1957 North Lakeman Drive, Bellbrook, OH 45305 · Greene County · (937) 848-7800
65 certified beds, about 38 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1984
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 365626 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on January 15, 2026, inspectors cited 10 health deficiencies (the Ohio average is 10.5, the national average 9.2).
None of its 37 health citations since November 2019 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $75,323 in the last three years; the largest was $75,323, and the latest is dated December 19, 2023.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.92 hours per resident per day, against 3.69 across Ohio and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.65 of those hours.
61.5% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Ohio average 48.7%).
CMS links it to Simcha Hyman & Naftali Zanziper, an affiliated group of 79 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 37 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, resident representative interview, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to notify the physician of a resident's pressure ulcer upon admission and failed to obtain treatment orders to treat it. This affected one (#40) of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility census was 36.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, resident representative interview, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) was administered according to physician orders. This affected one (#40) of three residents reviewed for respiratory cares and services. The facility census was 36.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of the Self-Reported Incidents (SRI), staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to timely report an allegation of verbal abuse. This affected one (#23) out of three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 41.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, review of the hospital record, review of the incident report, review of the incident/accident log, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free of significant medication errors. This affected two (Resident #15 and #36) out of six (#15, #36, #01, #39, #23, and #45) residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 41.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, staff interview, review of the Ohio Administrative Code (OAC), and policy review, the facility failed to ensure controlled substances were disposed of properly. This affected one (Resident #15) out of 33 residents with controlled substance medication orders. There were eight (#01, #02, #08, #10, #30, #31, #35, and #41) residents who were identified by the facility with no orders for controlled substances. The facility census was 41.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of an incident report, review of the hospital records, and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain an accurate and adequately comprehensive medical record. This affected one (Resident #15) out of six (#15, #36, #39, #01, #23, and #45) residents reviewed for accurate and complete medical records. The facility census was 41.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure areas of the facility were in good repair. This had the potential to affect all 34 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, record review, and policy review. the facility failed to secure and store medications appropriately. This affected one of two medication carts observed and the facility identified there were four medication carts. This affected Resident #11 and had the potential to affect 13 residents whose medications were stored in the 300-hall medication cart. The facility census was 34.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interviews and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure frozen foods were stored at appropriate temperatures. This has the ability to affect all residents except 11 residents (#1, #2, #3, #4, #6, #7, #19, #21, #23, #27, and #43) who did not receive food from the kitchen. The facility census was 34.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident and staff interviews, record review and policy review, the facility failed to provide residents privacy for telephone calls. This affected one (Resident #50) of 17 residents reviewed for telephone calls. The facility census was 34.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, policy review and record review, the facility failed to notify the provider and resident representative of a resident's change in condition. This affected one (Resident #9) of one resident reviewed for notification of change. The facility census was 34.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, resident and staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure resident care conferences occurred quarterly with the Interdisciplinary Team and the resident and/or resident representative. This affected three (#8, #9, and #34) of three residents reviewed for care conferences. The facility census was 34.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations, policy review, and staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was dependent on staff for personal hygiene and bathing received adequate assistance with nail care. This affected one (#11) of 12 residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL). The facility census was 34.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident received adequate care and treatment for intravenous line placements, skin assessments, and a wound vac. This affected one (Resident #46) of five residents reviewed for hospitalization. The facility census was 34.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, resident and staff interviews, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure fall interventions were in place for a resident who had a history of falling. This affected one (Resident #9) of two residents reviewed for accidents. The facility census was 34.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interviews, and observations, the facility failed to maintain an accurate medical record. This affected one resident (Resident #12) of 13 residents reviewed for accuracy of medical records. The facility census was 34.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were provided with a proper discharge. This affected one (#100) of the three residents reviewed for discharges. The facility also failed to ensure the discharges were reported to the local ombudsman office. This affected one (#100) of the three residents reviewed. The facility census was 33.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, facility staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to timely repositioning and turn one resident (#36) of three reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility census was 42. Findings Included: Review of medical record for Resident #36 revealed a re-admission date of 08/11/24, and an initial admission date of 06/17/24. Diagnoses included anoxic brain damage, stage four pressure ulcer of left elbow and sacrum which were documeted to be present on admission to the facility. Review of plan of care dated 06/18/24 revealed that Resident #36 had actual stage four pressure ulcer to the left elbow. Interventions included turning and repositioning schedule per assessment, turn side to side in bed every one to two hours, and treatments as ordered. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interview, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure enhanced barrier precautions were followed for one resident (#36) and failed to ensure soiled gloves were removed prior to touching clean items for one (#36) of three residents reviewed. The facility census was 42. Findings Included: Review of medical record for Resident #36 revealed a re-admission date of 08/11/24, and an initial admission date of 06/17/24. Diagnoses included anoxic brain damage, stage four pressure ulcer of left elbow and sacrum which were documeted to be present on admission to the facility. Observation on 08/14/24 at 11:42 A.M. Registered Nurse (RN) #329 and State Tested Nurse Aide (STNA) #405 enter Resident #36 room to perform incontinence care, repositioning, wound care, and to check urinary catheter for position. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure exterior windows in resident rooms were maintained. This affected seven (Residents #03, #09, #11, #25, #26, #30, and #31) of 37 residents residing at the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview and policy review, the facility failed to notify a resident's representative of a change in condition and failed to notify the resident's representative and physician of test results timely. This affected one (Resident #45) of three residents reviewed for a change in condition. The facility census was 42.
Inspectors wroteBased on of open and closed medical record review, staff interviews, resident representative interview, review of hospital records, review of the death certificate, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to appropriately assess and provide timely intervention for Resident #45 following a change in condition. This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy and placed Resident #45 at risk for serious life-threatening harm, negative health outcomes, and/or death when on [DATE] at approximately 3:06 P.M., Resident #45 complained of lower abdominal pain to Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) #02 and was unable to tolerate palpation to his abdomen. After Resident #45 complained of abdominal pain, his bowel sounds were not assessed and the physician ordered imaging results, which indicated a possible bowel obstruction, and the results were not relayed to the physician timely. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure resident medical records were complete. This affected one (Resident #45) out of three residents reviewed for documentation. The facility census was 42.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview , facility personal funds account review, and policy review, the facility failed to close the resident's account after the resident expired. This affected one resident (#137) of three residents who have expired with money in the facility's personal funds account. The facility failed to provide a notice of spend down for a resident whose balance exceeded the maximum asset permitted. This affected one resident (#30) of three resident records reviewed for personal funds accounts. The facility census was 33.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and interviews the facility failed to issue a bed hold notification letter to residents who went to the hospital. This affected Resident #13 and #34 who were reviewed for hospitalizations. The facility census was 33.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview and record review, the facility failed to provide services to prevent further decrease in range of motion and mobility. This affected one resident (Resident #33) out of two resident reviewed with splints. The facility census was 33.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to follow infection control procedures when distributing medications and completing wound care. This affected two residents (Resident #10 and Resident #11) out of five residents reviewed. The facility census was 33.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, resident record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were offered their pneumococcal vaccine. This affected two residents (Resident #9 and #21) of five residents reviewed for immunizations. The facility census was 33.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the facility time punches and schedules and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a Registered Nurse (RN) was working at least eight hours a day. This had the potential to affect 31 of 31 residents at the facility. The facility census was 31.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of personnel files and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure State Tested Nursing Assistants (STNA) received 12 hours of training annually. This affected one (#109) of one STNA reviewed who worked at the facility greater than one year. This had the potential to affect 31 of 31 residents at the facility. The facility census was 31.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical and personnel record reviews, facility Tuberculosis Risk Assessment review, policy reviews and staff interviews, the facility failed to maintain infection control measures while providing wound care. This affected one (#30) of two residents reviewed for infection control with wounds. The facility identified six residents with pressures wounds at the facility. The facility also failed to provide initial two-step Mantoux testing to three new hired employees. This affected two State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) (#115 and #120) and Social Services (SS) #127 of seven personnel files reviewed. This had the potential to affect 31 of 31 residents at the facility. The facility census was 31.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the fund account authorization agreements and staff interview, the facility failed to provide authorizations with complete information. This affected five (#2, #3, #13, #17 and #24) of five reviewed for resident fund accounts. The facility identified 11 residents with fund accounts. The census was 31.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to consistently provide physician ordered compression leg cuffs. This affected one (#18) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The census was 31.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff and resident interview, the facility failed to ensure catheter care was provided to residents utilizing an urinary catheter. This affected two (#20 and #30) of two residents reviewed for catheter care. The facility identified seven residents with urinary catheters. The facility census was 31.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure tube feeding was administered at the correct infusion rate. This affected two (#9, #131) of two residents reviewed for tube feed administration. The facility identified 15 residents who received tube feeding. The census was 31.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observations, review of the menu and recipe, and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide dessert as specified on the approved menu for two (#21 and #5) of five diabetic residents observed with physician's orders for controlled carbohydrate diet. The census was 31.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, the facility staff failed to contain trash in a sanitary manner. The potentially could affect 31 of 31 residents in the facility. The facility census was 31.
26 fire safety citations on file: 4 on January 15, 2026, 10 on September 26, 2022, 12 on November 26, 2019.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| December 19, 2023 | Fine | $75,323 |
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) | 3.92 | 3.69 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.65 | 0.64 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.75 | 3.28 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.98 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.28 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 61.5% | 48.7% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 72.7% | 43.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 5.79 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 3.99 on weekdays and 3.75 on weekends, 6% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 11.2% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.99 in April to June 2025 to 3.92 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 | 3.92 | 0.65 | 3.99 | 3.75 | 11.2% | 0 of 90 | 38 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.79 | 0.71 | 3.90 | 3.51 | 3.7% | 0 of 92 | 37 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.95 | 0.65 | 4.07 | 3.65 | 8.2% | 1 of 92 | 40 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.99 | 0.78 | 4.12 | 3.67 | 15.1% | 0 of 91 | 40 |
| 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 | 5.6 | 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 | 0.8 | 0.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.8 | 3.2 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.4 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 7.9 | 3.4 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 7.5 | 8.8 | 15.4 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Bellbrook Health and Rehab's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (38.1% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
38.1% 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. 30 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 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. 23 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. 18 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. 5 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: 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. 19 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: 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. 19 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: Newly certified nursing home with less than 12-15 months of data available or the nursing opened less than 6 months ago, and there were no data to submit or claims for this 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.
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: CT OHIO BELLBROOK, LLC. CMS links this home to Simcha Hyman & Naftali Zanziper, a group of 79 nursing homes averaging 2.7 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flyer 2 Operations Holdings LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 09/29/2022 |
| Acm Ashem Holdings, LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 09/29/2022 | |
| Flyer 2 Holdings, LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 09/29/2022 | |
| Ftk Flyer Oh, LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 09/29/2022 | |
| Zanziper Family Trust | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 09/29/2022 | |
| Clinger, Steavey | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/08/2025 | |
| Krieser, Akiva | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 09/29/2022 | |
| Moerman, Rafael | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 09/29/2022 | |
| Acm Ashem Holdings, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/29/2022 | |
| Citrin Cooperman Advisors LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/29/2022 | |
| Fasten Halberstam LLP | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/29/2022 | |
| Flyer 2 Holdings, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/29/2022 | |
| Ftk Flyer Oh, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/29/2022 | |
| Gale Healthcare Solutions LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/29/2022 | |
| Med-Net Compliance LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/01/2018 | |
| Npnh1 LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/29/2022 | |
| Ovation Rehabilitation Services LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/29/2022 | |
| Shs Keren LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/29/2022 | |
| The Pavilion Managment Company LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/29/2022 | |
| Veracity Resourcing and Services LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/29/2022 | |
| Wise Medical Staffing, Inc. | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/29/2022 | |
| Zanziper Family Trust | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/29/2022 | |
| Birnbaum, Ezra | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 09/29/2022 | |
| Clinger, Steavey | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/08/2025 | |
| Dixon, Koby | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/02/2025 | |
| Hirsch, Shaye | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 09/29/2022 | |
| Moerman, Rafael | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 09/29/2022 | |
| Singer, Simon | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 09/29/2022 | |
| Zanziper, Naftali | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 09/29/2022 | |
| Zanziper, Natalie | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 09/29/2022 |
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.