Lincoln Healthcare Center

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.

44.4% 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 27 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.25 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 35% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 5% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 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 60 beds and averages 58.8 residents a day — about 98% occupied, or roughly 1 bed typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.52 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.73 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.94 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.92 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.76 on weekdays — 22% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.84 to 0.46 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 39% 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 fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

18 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 8 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · E2025-06-12 · tag F0641 — pattern
  Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to accurately complete the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment regarding discharge and dental. This is true for two (2) of (18) reviewed during the Long-Term Care Survey Process (LTCSP). Resident identifiers: #56, #11 and #32. Facility census: 59. Findings include: a) Resident #56. A discharge medical record review of Resident #56 revealed a progress note on 05/22/25 at 12:24 PM stated that Resident #56 was discharged to the emergency room. According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Discharge assessment for Resident #56, with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) May 22, 2025, Section A (Identification information) was marked Planned and was not accurately assessed for, unplanned to an acute Hospital. During an interview on 06/11/25 at 9:58 AM the Director of Nursing confirmed Resident #56's Discharge MDS was incorrect. She stated that Resident #56 discharged was unplanned to an acute hospital. b) Resident #11 During an interview on 06/09/25 at 12:19 PM, Resident #11 stated her lower dentures did not fit well and she would…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-12 · 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 resident interview, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to follow a physician's order for therapy screening for one (1) of one (1) residents reviewed for the care area of position/mobility. Resident identifier: #11. Facility census: 59. Findings included: a) Resident #11 During an interview on 06/09/25 at 12:24 PM, Resident #11 stated she had a diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. She stated she had no movement of her lower extremities and limited movement of her upper extremities. Resident #11 stated she was not currently receiving physical therapy. However, she stated she independently works on moving her arms and straightening out her fingers every day. Review of Resident #11's medical records showed the resident was transferred to the hospital at approximately 3:00 AM on 03/28/25 for flu-like symptoms. The resident also reported an increased upper extremity weakness. The resident was evaluated by a neurologist whose final report on 03/28/25 at 5:01 PM stated, Arm strength bilaterally…

  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 before2025-06-12 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  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, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. The facility failed to ensure enhanced barrier precautions for a resident with a chronic wound. This was true for one (1) of three (3) residents reviewed for the care area of transmission-based precautions. Resident Identifier: #14. Facility census: 59. a) Resident #14 The facility's policy titled, Enhanced Barrier Precautions, with effective date 04/14/22 and revision date 02/02/23 stated enhanced barrier precautions apply to residents with infection or colonization with a novel or targeted multi-drug-resistant organisms when contact precautions do not apply. According to guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about Enhanced Barrier Precautions in Nursing Homes, available on-line, enhanced barrier precautions generally includes residents with chronic wounds, and not those with only…

  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 · E2023-10-04 · 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 observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to maintain the kitchen in a safe and sanitary manner in accordance with professional standards of practice. During the kitchen tour it was discovered the floor of the walk-in freezer was dirty. The racks holding the cups, bowls, and thermal warmers needed to be cleaned. This had the potential to affect all residents receiving nutrition from the kitchen. Facility census: 59. Findings included: a) Kitchen tour During the kitchen tour on 10/02/23 at 11:15 AM, it was discovered the floor of the walk-in freezer had debris along the back wall. The bowls, cups, glasses were stored rim down on racks and the thermal plate warmers were also stored on racks with a crusted dust build up. An interview with the Dietary Manager on 10/02/23 at 11:25 AM, verified the floor of the walk-in freezer was dirty and needed to be cleaned. She also agreed the racks storing the cups, bowls, glasses and thermal plate warmers were crusted with dust. .

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-10-04 · 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, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. Signage for Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) was not placed in a location that could be viewed by everyone entering the residents' rooms. This was true for four (4) of four (4) residents reviewed for the care area of transmission-based precautions (TBP). Resident identifiers: #16, #51, #45, and #22. Facility census: 59. Findings included: a) Policy review The facility's policy regarding Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) with effective date 04/14/22 and most recent revision date 02/02/23 stated, Ensure appropriate signage is placed at the entrance of the resident room. b) Resident #45 Review of Resident #45's physician's orders showed the following order written on 06/09/23: Enhanced barrier precautions related to: hx [history] of MRSA [Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus] when dressing/bathing/showering/transferring/personal…

  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 · E2023-10-04 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — pattern
  Make sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on observations and staff interview the facility failed to ensure an appropriate pest control program. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents dining or attending activities in this area. A random opportunity for discovery revealed a swarm of gnats in and around the uncovered trash can located in the dining room. Facility census: 59. Findings included: a) Pest control During a random observation of the dining room on 10/02/23 at 11:35 AM, it was discovered a trash can did not have a lid and when the Director of Plant Maintenance (DPM) moved the trash can gnats swarmed from the trash can. On 10/02/23 at 11:35 AM the DPM reported he was instructed to have the trash can removed from the dining room and it was not to be used until the new replacement lid arrived. He also reported he had ordered the replacement lid last week and he had not removed the trash can timely.

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-10-04 · tag F0644 — isolated
  Coordinate 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 record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the completion of a new Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) for a resident with a newly added psychiatric diagnosis. This deficient practice had the potential to affect one (1) of two (2) residents reviewed for the PASARR care area. Resident identifier: #14. Facility census: 59. Findings included: a) Resident #14 Review of Resident #14's medical records showed the resident's most recent Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) was performed on 08/29/2019. The mental illness and intellectual disability assessment in the PASARR showed current diagnoses of seizure disorder and schizophrenic disorder. Level II evaluation was determined to not be required. Review of Resident #14's diagnosis report showed on 10/10/22 a history of bipolar disorder was added to the resident's diagnosis list. During an interview on 10/03/23 at 2:09, the Social Worker confirmed that when a history of bipolar disorder was added to Resident #14's diagnosis list, a new PASARR was not completed completed 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-10-04 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the development of a comprehensive care plan in the area of weight loss for one (1) of two (2) residents reviewed for the care area of nutrition. Resident identifier: #24. Facility census: 59. Findings included: a) Resident #24 Review of Resident #24's weights showed on 03/05/2023, the resident weighed 96 pounds (lbs) and on 09/06/2023, the resident weighed 85 lbs. This was an 11% weight loss in six (6) months. Review of Resident #24's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment with Assessment Reference Date (ARD) 08/01/23 showed the resident had a weight loss of 5% or more in the last month or a loss of 10% or more in the last six (6) months. Resident #24's current comprehensive care plan did not contain a focus related to potential or actual weight loss. During an interview on 10/03/23 at 12:26 PM, the Clinical Care Specialist confirmed Resident #24's current comprehensive care plan did not contain a focus related to weight loss.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-10-04 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice. This deficient practice was true for (1) of one (1) resident reviewed for the care area of tube feeding. Resident #2 had an order for weights to be done every Sunday and this was not done as ordered. Resident identifier: #2. Facility census: 59. Findings included: a) Resident #2 During a medical record review on 10/03/23 Resident #2 had an order for weekly weights to be done on day shift every Sunday with a start date of 05/28/23. A review of the weights recorded since 05/28/23 indicated there were no recorded weights on Sunday 06/04/23, 07/09/23 and 09/03/23. Instead, the weights were obtained on Wednesday 06/07/23, 07/12/23 and 09/06/23. An interview on 10/03/23 at 1:30 PM with the Regional Director for Clinical Operations (RDCO) verified the weights were not obtained on Sunday as ordered. .

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-10-04 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY . Based on observations, record reviews and staff interviews the facility failed to provide respiratory care and services in accordance with professional standards of practice. This deficient practice affected two (2) of two (2) residents reviewed for respiratory care. Residents #158 and #29 were not receiving oxygen therapy at the correct flow rate. Resident identifiers: #158 and #29 Facility census: 59. Findings included: a) Resident #158 During an observation for Resident #158 on 10/02/23 at 11:42 AM, it was discovered the oxygen concentrator was administering oxygen at a flow rate of three (3) liters per minute (lpm) and not the prescribed two (2) lpm. A record review on 10/02/23 revealed Resident #158 had an order to receive oxygen therapy at two (2) lpm. The Regional Director for Clinical Operations ([NAME]) on 10/02/23 at 11:44 AM verified the oxygen concentrator flow rate was set on three (3) lpm and not the correct two (2) lpm as ordered. b) Resident #29 During an observation for Resident #29 on…

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

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

“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

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to COMMUNICARE HEALTH — 110 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 36 rows in the source record cover these 20 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

14 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 93% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $1.7M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 33% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

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 WV