerebral infarction (paralysis of one side of the body following a stroke caused by a blood clot in the brain). Resident 2 was non-verbal and unable to be interviewed due to dementia. A review of the Physician Encounter note dated 8/25/24 revealed the resident was transported to the emergency department following a fall on 8/25/24. Resident 2 was diagosed at the hospital with a fracture of the right femural neck (a break in the bone that connects the ball of the hip to the thigh bone). A review of the resident's care plan indicated Resident 25 required the assistance of two caregivers for toileting and personal care. In an interview on 2/12/25 at 5:02 PM…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2026-05-11 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — widespread
  Keep all essential equipment working safely.
  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 maintain essential kitchen equipment for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for kitchen services. This placed residents at risk for food borne illnesses. Findings include:The 12/5/07 manufacturer specifications for the Ecolab Model ES-2000 indicated the dishwasher required a minimum wash and rinse temperature of 120 degrees Fahrenheit and a recommended temperature of 140 degrees Fahrenheit.On 5/7/26 at 12:17 PM, an observation of the facility kitchen revealed the dishwasher temperature gauge was hazed and unreadable. Staff 16 (Registered Dietician) acknowledged the gauge was unreadable. She stated Dietary Manager was on vacation. She was unsure of the dishwasher's status and requested maintenance assistance.A review of the May 2026 dishwasher log did not include temperature monitoring.On 5/7/26 at 12:24 PM, Staff 15 (Maintenance Supervisor) acknowledged the temperature gauge was unreadable and needed to be replaced. Staff 15 stated the dishwasher temperature was tested with a thermometer on a regular…

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

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-05-11 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on observation and interview it was determined the facility failed to store food in a sanitary manner for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for food safety. This placed residents at risk for foodborne illnesses. Findings include:On 5/4/26 at 9:34 AM, a brief kitchen tour was completed and revealed the following:-An opened bag of cereal in dry storage was unlabeled and undated.-An opened container of ranch dressing in the refrigerator was undated.-An open bag containing eight boiled eggs in the refrigerator was unlabeled and undated.-An open block of cheese in the refrigerator was loosely wrapped and undated.On 5/4/26 at 9:36 AM, Staff 13 (Cook) stated staff were to date food products when opened and add a use-by date. Staff 13 confirmed the open items were undated and stated she would discard them.On 5/7/26 at 11:38 AM, Staff 16 (Registered Dietician) stated staff were to date any food product immediately when opened and discard any items found without dates.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-05-11 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to implement measures to prevent the spread of infection related to catheter positioning, hand hygiene, and Enhanced Barrier Precautions for 1 of 1 staff member (Staff 8) reviewed during a random observation and 3 of 11 sampled residents (#s 4, 8, and 29) reviewed for infection control. This placed residents at risk for infections. Findings include: 1. On 5/4/26 at 1:32 PM, Resident 4's catheter was observed to be attached to her/his bed with part of the catheter resting on the floor. On 5/6/26 at 11:59 AM Resident 4 was observed with part of the catheter attached to the bed and part of it rested on the floor. On 5/6/26 at 9:00 AM Staff 21 (CNA) observed Resident 4's catheter and confirmed it rested on the floor. On 5/6/26 at 10:29 AM Staff 9 (CNA) observed Resident 4's catheter and confirmed it rested on the floor. Staff 9 stated a barrier between the catheter and the floor was required. Staff 9 raised Resident 4's bed slightly and placed a basin under the catheter. On 5/8/26 at 1:32 PM Staff 4…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-05-11 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — pattern
  Develop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
  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 influenza and pneumococcal vaccines for 3 of 5 sampled residents (#s 4, 6, and 14) reviewed for immunizations. This placed residents at risk for influenza and pneumonia. Findings include: 1 Resident 4 was admitted to the facility in 2024 with diagnoses included multiple sclerosis (an autoimmune disease which affects the central nervous system). A review of Resident 4's immunization record revealed no documentation she/he was offered or received an influenza vaccine in 2025.On 5/8/26 at 3:13 PM Staff 3 (Assistant Director of Nurses/LPN Resident Care Manager) stated she reviewed Resident 4's documentation and confirmed there was no evidence Resident 4 was offered or received an influenza vaccine.2. Resident 6 admitted to the facility in 2025 with diagnoses including osteomyelitis (bone infection). A review of Resident 6's immunization record revealed she/he received a PCV 13 in 2017.A review of the CDC Pneumococcal Vaccine Recommendations revealed Resident 6 required another dose of a pneumococcal…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-05-11 · tag F0887 — pattern
  Educate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
  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 offer a COVID-19 vaccine for 3 of 5 sampled residents (#s 4, 6, and 14) reviewed for immunizations. This placed residents at risk for COVID-19. Findings include: 1. Resident 4 was admitted to the facility in 2024 with diagnoses included multiple sclerosis (an autoimmune disease which affects the central nervous system). A review of Resident 4's immunization record revealed no documentation she/he was offered or received a COVID-19 vaccine in 2025.On 5/8/26 at 3:13 PM Staff 3 (Assistant Director of Nurses/LPN Resident Care Manager) stated she reviewed Resident 4's documentation and confirmed there was no evidence Resident 4 was offered or received a COVID-19 vaccine.2. Resident 6 admitted to the facility in 2025 with diagnoses including osteomyelitis (bone infection). A review of Resident 6's immunization record revealed she/he did not have documentation of a COVID-19 vaccine in 2025.A review of Resident 6's medical record revealed a 11/4/25 Multi-Vaccine Consent Form signed by Resident 6, and the COVID-19…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-11 · tag F0552 — isolated
  Ensure 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 ensure residents were informed of the risks and benefits of psychotropic medications for 2 of 5 sampled residents (#s 4 and 43) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This placed residents at risk for uninformed about their medications. Findings include: 1. Resident 4 admitted to the facility in 2024 with diagnoses including depression. Resident 4's physician orders revealed a 1/6/26 order for citalopram (an antidepressant). A review of Resident 4's medical record revealed no indication she/he was informed in advance of the risks and benefits of citalopram. On 5/11/26 at 1:19 PM Staff 2 (DNS) confirmed Resident 4 was not informed of the risks and benefits of citalopram. 2. Resident 43 was admitted to the facility in 5/2026 with diagnoses including esophageal obstruction (narrowed esophagus). Resident 43's 5/2/26 Physician Orders indicated the resident was prescribed clonazepam (antianxiety medication) for anxiety. Review of Resident 43's medical record revealed no indication the resident was informed in…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-11 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
  Honor 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents had unsoiled clean linens for 1 of 3 linen closets reviewed for environment. This placed residents at risk for a lack of a homelike environment. Findings include:On 5/6/26 at 10:26 AM the left lower corner of the east hall linen closet was observed to have multiple black spots. On 5/6/26 at 11:10 AM Staff 11 (CNA) stated there was a mold odor in the east linen closet at times. Staff 11 opened the east linen closed and confirmed there appeared to be mold in the lower left corner of the closet with multiple blankets touching the black spots on the wall. Staff 11 removed the blankets and sent them to laundry. On 5/6/26 at 12:03 PM Staff 15 (Maintenance Supervisor) stated he was unaware of any concerns with mold in the east linen closet. Staff 15 looked in the linen closed and confirmed there was mold in the lower left corner.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-05-11 · tag F0637 — isolated
  Assess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
  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 complete a Significant Change MDS within the required timeframe for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#6) reviewed for hospice. This placed residents at risk for unassessed hospice needs. Findings include: Resident 6 admitted to the facility in 11/2025 with diagnoses including osteomyelitis (an infection in the bone). A 4/21/26 Progress Note revealed Resident 6 admitted to hospice services on 4/21/26. A Significant Change MDS assessment dated [DATE] was completed on 5/7/26, 17 days after Resident 6 admitted to hospice. On 5/8/26 at 10:55 AM Staff 18 (MDS Coordinator) reviewed Resident 6's Significant Change MDS and confirmed it was not completed within 14 days after Resident 6 was admitted to hospice.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-05-11 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  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 personal care for 1 of 4 sampled residents (#34) reviewed for ADLs. This placed residents at risk for not receiving grooming. Findings include:Resident 34 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including schizophrenia and major depressive disorder. The 4/22/26 admission MDS indicated Resident 34 had a BIMS score of 14, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact, and required staff assistance with personal care, which included shaving.On 5/4/26 at 11:27 AM Resident 34 was observed in her/his room with facial hair that was long and thick. Resident 34 stated she/he preferred short facial hair, but staff did not offer to trim or shave her/his facial hair since admission into the facility.On 5/6/26 at 1:56 PM Staff 10 (CNA) stated she worked with Resident 34 on 5/5/26 but did not offer to shave or trim the resident's facial hair. On 5/6/26 at 2:16 PM Staff 6 (CNA) stated she provided care to…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-11 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide 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 PRN bowel medication for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#34) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This placed residents at risk for unmet bowel care needs. Findings include:The facility's Bowel Protocol policy dated 5/2025 stated if a resident does not have a bowel movement for three days, the nurse administers the physician ordered bowel program.Resident 34 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including chronic idiopathic constipation. A review of Resident 34's Physician Orders dated 4/17/26 included sennoside 8.6 mg and polyethylene glycol 3350 powder, for constipation on a PRN basis. The Physician Orders also indicated the resident was to receive Milk of Magnesia for constipation on a PRN basis after three days of no bowel movement.A review of Resident 34's bowel record indicated the resident had no bowel movement from 4/21/26 to 4/24/26 (four days). A review of Resident 34's 4/2026 MAR revealed no indication the…

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

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

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

Fines & penalties

$69,876 in federal fines across 3 penalties.

• $45,819 — penalty dated 2025-02-18
• $8,018 — penalty dated 2024-01-17
• $16,039 — penalty dated 2024-01-17

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 EVERGREEN HEALTHCARE GROUP — 44 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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 37 rows in the source record cover these 17 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.

9 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

About 78% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $100K 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