1915 Hill Street, Belpre, OH 45714 · Washington County · (740) 350-9095
62 certified beds, about 49 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 2016
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 366443 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on January 8, 2025, inspectors cited 14 health deficiencies (the Ohio average is 10.5, the national average 9.2).
Of 47 health citations since November 2022, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.66 hours per resident per day, against 3.69 across Ohio and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.60 of those hours.
47.3% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Ohio average 48.7%).
CMS links it to Continuing Healthcare Solutions, an affiliated group of 12 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 47 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, hospital record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident #2, with a known history of hypothermia, was comprehensively monitored for a change in condition to ensure timely notification to the resident's medical provider to prevent a delay in treatment. This affected one resident (#2) of three sampled residents reviewed for quality of care. The facility census was 49. Actual Harm occurred on 01/17/26 when Resident #2 was noted to exhibit decreased consciousness and was transported to the hospital for evaluation where she was admitted with hypothermia (body temperature of 91 degrees F) and multiple infections requiring treatment in the intensive care unit and antibiotic therapy. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the facility assessment and interview, the facility failed to ensure the facility assessment was completed accurately. This had the potential to affect all residents in the facility. The facility census was 49.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure respiratory care was completed as ordered. This affected two residents (#1 and #2) of two residents reviewed for respiratory care. The facility census was 49.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of staff schedules, review of the National Library of Medicine literature, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure sufficient registered nurses or respiratory therapists were available at the facility to care for residents with ventilators. This affected two (#1 and #2) of two residents with ventilators. The facility census was 49.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, review of facility investigations, observations, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents' controlled narcotic medications were not misappropriated. This affected two (#8 and #50) of three residents reviewed for misappropriation of medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, review of facility investigations, observations, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure all allegations/ suspicions of misappropriation of resident property was reported to the State Survey Agency as required. This affected two (#8 and #50) of three residents reviewed for misappropriation of medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of a facility investigation pertaining to an alleged/ suspected tampering of controlled narcotic medications, review of shift to shift controlled medication reconciliation sheets, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure proper pharmacy procedures were followed in regards to performing an appropriate reconciliation of all controlled medications each time keys to medication administration carts providing access to those controlled medications were exchanged between nurses. This affected two (#8 and #50) of three residents reviewed for the handling of controlled narcotic medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, policy review and interviews, the facility failed to meet at least quarterly to coordinate and evaluate activities under the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) program. This had the potential to affect all 52 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, resident interview, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a multi-disciplinary approach was taken and resident's and/or their representatives were included in the development of their care plans. This affected four (Resident #6, #19, #148, and #149) of four residents reviewed for care planning. The facility census was 52.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed accurately reflect Resident #14's significant change, including hospice, in the comprehensive significant change in condition assessment. This affected one resident, (Resident #14) of one resident reviewed for Hospice care. The facility census was 52.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to complete a new Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) assessment for Resident #6 with a new diagnosis. The facility also failed to ensure the admission PASARR for Resident #37 was accurate. This affected two residents (#6 and #37) of three residents reviewed for PASARR completion. The facility census was 52.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to notify the mental health authority by completing a resident Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR)Level II assessment for Resident #6 with a new diagnosis. This affected one resident (#6) of three residents reviewed for PASARR. The facility census was 52.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed ensure Residents #4, #19, and #36 or their representatives were provided with a copy of their baseline care plan. This affected three residents (#4, #19, #36) of three residents reviewed for baseline care plans. The facility census was 52.
Inspectors wrote3. Record review revealed Resident #19 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including malignant neoplasm of stomach and esophagus, muscle wasting and atrophy, and hypertension. Review of a MDS assessment completed 11/27/24 revealed Resident #19's cognition remained intact, and he had no behaviors. Interview on 12/30/24 at 9:42 A.M. with Resident #19 revealed he asks for showers but never gets them unless a certain aide is working. Review of EMR for showers and shower sheets from 12/02/24 through 12/30/24 revealed three scheduled showers were missed on 12/04/24, 12/20/24, and 12/25/24. Interview on 01/08/25 at 9:59 A.M. with LPN #557 confirmed three showers were missing for Resident #19. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased record review, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure Residents #4 and #19 were invited to participate in activities. This affected two residents (#4 and #19) of two residents reviewed for activities. The facility census was 52.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to address signs and symptoms of a urinary tract infection (UTI) in a timely manner for Resident #36. This affected one resident (#36) of one resident reviewed for UTIs. The facility census was 52.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations, interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure Resident #4's oxygen tubing was changed once per week as ordered by the physician. This affected one resident (#4) of two residents reviewed for respiratory services. The facility census was 52.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to address signs and symptoms of pain Resident #36 in a timely manner. This affected one resident (#36) of one resident reviewed for pain. The facility census was 52.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure Resident #37, who received an antipsychotic medication, had an abnormal involuntary movement scale (AIMS) assessment completed to monitor the resident for any extrapyramidal side effects of the medication. This affected one resident (#37) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility assessment was 52.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure stock medications were stored in its original packaging and in a manner that allowed the staff to identify the expiration date of that medication. This affected three (Resident #2, #6, and #12), who resided on the 200 hall and had orders to receive Tylenol Extra Strength medication and received medication from the 200-hall medication administration cart where the improperly stored stock medication was found. The facility census was 52.
Inspectors wrote3. Review of Resident #11's medical record revealed an admission date of 04/25/23 and a reentry date of 06/12/24. Diagnoses include end stage renal disease, diabetes, morbid obesity, depression, cerebral infarction, and nontraumatic intracerebral hemorrhage. Review of the MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating Resident #11 had intact cognition. Further review revealed Resident #11 had orders for hemodialysis every Monday, Wednesday and Friday since 06/13/24. Review of assessments titled Dialysis Pre and Post Evaluation revealed missing assessments on 06/17/24, 06/19/24, 06/28/24, 07/01/24, 07/03/24, 07/10/24, 07/19/24, 07/24/24, 07/26/24, 07/29/24, 07/31/24, 08/28/24, 08/30/24, 10/04/24, 10/11/24, 10/18/24, 10/23/24, 11/01/24,11/04/24, 11/20/24 and 11/27/24. In an interview with LPN Unit Manager #557 on 01/02/25 at 3:00 P.M. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, policy review and interview, the facility failed to initiate enhanced barrier precautions as required. This affected one (Resident #37) of three sampled residents and the potential to affect all 48 residents. The facility identified 21 residents on enhanced barrier precautions (EBP).
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure dependent residents received assistance with activities of daily living (ADL) and grooming as needed. This affected two residents (#7, #53) of three sampled residents. The census was 48.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure competent nursing staff administered intravenous medications. This affected one (#47) of five residents observed for medication admininstration. The census was 48.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, policy review and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were stored appropriately and administered when dispensed. This affected two residents (#1, #3) from one of three medication carts observed during medication administration. The census was 48.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, policy review and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered without error. This affected two (#5, #47) of five residents observed during 25 medication opportunities with four medications errors. The medication administration error rate was 16%. The census was 48.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to maintain sanitary conditions in the kitchen. This had the potential to affect all 44 residents residing in the building.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, and review of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) documents, the facility failed to provide education to residents regarding influenza and pneumonia vaccines and failed to ensure residents received the recommended pneumonia vaccines. This affected four (Residents #15, #20, #32 and #97) of four residents reviewed for immunizations. The facility census was 44.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview the facility failed to complete and submit a new Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) for residents with a significant change in behaviors. This affected one (Resident #05) of two residents reviewed for PASARR screenings. The facility census was 44.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure the development of comprehensive resident care plans. This affected two (Residents #15 and #20) of 12 residents reviewed for care plans. The facility census was 44.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to accurately assess residents' skin and obtain timely treatment for areas of impaired skin integrity. This affected two (Residents #01 and #35) of three residents reviewed for skin integrity. The facility census was 44.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, staff interview and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to accurately assess resident risk for falls and failed to ensure fall prevention interventions were implemented to prevent falls. This affected one (Resident #11) of one resident reviewed for accidents. The facility census was 44.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy the facility failed to ensure residents were provided with oxygen therapy as ordered. This affected one (Resident #11) of one resident reviewed for respiratory care. The facility census was 44.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide necessary behavioral health services to residents. This affected one (Resident #5) of one resident reviewed for behavioral health. The facility census was 44.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure physicians documented a rationale indicating why consultant pharmacist medication regimen recommendations were rejected. This affected one (Resident #32) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 44.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, staff interview, review of alternate menu and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure alternate menu items included a variety based on resident preferences, likes or dislikes and failed to ensure residents knew what was on the alternate menu and where to find it. This affected two (Residents #15 and #20) of two residents reviewed for food preferences. The facility census was 44.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure residents were educated regarding the risk and benefits of Coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccination. This affected three (Residents #20, #32, and #97) of four residents reviewed for vaccines. The facility census was 44.
Inspectors wrote3. Review of Resident #349's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including pneumonia, diabetes, severe protein calorie malnutrition, pacemaker, epilepsy, dementia, high blood pressure and anemia. Review of the admission MDS 3.0 assessment, dated 11/08/22 revealed the resident required staff assistance for activities of daily living. Review of the physician's orders for 11/2022 revealed an order to change aerosol nebulizer set-up every seven days and as needed (PRN) on night shift every Sunday. The resident also had an order for Ipratropium Bromide Solution 0.02 % 2.5 ml inhalation three times a day for COPD. On 11/07/22 at 12:30 P.M., 3:03 P.M. and 4:02 P.M. observation revealed the resident's nebulizer with tubing and mask were not dated or covered and laying on the resident's bed side stand uncovered. On 11/08/22 at 10:43 A.M. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, facility policy and procedure and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #43's physician was notified timely regarding the resident's discharge against medical advice. This affected one resident (#43) of four residents reviewed for hospitalization.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure written notification was provided related to bed hold procedures. This affected two residents (#27 and #44) of four residents reviewed for hospitalization.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #95's plan of care was accurate and updated to reflect the resident's advance directives. This affected one resident (#95) of one resident reviewed for advanced directives.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #246, who required staff assistance for activities of daily living received adequate and timely assistance with nail care to maintain proper hygiene. This affected one resident (#246) of four residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL) care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure physician ordered anti-embolism stockings/(TED) hose were in place for Resident #2. This affected one resident (#2) of one resident reviewed for hemodialysis.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure wound care was provided using proper and adequate infection control techniques to decrease the risk of infection for Resident #349. This affected one resident (#349) of two residents reviewed for pressure ulcers.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure fall safety measures were in place for Resident #19 as planned. This affected one resident (#19) of three residents reviewed for accidents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure pureed food was prepared by the recipe to ensure it was served at the proper consistency. This affected two resident (#39 and #349) two residents who received pureed diets from the kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #21's medical record was maintained in an accurate manner related to wound care. This affected one resident (#21) of two residents reviewed for pressure ulcers.
11 fire safety citations on file: 7 on January 8, 2025, 2 on January 18, 2024, 2 on November 14, 2022.
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) | 3.66 | 3.69 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.60 | 0.64 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.37 | 3.28 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.91 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.15 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 47.3% | 48.7% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 42.9% | 43.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 4.81 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 3.78 on weekdays and 3.37 on weekends, 11% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.62 in April to June 2025 to 3.66 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 | 3.66 | 0.60 | 3.78 | 3.37 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 49 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.63 | 0.59 | 3.77 | 3.30 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 51 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.49 | 0.40 | 3.59 | 3.26 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 51 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.62 | 0.49 | 3.81 | 3.14 | 0.0% | 1 of 91 | 52 |
| 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 | 7.7 | 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 | 1.0 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.6 | 6.1 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 13.2 | 3.4 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 7.3 | 8.8 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 30.6 | 24.9 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 18.0 | 12.9 | 12.0 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Belpre Landing Nursing and Rehabilitation's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (54.0% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
54.0% 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. 323 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. 296 eligible stays.
5.2% this home
No different from the national rate
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. 165 eligible stays.
48.9% this home
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. 133 residents counted.
1.6% 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. 185 residents counted.
0.6% 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. 185 residents counted.
100.0% this home
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. 109 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: BELPRE LANDING NURSING & REHABILITATION INC. CMS links this home to Continuing Healthcare Solutions, a group of 12 nursing homes averaging 2.2 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bunner, Michael | Corporate director | Individual | 06/08/2012 | |
| Parsons, Benjamin | Corporate director | Individual | 07/16/2016 | |
| Hughey, Tracy | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/01/2026 | |
| Kauffman, Kevin | Corporate officer | Individual | 08/01/2024 | |
| Kauffman, Kevin | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 08/01/2024 | |
| Continuing Healthcare Solutions Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/20/2026 | |
| Hughey, Tracy | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/15/2013 | |
| Kauffman, Kevin | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 08/01/2024 |
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.