5040 Philadelphia Drive, Dayton, OH 45415 · Montgomery County · (937) 278-0404
85 certified beds, about 71 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1992
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 365876 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on December 12, 2024, inspectors cited 4 health deficiencies (the Ohio average is 10.5, the national average 9.2).
None of its 48 health citations since August 2019 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.10 hours per resident per day, against 3.69 across Ohio and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.33 of those hours.
55.4% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Ohio average 48.7%).
CMS links it to Aventura Health Group, an affiliated group of 11 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 48 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's code status was accurate and matched in all areas of the resident's medical record. This affected one (#56) out of the 24 residents reviewed for advanced directives. The facility census was 60. Review of Resident #56's chart revealed an admission date of [DATE]. Diagnosis included acute kidney failure, unspecified severe protein calorie malnutrition, unspecified mood disorder, muscle weakness, adult failure to thrive, unspecified hearing loss, acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and generalized anxiety disorder. Review of Resident #56's electronic physician order dated [DATE] revealed Resident #56's code status was a do not resuscitate comfort care (DNRCC). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure residents' medical records were complete and accurate. This affected one (#69) one out of five residents reviewed for discharged and transfer. The facility census is 60.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record reviews, observations, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure resident's medications were administered as ordered resulting in five medication errors out of 33 opportunities or a 15 percent (%) error rate. This affected two (#04 and #59) residents out of four reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 65.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interviews, review of facility investigation, and review of a clinical resource guidance, the facility failed to implement appropriate safety interventions to prevent an avoidable fall by not ensuring the resident was safely positioned in bed during incontinence care. This affected one (#70) of three residents reviewed for accidents. The facility census was 65.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the facility menu, observations, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure food was served per the facility menu. This affected nine (#28, #32, #33, #34, #35, #36, #40, #41, and #71) resident who did not receive coleslaw on their lunch trays. The facility census 62.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to notify resident representative of a resident's change of condition. This affected one (#64) out of three reviewed for changes in conditions. The facility census was 62.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to properly assess a surgical wound to include measurements and description of the wound. This affected one (#64) out of three residents reviewed for wounds. The facility census was 62.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of hospital records, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to provide wound care as ordered for an arterial ulcer to a resident's foot and failed to complete a comprehensive wound assessment for surgical wound on a resident's foot. This affected one (#66) out of three residents reviewed for wounds. The facility census was 62.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure residents were free of significant medication errors. This affected two (Residents #10 and #11) of three residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 65 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure laboratory services were provided as ordered. This affected one (Resident #10) of three residents reviewed. The facility census was 65 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain kitchen equipment and furnishings in a clean and sanitary manner. This had the potential to affect all of the residents residing in the facility with the exception of three facility-identified residents who did not consume food by mouth. The facility census was 63 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of the facility menu, observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to prepare pureed foods in a method that conserved nutritive value, flavor and appearance. This affected four (Residents #7, #13, #21,and #35) of four residents with orders for pureed diets. The facility census was 63 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, staff interview and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure staff donned appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) for residents on enhanced barrier precautions. This affected three (Residents #61, #21, #14) of three residents observed for care. The facility also failed to ensure staff practiced proper hand hygiene. This affected one (Resident #21) of three residents observed for care and one (Resident #15) of two residents observed for medication administration. The facility census was 63 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and review of policy, the facility failed to ensure medications were not left unattended in resident rooms. This affected one (Resident #15) of two residents observed for medication administration. The facility census was 63 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure staff administered blood pressure medications according to physician-ordered parameters. This affected one (Resident #15) of two residents observed for medication administration. The facility census was 63 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, medical record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff followed the policy to check placement of the resident's gastrostomy tube (G-tube) before medication was administered. This affected one (#62) of four residents observed for medication administration. The facility census was 60.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, medical record review, and policy review, the facility failed to maintain a medication error rate of less than five percent (%). There were 3 medication errors of 38 medication opportunities, which resulted in a medication error rate of 7.89%. This affected two (#62 and #111) of four residents observed for medication administration. The facility census was 60.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident interview, staff interview, medical record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure medications were not left unattended at the bedside. This affected one (#45) of three sampled residents reviewed for potential accidents. The facility census was 60.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to maintain infection control procedures when administering medications. This affected one (#111) of four residents observed for medication administration. The facility census was 60.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's representative was notified of development of new pressure ulcer and treatment plan. This affected one (#75) out of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility census was 61.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, staff and resident interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to follow infection control procedures. This affected one (#22) out of three residents reviewed for wound care. The facility census was 61.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to develop a baseline care plan for a resident. This affected one (#76) of three residents reviewed who were new admissions. The census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to update a resident's comprehensive care plan for suicide risk/suicidal ideation. This affected one (#59) of three residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans. The census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to provide urinary catheter care to a resident. This affected one (#76) of three residents reviewed for urinary catheters. The census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, review of facility policy, and review of medication information from Medscape, the facility failed to monitor a resident's blood glucose level before administering insulin. This affected one (#76) of three residents reviewed for insulin administration. The census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations, resident and staff interviews and policy review, the facility failed to provide a resident with timely incontinence care and timely assistance with the use of a bed pan. This affected one (#44) of three residents reviewed for incontinent care. The facility census was 75.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff and physician interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to notify a resident's physician of abnormal laboratory results. This affected one (#77) of three residents reviewed for notification of change. The census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff and physician interviews, and review of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) information, the facility failed to timely treat a resident's urinary tract infection (UTI). This affected one (#77) of three residents reviewed for UTI's. The census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interviews, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure pressure ulcer treatments were completed as prescribed and failed to ensure pressure ulcer assessment were completed. This affected two (Residents #10 and #12) of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility census was 73.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the facility's policy, record review, observations, review of online resources for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure staff wore Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) while caring for residents to the prevent the potential spread of COVID-19. In addition, the facility failed to have a Legionella management plan in place. This had the potential to affect all 72 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interviews, and recipe review, the facility failed to ensure therapeutic texture diets were made according to a recipe and maintained palatability. This had the potential to affect 13 residents who received a puréed diet. The facility census was 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interviews, review of manufacturer's guide, policy review, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food was safely and properly stored in the kitchen. The facility also failed to ensure the dishwasher was in safe working order. This had the potential to a affect all residents except three (Residents #5, #39 and #54) who do not eat food from the kitchen. The facility census was 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure an updated and accurate pre-admission screening and resident review (PASARR) assessment was completed for the residents. This affected three (Residents (#39, #45, and #53) of six resident reviewed for the PASARR program. The facility census was 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, resident and staff interviews, review of the facility's policy, and record review, the facility failed to ensure Resident #39 who required assistance with activity of daily living (ADL) care received adequate and timely nail care. This affected one (Resident #39) of two residents reviewed for ADL care. The facility identified 71 residents who required assistance with bathing. The facility census was 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record reviews, review of the facility's policy, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure the resident's skin assessments were completed as physician ordered, failed to monitor a resident's wounds routinely, and failed to timely identify new wounds. This affected two (Residents #39 and #56) of two residents reviewed for skin. The facility census was 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and review of the National Pressure Injury Advisory Panel (NPIAP) resources, the facility failed to have documented timely treatment and interventions for a resident who was admitted to the facility with deep tissue injuries (DTIs). This affected one (Resident #23) of two residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility identified four residents with pressure ulcers. The facility census was 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, resident and staff interview and review of Medscape guidance, the facility failed to ensure the residents were free from unnecessary medication use. This affected one (Resident #58) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medication use. The facility census was 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interviews, and record review, the facility failed to have the nurse staffing information posted with the current date, in a prominent location where it could be easily seen by residents and visitors, and have logs maintained of all daily staff postings for the previous 18 months. This had the potential to affect all 72 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the facilities legionella risk assessment and control plan and facility staff interview the facility failed to implement control measures to ensure the facility water source was free from legionella bacteria. This had the potential to affect all 63 residents who reside in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to provide a copy of the notification of bed hold status, or transfer and discharge notice to the resident, their representative or the Ombudsman for residents that discharged to the hospital. This affected seven (#20, #21, #26, #44, #58, #106 and #256) of seven residents reviewed for hospitalization. The facility identified 24 residents who had an unplanned discharge to the hospital in the past six months who additionally did not receive these notifications. The facility census was 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to provide a copy of the notification of bed hold status, or transfer and discharge notice to the resident, their representative or the Ombudsman for residents that discharged to the hospital. This affected seven (#20, #21, #26, #44, #58, #106 and #256) of seven residents reviewed for hospitalization. The facility identified 24 residents who had an unplanned discharge to the hospital in the past six months who additionally did not receive these notifications. The facility census was 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, facility staff interview and resident interview and review of facility policy the facility failed to complete a comprehensive care plan that addressed resident individual needs. This affected two (#5 and #47) of 19 residents care plans reviewed. The total facility census was 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and facility staff interview the facility failed to update care plans timely. This affected one (#47) of 19 residents' care plans reviewed. The total facility census was 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, staff and resident interview and policy review, the facility failed to timely refer a resident for restorative nursing care. This affected one Resident (#5) of 24 reviewed. The facility census was 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, staff and resident interview and policy review, the facility failed to provide timely weights, reweighs and acknowledge a significant weight loss. This affected one Resident (#5) of 24 reviewed. The facility census was 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and facility staff interview the facility failed to the monitor the dialysis access site. This affected one Resident (#21) of one reviewed. The facility identified three residents who were receiving dialysis services. The total facility census was 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation and facility staff interview the facility failed to have required medications available. This affected one (#20) of four observed during medication administration. The total facility census was 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, facility staff interview and review of package insert the facility failed to store ophthalmic solution correctly in one of two medication carts observed. The facility had a total of four medication carts. This directly affected two (#26 and #41) residents who medications were stored in the 400 hall medication cart. The total facility census was 63.
15 fire safety citations on file: 7 on December 12, 2024, 2 on August 10, 2022, 6 on August 1, 2019.
CMS lists no fines or payment denials against this home in the last three years. The national average is 0.9 fines per home.
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) | 3.10 | 3.69 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.33 | 0.64 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.79 | 3.28 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.84 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.92 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 55.4% | 48.7% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 20.0% | 43.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.95 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 3.22 on weekdays and 2.79 on weekends, 13% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 7.1% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.36 in April to June 2025 to 3.10 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 | 3.10 | 0.33 | 3.22 | 2.79 | 7.1% | 0 of 90 | 71 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.30 | 0.40 | 3.42 | 3.00 | 10.1% | 0 of 92 | 65 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.17 | 0.30 | 3.33 | 2.75 | 12.8% | 0 of 92 | 66 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.36 | 0.28 | 3.49 | 3.04 | 7.9% | 0 of 91 | 66 |
| 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.
| 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 | 3.4 | 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 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.1 | 3.2 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.5 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.5 | 6.1 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.7 | 3.4 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 10.8 | 8.8 | 15.4 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Aventura at Carriage Inn's Medicare short-stay residents. How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
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 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. 24 eligible stays.
10.7% 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. 25 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. 12 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. 12 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. 23 residents counted.
3.1% 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. 23 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. 1 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: AVENTURA AT CARRIAGE INN LLC. CMS links this home to Aventura Health Group, a group of 11 nursing homes averaging 1.6 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kaszirer, Moishe | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 50% | 12/01/2021 |
| Scharf, Mordechai | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 50% | 12/01/2021 |
| Kaszirer, Moishe | Corporate officer | Individual | 12/01/2021 | |
| Scharf, Mordechai | Corporate officer | Individual | 12/01/2021 | |
| Kaszirer, Moishe | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/01/2021 |
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.