904 Isaac Streets Drive, Oregon, OH 43616 · Lucas County · (419) 691-2483
87 certified beds, about 74 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1980
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 365523 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on June 25, 2026, inspectors cited 7 health deficiencies (the Ohio average is 10.5, the national average 9.2).
Of 50 health citations since October 2022, 4 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $36,224 in the last three years; the largest was $20,881, and the latest is dated August 27, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 4.25 hours per resident per day, against 3.69 across Ohio and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.87 of those hours.
45.6% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Ohio average 48.7%).
CMS links it to Arbors at Ohio, an affiliated group of 16 nursing homes.
Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.
Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.
CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 50 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of hospital documentation, resident interview, staff interview, and review of a facility policy, the facility failed to ensure residents ordered supplemental oxygen were provided timely care and services to maintain adequate oxygen levels and prevent a change in condition. Actual harm occurred to Resident #59 on 12/09/25 when the resident was removed from her bedroom to accommodate the need for maintenance staff to make repairs in the resident's room, and the resident was placed on an oxygen tank and taken to the dining room with no means to alert staff for clinical needs and no monitoring put into place to check the resident's condition. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, resident interview, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a dependent resident was provided with adequate facial hair grooming. This affected one (#25) of three residents reviewed for the provision of activities of daily living in a facility census of 76.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, resident interview, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure wound treatments and interventions were implemented as prescribed. This affected one (#33) of two residents reviewed with wounds and related treatment applications in a facility census of 76.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure gastrostomy (g-tube) care was complete and placement of the g-tube was verified prior to administering enteral feedings and flushes. This affected one (#73) of three residents reviewed for g-tubes. The facility census was 76.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview and medical record review, the facility failed to provide clinical rationale to support a provider's disagreement with a medication regimen review (MRR) as suggested by the pharmacist. This affected one ( #6) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 76.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, and staff interview, review of manufacturer instructions, and review of a facility policy, the facility failed to ensure medications were properly labeled and dated. This affected three (#7, #19, and #3) of 19 residents who resided in the [NAME] hall. The facility census was 76.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure enhanced barrier precautions were implemented for residents with wounds and indwelling medical devices during resident care. This affected two (#66 and #73) of two residents observed receiving direct care from staff who met criteria for enhanced barrier precautions. The facility census was 76.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, resident interview, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to timely report an allegation verbal abuse to the state agency. This affected one (#48) of three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 77. Review of Resident #48's medical record revealed an admission date of 03/20/24, diagnoses included spinal stenosis of the cervical region, osteomyelitis, type II diabetes mellitus, and muscle weakness. Review of Resident #48's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #48 had intact cognition. Resident #48 was dependent for toilet hygiene, required partial/moderate assistance with personal hygiene, and was dependent for chair to bed transfers. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, resident interview, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to investigate a report of alleged verbal abuse. This affected one (#48) of three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 77. Review of Resident #48's medical record revealed an admission date of 03/20/24, diagnoses included spinal stenosis of the cervical region, osteomyelitis, type II diabetes mellitus, and muscle weakness. Review of Resident #48's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #48 had intact cognition. Resident #48 was dependent for toilet hygiene, required partial/moderate assistance with personal hygiene, and was dependent for chair to bed transfers. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, staff interview, review of the manufacturer instructions, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to maintain a medication administration error rate of less than five percent. This affected two (#04 and #24) of three residents reviewed for medication administration. There were 36 opportunities with two medication errors for a medication error rate that was 5.5 percent. The facility census was 77.1. Review of Resident #04's medical record revealed an initial admission date of 03/14/24 and a re-admission date of 08/12/25. Diagnoses included traumatic brain injury without loss of consciousness, type II diabetes mellitus, muscle weakness, depression, and dysphagia. Review of Resident #04's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #04 had moderately impaired cognition and received hypoglycemic medication. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, staff interview, review of the manufacturer instructions, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure insulin pens were primed prior to administration of insulin. This affected two residents (#04 and #24) of two residents reviewed for insulin administration. The facility census was 77.1. Review of Resident #04 ' s medical record revealed an initial admission date of 03/14/24 and a re-admission date of 08/12/25. Diagnoses included traumatic brain injury without loss of consciousness, type II diabetes mellitus, muscle weakness, depression, and dysphagia. Review of Resident #04 ' s quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #04 had moderately impaired cognition and received hypoglycemic medication. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure infection control standards were maintained during the preparation of medication for administration. This affected two residents (#04 and #24) of three residents reviewed for infection control. The facility census was 77. 1. Review of Resident #04's medical record revealed an initial admission date of 03/14/24 and a re-entry date of 08/12/25. Diagnoses included traumatic brain injury without loss of consciousness, type II diabetes mellitus, muscle weakness, depression, and dysphagia. Review of Resident #04's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #04 had moderately impaired cognition. Furthermore, Resident #04 took anti anxiety, antidepressant, hypoglycemic, and anticonvulsant medications. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on review of a social media post, medical record review, staff interview, Police Detective (PD) interview, review of the facility video surveillance, review of the Local Police Department (LPD) report, review of the local weather report and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure Resident #23, who had a diagnosis of alcohol dependence with induced persisting dementia, had a history of an elopement from a previous facility, was assessed to be at risk for elopement, and had a Wanderguard (wearable bracelet that triggers alarms at the doors to alert staff when a resident attempts to exit) applied to his left ankle, did not elope from the facility without staff knowledge. This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy and the potential for serious life-threatening harm, injury, and/or death on 08/09/25 at 10:38 A.M. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure medication carts were secured when left unattended and further failed to appropriately dispose of oral syringes used for the administration of medication. This had the potential to affect seven (#22, #23, #28, #31, #34,#35, and #44) residents identified by the facility as being cognitively impaired, independently mobile, and resided on the C and D Halls. The facility census was 66.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy the facility failed to ensure foods were appropriately stored and further failed to ensure foods were discarded of past the use by dates. This had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility, except for 13 (#3, #5, #6, #8, #12, #13, #15, #16, #17, #19, #20, #21, and #33) residents identified by the facility as receiving no food by mouth. The facility census was 66.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy the facility failed to ensure wound measurements were completed for ongoing assessment of wounds. This affected one (#64) of three residents reviewed for wound care. The facility census was 66.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents with intravenous (IV) catheters received dressing changes as ordered and had active orders for care and treatment. This affected three (#1, #2, and #3) of three residents reviewed for IV catheter care and treatment. The facility census was 69.
Inspectors wroteAMENDED 08/27/24 Based on observation, medical record review, family and staff interview, and review of the facility's Pressure Ulcer/Skin Breakdown Clinical Protocol, and review of the guidelines from the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (NPUAP), the facility failed to accurately assess wounds, provide timely interventions to prevent the development of pressure ulcers or healing of existing pressure ulcers, failed to obtain timely treatments of existing wounds, and failed to timely identify the resident's pressure ulcers until it reached an advanced stage. This resulted in Actual Harm to Residents #79 and #40 who were at risk for pressure ulcers and the facility found Resident #79's pressure ulcer as an unstageable pressure ulcer (Slough and/or eschar: [...]
Inspectors wroteAMENDED 08/27/24 Based on observation, medical record review, resident interview, staff interview, and review of policy, the facility failed to ensure residents who required staff assistance with activities of daily living, received adequate and timely care to maintain good personal hygiene including nail care, bathing, and shaving. This affected four (#15, #16, #19, and #185) of seven residents reviewed for activities of daily living. The facility census was 74. Findings Include: 1. Review of Resident #16's medical record revealed an admission date of 04/12/10. Diagnoses included type II diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, dementia, anxiety disorder, and anoxic brain damage. Review of Resident #16's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of zero indicating Resident #16 was severely cognitively impaired. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, resident interview, staff interview, and review of the policy, the facility failed to develop comprehensive care plans which included supports for dental needs. This affected one (#1) of three residents reviewed for ancillary services. The facility census was 74. Findings Include: Review of Resident #1's medical record revealed an admission date of 03/22/22. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, altered mental status, chronic kidney disease, history of stroke, muscle wasting and atrophy, osteoporosis, and symbolic dysfunction. Review of Resident #1's Minimum Data Set (MDS) Annual Review dated 03/13/24 Resident #1 had no obvious or likely cavity or broken natural teeth. [...]
Inspectors wroteAMENDED 08/27/24 Based on resident interview, medical record review, staff interview, observations, and review of policy, the facility failed to ensure residents and/or their representatives participated in resident care planning. This affected one (#129) of three residents reviewed for care plan participation. In addition, the facility failed to ensure resident care plans were reviewed and revised when a resident's smoking status changed. This affected one resident (#13) of three residents reviewed for smoking. The facility census was 74. Findings Include: 1. Review of Resident #129's medical record revealed an admission date of 07/11/24. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, respiratory failure, heart disease, anxiety disorder, and major depressive disorder. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure alternative methods of communication were provided as indicated. This affected one (#17) of one sampled residents reviewed for alternate means of communication in a facility census of 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, staff interview and review of the clinical protocol, the facility failed to identify, report and timely assess an alteration in skin integrity. This affected one (#19) of six resident reviewed for skin integrity. The facility census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident interview, medical record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure audiology services were provided timely for residents with identified hearing concerns. This affected one resident (#70) of two residents reviewed for audiology services. The facility census was 74. Findings Include: Review of Resident #70's medical record revealed an admission date of 04/23/24. Diagnoses included conductive hearing loss, impacted earwax, and injury of thorax subsequent encounter. Review of Resident #70's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating Resident #70 was cognitively intact. Resident #70 required touching assistance with toilet use, bathing, and parts of dressing. Resident #70 was highly hearing impaired and did not have hearing aides at the time of the review. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure interventions to promote range of motion and limit contractures were implemented as ordered. This affected two (#24 and #19 ) of three sampled residents reviewed for range of motion. The facility census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, resident interview, staff interview, and review of policy the facility failed to follow their policy to secure resident's smoking materials and failed to ensure residents smoked in the proper designated areas. This affected two (#70 and #13) of three residents reviewed for accidents and hazards. The facility census was 74. Findings Include: 1. Review of Resident #70's medical record revealed an admission date of 04/23/24. Diagnoses included conductive hearing loss, impacted earwax, and injury of thorax subsequent encounter. Review of Resident #70's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating Resident #70 was cognitively intact. Resident #70 required touching assistance with toilet use, bathing, and parts of dressing. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on resident interview, staff interview, medical record review, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to provided adequate and timely care to prevent episode of incontinence for a resident who was continent of bowel and bladder. This affected one (#69) of two residents reviewed for bowel and bladder incontinence. The facility census was 74. Findings Include: Review of Resident #69's medical record revealed an admission date of 04/02/24. Diagnoses included hemiplegia and hemiparesis, stroke, peripheral vascular disease, depression, cognitive communication deficit, insomnia, and benign prostatic hyperplasia. Review of Resident #69's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating Resident #69 was cognitively intact. Resident #69 was dependent on staff for toilet use and dressing. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, and resident and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure dependent residents were provided with adequate grooming and hygiene. This affected one resident (#1) of three residents observed for the provision of activities of daily living in a facility census of 80.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, hospital documentation review, and review of a facility incontinence policy, the facility failed to ensure dependent residents received timely and sufficient care related to bowel incontinence. This affected one (#3) of three residents reviewed for the provision of incontinence care services in a facility census of 80.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff and resident interview, and policy review, the facility failed to notify resident representatives of a change in condition requiring a transfer to the hospital. This affected two (#27 and #66) of four residents reviewed for change in condition. The facility census was 65.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to complete admissions procedures and documents per the facility policy. This affected two (#66 and #67) of three reviewed for admissions. The facility census was 65.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, resident interview, staff interview, and review of the electronic mail (e-mail) correspondence), the facility failed to honor Resident #45's preference for showers and grooming. This affected one (#45) of three residents reviewed for activities of daily living. The facility census was 64.
Inspectors wroteBased on closed record review, staff interviews, review of hospital documentation, review of witness statements, review of a fall policy, and review of the facility's fall investigation, the facility failed to ensure care was provided per Resident #71's plan of care, failed to prevent an avoidable fall with injuries and failed to conduct a thorough post-fall investigation including a root cause analysis to identify potential hazards and resident-specific interventions to reduce and/or eliminate falls. This resulted in Actual Harm on 10/20/23 when State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #180 provided care to Resident #71, who was cognitively impaired and dependent on two staff for bed mobility and toileting, without the assistance of two staff resulting in the resident rolling away from the STNA and falling onto the floor. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed ensure medications as ordered by a physician. A total of two medications were administered in error out of 36 opportunities for a medication error rate of 5.55 percent (%). This affected two (#3 and #22) of four residents observed for medication administration. The facility census was 56.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident interview, staff interview, review of the medical record, and review of policy, the facility failed to ensure a resident dependent on staff assistance was provided showers. This affected one (#27) of three residents reviewed for showers. The facility census was 55.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received adequate assistance to ensure safety while providing incontinence care and repositioning. This affected one (#45) of one resident reviewed for safety. The facility census was 55.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to accurately document the administration of controlled substances. This affected one (#76) of three residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 55.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident interview, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to provide a clean environment. This affected one (#20) of three residents reviewed for environment. The facility census was 55.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to serve meals in a sanitary manner. This affected three (#3, #27, and #45) of 59 residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure staff practiced hand hygiene and utilized personal protective equipment appropriately when providing care to residents on transmission-based precautions. This had the potential to affect 12 (#4, #9, #14, #17, #28, #30, #38, #39, #43, #51, #54, and #155) of 12 residents identified to be on transmission-based precautions. The facility census 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, and staff and resident interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were placed into proper fitting beds. This affected one resident (#46) out of 24 residents observed for the provision of assistive devices and furniture. The facility census was 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to notify the physician and responsible party of a significant weight loss. This affected one resident (#45) out of four residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility census was 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were completed accurately. This affected one resident (#20) out of three residents reviewed for oxygen use. The facility census was 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, policy review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure treatments were completed per physician order. This affected one resident (#18) out of one reviewed for a skin tear. The facility census was 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, staff interview, policy review, and review of the dressing package instructions, the facility failed to ensure timely wound assessment and wound treatments were provided in accordance with physician orders. This affected one resident (#08) out of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility census was 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, staff interview, facility policy review, and hospital documentation review, the facility failed to provide the care and treatment to a resident utilizing an indwelling urinary catheter to main urinary function. This affected one (#8) of two individuals reviewed for the placement and care of urinary catheters. The facility census of 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to monitor, recognize, and assess a resident who sustained significant weight loss. This affected one (#45) of four residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility census was 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff and family interviews and review of facility policies, the facility failed to ensure the administration of tube feeding was assessed, monitored and timely treated when gastrointestinal changes occurred. This affected one (#8) of three residents reviewed for the administration of tube feeding. The facility census was 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure Central Venous Catheters were maintained in accordance with physician orders. This affected one (#7) of one residents reviewed for the maintenance of a CVC and identified by the facility with a CVC inserted. Facility census 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, policy review, and staff interview, the facility failed to obtain physician orders for residents receiving oxygen therapy and maintain the oxygen equipment per policy. This affected two (#13 and #255) of four residents reviewed for oxygen therapy.
21 fire safety citations on file: 2 on June 25, 2026, 12 on August 5, 2024, 7 on October 6, 2022.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| August 27, 2025 | Fine | $15,343 |
| August 5, 2024 | Fine | $20,881 |
A payment denial means Medicare and Medicaid stopped paying for new admissions for that period.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | Ohio | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 4.25 | 3.69 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.87 | 0.64 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.61 | 3.28 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.30 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.08 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 45.6% | 48.7% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 38.9% | 43.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 4.60 hours a day for residents as sick as this home's (its case-mix figure). The staffing star compares the two.
Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In January to March 2026, nursing staff hours per resident were 4.50 on weekdays and 3.61 on weekends, 20% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 1.1% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.94 in April to June 2025 to 4.25 in January to March 2026.
| Quarter | All nursing staff | Registered nurses | Weekdays | Weekends | Contract staff share | Days with no RN hours | Residents a day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan to Mar 2026 | 4.25 | 0.87 | 4.50 | 3.61 | 1.1% | 1 of 90 | 74 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 4.39 | 0.97 | 4.63 | 3.77 | 0.6% | 0 of 92 | 71 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 4.09 | 1.30 | 4.37 | 3.38 | 2.1% | 0 of 92 | 69 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.94 | 1.11 | 4.13 | 3.46 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 69 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Ohio, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.64 | 0.60 | 3.80 | 3.24 | 4.6% | 0.4% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ohio, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $18.76 | $17.93 to $21.44 | 63,280 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $29.78 | $27.34 to $31.68 | 39,900 |
| Registered nurses | $39.67 | $38.08 to $47.61 | 143,730 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Ohio | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.8 | 5.3 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.6 | 0.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.5 | 3.2 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.5 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.4 | 6.1 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 8.3 | 3.4 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.5 | 8.8 | 15.4 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Arbors at Oregon's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (43.6% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
43.6% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Ohio: 147 better, 20 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 38 eligible stays.
11.2% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Ohio: 3 better, 7 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 34 eligible stays.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
US median of homes 7.1% · Ohio: 1 better, 4 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 16 eligible stays.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Ohio55.6% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 13 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Ohio0.0% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 26 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Ohio1.4% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 26 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Ohio100.0% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 5 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: OREGON OPCO LLC. CMS links this home to Arbors at Ohio, a group of 16 nursing homes averaging 2.8 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ark Opco Group, LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 07/01/2015 |
| B&y Healthcare S Corp | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 07/01/2015 | |
| B&y Trust | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 07/01/2015 | |
| Cody Healthcare S Corp | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 07/01/2015 | |
| Craig Flashner 2007 Trust | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 07/01/2015 | |
| Norcross, Robert | Contracted managing employee | Individual | 07/01/2015 | |
| Rogers, Stacey | Contracted managing employee | Individual | 07/01/2015 | |
| Kirk, Kristine | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 09/01/2016 | |
| Flashner, Craig | Corporate officer | Individual | 07/01/2015 | |
| Perlstein, Yitzchok | Corporate officer | Individual | 07/01/2015 | |
| Noble Healthcare Management, LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 07/01/2015 | |
| Prestige Administrative Services, LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 01/01/2016 | |
| Flashner, Craig | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/01/2015 | |
| Perlstein, Yitzchok | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/01/2015 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in Ohio. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.