7025 Clovernook Avenue, Cincinnati, OH 45231 · Hamilton County · (513) 605-4000
126 certified beds, about 108 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1981
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 365551 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on April 14, 2026, inspectors cited 18 health deficiencies (the Ohio average is 10.5, the national average 9.2).
Of 49 health citations since September 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 3.86 hours per resident per day, against 3.69 across Ohio and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.50 of those hours.
70.3% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Ohio average 48.7%).
CMS links it to Cch Healthcare, an affiliated group of 33 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 49 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to store food in a safe and sanitary manner. This had the potential to affect all 115 facility-identified residents who received food from the kitchen. The facility census was 119 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of personnel records and staff interview, the facility failed to employ a full-time qualified Licensed Social Worker (LSW). This had the potential to affect all of the residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 119 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure nursing staff followed proper hand hygiene protocols. This had the potential to affect all of the residents residing in the facility. Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to implement enhanced barrier precautions for one (Resident #23) of 40 residents with orders for EBP. The facility census was 119 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, the facility failed ensure corridors were equipped with handrails on each side. This could potentially affect all 119 residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 119.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, resident interview, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to provide a safe and clean environment for two Residents (#67 and #102) out of three Residents reviewed. The facility census was 119. 1) Review of the medical record for Resident #67 revealed an admission date of 12/01/25. Diagnoses included constipation, insomnia, vitamin-d deficiency, and spinal stenosis. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] for Resident #67 revealed he was cognitively intact. Review of the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) Post Fall/Incident Investigation/Summary dated 02/18/26 at 3:30 P.M., revealed Registered Nurse (RN) #858 was notified by Certified Nursing Assistants (CNA) (#1001 and #511) that Resident #67 fell in the shower room. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, resident interview, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to provide regular care conferences for the resident and/or resident representative. This affected four (Residents #18, #29, #55, and #142) of four residents reviewed for care conferences. The facility census was 119 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, resident interview, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to provide nail care and personal care for dependent residents. This affected five (#42, #57, #76, #92 and #107) of six residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL) care. The facility census was 119 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, review of the facility menu, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to implement the menu as planned by the Registered Dietitian (RD). This affected 15 facility-identified residents who received a renal diet. The facility census was 119 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to provide dignified care for Resident #58 who had an indwelling Foley catheter. This affected one (#58) of the four residents (#23, #58, #66 and #102) reviewed for dignity. The facility census was 119. Review of the medical record for Resident #58 revealed an admission date of 03/07/26 with diagnoses of congestive heart failure, acute cystitis with hematuria, chronic kidney disease state III and major depressive disorder. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) admission assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #58 had moderate cognitive impairment and was always incontinent for bowel and had a catheter for the bladder. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on closed record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to notify a resident's representative of medication changes. This affected one (#138) of the three residents reviewed for notification of change of status. The facility census was 119. Review of the closed medical records for Resident #138 revealed the resident was admitted to facility on 12/13/21. Diagnosis included cerebellar ataxia, dysphasia, vascular dementia, polyneuropathy, chronic pain syndrome, lower left extremity above the knee amputation and schizoaffective disorder. Resident was discharged to another skilled nursing facility on 11/11/25. Review of the closed medical record for Resident #138 dated 04/03/25, revealed an informed consent being done for genetic testing on 04/03/25 with a verbal consent being obtained from Resident #138 despite being severely cognitively impaired. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) documents, staff interview and facility policy, the facility failed to ensure the NOMNC was accurately completed. This affected three (Residents #143, #144 and #146) of five residents reviewed for Beneficiary Notification. The facility census was 119. 1) Review of the medical record revealed Resident #143 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 02/23/26. Diagnoses included asthma with acute exacerbation, diabetes mellitus type II and morbid obesity. Review of the census profile for Resident #143 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], transitioned to Medicare Part A on 02/01/26, and was discharged from the facility on 02/23/26. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Discharge-Return Not Anticipated assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #143 had intact cognition. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interviews, record review, review of facility's Self-Reported Incidents (SRI), and policy review, the facility failed to timely report an allegation of a missing item. This affected one (#02) resident of the one resident reviewed for reporting of potential abuse and misappropriation. The facility total census was 119. Record review of Resident #02 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses for Resident #02 include respiratory failure, hypertension, diabetes, end stage renal disease, obesity, anxiety disorder, dependent on dialysis, cardiac defibrillator, and metabolic encephalopathy. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) comprehensive assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #02 had intact cognition and was dependent on staff assistance with Activities of Daily Living skill (ADL) and mobility. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interviews, record review, review of facility's Self-Reported Incidents (SRI), and policy review, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate an allegation of misappropriation. This affected one (#02) resident of the one resident reviewed for reporting of potential abuse and misappropriation. The facility total census was 119. Record review of Resident #02 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses for Resident #02 include respiratory failure, hypertension, diabetes, end stage renal disease, obesity, anxiety disorder, dependent on dialysis, cardiac defibrillator, and metabolic encephalopathy. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) comprehensive assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #02 had intact cognition and was dependent on staff assistance with Activities of Daily Living skill (ADL) and mobility. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and resident interview, the facility failed to develop comprehensive care plans for residents regarding pain management and refusal of medications. This affected two (Residents #79 and #3) of three residents reviewed for care plans. The facility census was 119 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure timely care and treatment for a resident exhibiting a change in condition. This affected one (Resident #141) of 26 residents sampled. Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility also failed to arrange follow-up medical tests. This affected one (Resident #138) of 26 residents sampled. The facility census was 119 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, staff interview, resident interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure staff assessed residents for smoking safety and implemented safe smoking interventions. This affected one (Resident #126) of four residents reviewed for accidents and hazards. Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview, resident interview, and review of the facility policy the facility also failed to ensure staff maneuvered resident shower chairs in a safe manner to prevent falls. This affected one (Resident #67) of four residents reviewed for accidents and hazards. The facility census was 119 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, staff interview, resident interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure staff followed residents' fluid restrictions. This affected three (Residents #6, #111 and #29) of three residents reviewed for fluid restrictions. The facility census was 119 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, resident interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to routinely assess and document resident pain and monitor the effectiveness of pain medications. This affected one (Resident #79) of three residents reviewed for pain management. The facility identified 33 residents on a pain management program. The facility census was 119 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of an incident report, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from avoidable accidents during transfers with a mechanical (Hoyer) lift. This affected one (#6) out of three residents reviewed for accidents. The facility census was 110.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview and review of employee personnel file, the facility failed to ensure the activities program was directed by a qualified professional. This had the potential to affect all 116 residents who resided at the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, and staff interview, the failed to ensure employment of a full-time, qualified social worker. This had the potential to affect all 116 residents who resided at the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of facility policy, staff interview, hospital social worker interview, dialysis staff interview, review of a a job description for a social worker, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a resident received hemodialysis as ordered by not assisting and coordinating transportation. This affected one Resident (#117) of the two residents reviewed for dialysis. The facility also failed to ensure active and ongoing communication between the facility and the dialysis center was maintained. This affected one Residents (#05) of the two reviewed for receiving dialysis. The facility census was 116.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure dented cans were not in circulation for use. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure residents' food items stored in unit refrigerators were labeled and dated and further failed to ensure unit refrigerators were clean and consistently monitored to ensure appropriate food storage temperatures. This had the potential to affect all residents except three (#77, #94 and #100) identified by the facility as receiving no food by mouth. The facility census was 111.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview and medical record review and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure dignity was maintained during mobility assistance for Resident #54. This affected one resident (#54) of four residents reviewed for dignity. The facility census was 111.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of resident fund authorizations and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure resident authorization to establish a Resident Funds Trust Account was witnessed by someone who was not an employee of the facility. This affected two residents (#9 and #73) of six residents reviewed for resident funds. The facility census was 111.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of resident fund documents and staff interview, the facility failed to notify residents when available funds were within the $200.00 Medicaid resource limit. This affected one resident (#7) of six residents reviewed for personal funds. The facility census was 111.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, staff interview, pharmacist interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure resident's were free from significant medication errors during insulin administration. This affected one resident (#1) of six residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 111.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, staff interview, review of the Individual Control Drug Record (ICDR)and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a narcotic medication was accurately labeled to reflect current physician orders. This affected one resident (#367) of six residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 111.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure resident medical records contained complete and accurate information. This affected one resident (#367) of six residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 111.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview, review of job description, the facility failed to ensure they employed a qualified Dietary Manager. This had the potential to affect all 115 residents who received food from the kitchen. The facility census was 115.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to follow the physician's order for a resident's pressure ulcer treatment. This affected one (Resident #65) of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility census was 106.
Inspectors wroteTHE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCY REPRESENTS AN INCIDENT OF PAST NON-COMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY. Based on record review, observation, staff interviews, interview with the Medical Director (MD), review of hospital records, review of facility investigation, review of witness statements, review of personnel records, review of Hoyer Lift Manufacturer Guidelines, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a resident was safely transferred by a Hoyer mechanical lift. This resulted in Actual Harm on 12/19/23 when Resident #15 was being transferred from the wheelchair to the bed with the use of a mechanical lift by former State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #30 and STNA #30 hit the resident's right leg on the mechanical lift support bar. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to promptly notify the resident representative when residents tested positive for COVID-19 and/or were exposed to COVID-19 and were placed under isolation precautions. This affected two (Residents #38 and #105) of three residents reviewed for notification of change. The census was 104.
Inspectors wroteTHE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCY REPRESENTS AN INCIDENT OF PAST NONCOMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY. Based on medical record review, review of the State of Ohio Board of Pharmacy Terminal Distributor Licensure of Prescriber Practices, review of facility policy, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a contracted entity had appropriate State of Ohio required credentials for provision of services for residents. This deficiency affected four of four Residents (#10, #62, #92, and #97) reviewed for medications administered by a contracted ancillary provider. This affected six current Residents (#5, #50, #57, #67, #74 and #77) and 13 discharged Residents (#84, #85, #87, #88, #89, #90, #91, #92, #93, #94, #95, #96 and #97). The census was 108.
Inspectors wroteTHE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCY REPRESENTS AN INCIDENT OF PAST NONCOMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY. Based on medical record review, review of the State of Ohio Board of Pharmacy Terminal Distributor Licensure of Prescriber Practices, review of facility policy, and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were obtained from a source with a Terminal Distributor of Dangerous Drugs (TDDD) license (which allows a business entity to purchase, possess, and/or distribute dangerous drugs at a specific location) specific to the State of Ohio. This deficiency affected four of four Residents (#10, #62, #92, and #97) reviewed for medications administered by a contracted ancillary provider. This affected six current Residents (#5, #50, #57, #67, #74 and #77) and 13 discharged Residents (#84, #85, #87, #88, #89, #90, #91, #92, #93, #94, #95, #96 and #97). [...]
Inspectors wroteTHE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCY REPRESENTS AN INCIDENT OF PAST NONCOMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY. Based on medical record review, review of the State of Ohio Board of Pharmacy Terminal Distributor Licensure of Prescriber Practices, review of facility policy, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a contracted entity had appropriate State of Ohio required credentials for provision of services for residents. This deficiency affected four of four Residents (#10, #62, #92, and #97) reviewed for medications administered by a contracted ancillary provider. This affected six current Residents (#5, #50, #57, #67, #74 and #77) and 13 discharged Residents (#84, #85, #87, #88, #89, #90, #91, #92, #93, #94, #95, #96 and #97). The census was 108.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interviews, review of facility investigation, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's discharge was safe, orderly and the accurate medications were provided to a resident upon discharge. The facility also failed to implement an effective discharge planning process by failing to confirm home health services needed post discharge were in place prior to discharge. This affected one (#10) of the three residents reviewed for discharges. The facility census was 108.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to complete a discharge summary of recapitulation of resident's stay. This affected one (#10) out of three residents reviewed for discharge rights. The facility census was 108.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure medication carts and a medication room was locked. This had the potential to affect eight residents (#11, #12, #13, #14, #15, #16, #17, and #18) identified by the facility as independently mobile with confusion, The facility census was 102.
Inspectors wroteTHE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCY REPRESENTS AN INCIDENT OF PAST NON-COMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY. Based on medical record review, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to check orders for as needed medications prior to administrating. This affected one (Resident #17) of six residents reviewed for medication administration. The in-house facility census was 102.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, resident interview, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure fall prevention interventions were put in place for a resident at high risk for falls and per the resident's plan of care. This affected one (Resident #85) of five residents reviewed for accidents. The facility also failed to ensure resident smoking materials were safely stored and secured. This affected three (Residents #3, #68, and #97) of 18 facility identified residents who smoked. The facility census was 108.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure expired medications were discarded. This affected the following residents (Residents #33, #34, #36, #72, and #202) of 25 facility identified residents receiving insulin. This had the potential to affect Residents #57, #58, #70, and #85 who resided on the second floor with orders for bisacodyl suppositories. This had the potential to affect Residents #36 and #70 who resided on the second floor with orders for promethazine suppositories. This had the potential to affect all residents on the second floor with the exception of Residents #91 and #94 who the facility identified as having contraindication to receiving tuberculin skin testing solution. The facility census was 108.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident interview, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure food was served at safe and appropriate temperatures. This had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility with the exception of five residents (Residents #52, #63, #70, #77 and #92) identified by the facility as not receiving food prepared in the facility kitchen. The facility census was 108.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, resident interview, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure resident, and resident's representative were notified of resident's room move. This affected one (Resident #85) of 26 residents reviewed for room change notification. The facility census was 108.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the medical record accurately reflected a resident's advance directive. This affected one (Resident #8) of 32 residents reviewed for advance directives. The facility census was 108.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, resident and staff interviews, medical record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents, who required extensive staff assistance or dependent on staff for activities of daily living (ADL) care, received adequate and timely hygiene care and assistance with meals. This affected three (Resident #18, #28 and #54) of five residents reviewed for ADL. The facility identified 102 residents who required assistance for dressing, 72 residents who required assistance with eating, and all 108 residents required assistance with bathing. The facility census was 108.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was at nutrition risk and had a unplanned significant weight loss received a timely nutritional assessment and intervention(s). This affected one (Resident #47) of seven residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility identified eight resident with unplanned significant weight loss/gain. The facility census was 108.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, resident and staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure residents received medications as physician ordered. This affected one (Resident #85) of five residents reviewed for medications. The facility census was 108.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure residents on as needed anti-anxiety medications had a duration or stop date for the medication. This affected one (Resident #85) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility identified seven residents with orders for anti-anxiety medications. The facility census was 108.
17 fire safety citations on file: 8 on April 14, 2026, 5 on October 25, 2024, 4 on September 26, 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) | 3.86 | 3.69 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.50 | 0.64 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.43 | 3.28 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.30 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.06 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 70.3% | 48.7% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 69.6% | 43.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.60 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 4.04 on weekdays and 3.43 on weekends, 15% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 5.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.60 in April to June 2025 to 3.86 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 | 3.86 | 0.50 | 4.04 | 3.43 | 5.0% | 0 of 90 | 108 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.83 | 0.47 | 4.01 | 3.36 | 5.2% | 1 of 92 | 106 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.78 | 0.56 | 3.96 | 3.32 | 7.5% | 0 of 92 | 109 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.60 | 0.60 | 3.78 | 3.14 | 9.7% | 0 of 91 | 112 |
| 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 | 5.9 | 5.3 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.3 | 3.2 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.3 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.8 | 6.1 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.8 | 3.4 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.0 | 8.8 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 12.8 | 24.9 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 11.3 | 12.9 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.8 | 1.7 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 0.9 | 1.8 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Clovernook Health Care and Rehabilitation Center'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. 19 eligible stays.
10.2% 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. 50 eligible stays.
7.6% 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. 25 eligible stays.
46.5% 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. 43 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. 66 residents counted.
2.4% 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. 66 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. 11 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: CLOVERNOOK HEALTHCARE LLC. CMS links this home to Cch Healthcare, a group of 33 nursing homes averaging 2.5 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clovernook Healthcare Holdings LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 08/21/2018 |
| Ch Clovernook Holdings LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 46% | 08/21/2018 |
| Starlight Healthcare LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 48% | 08/21/2018 |
| Bisel, Deborah | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 08/21/2018 | |
| Stern, Jacob | Corporate director | Individual | 08/21/2018 | |
| Stern, Jacob | Corporate officer | Individual | 08/21/2018 |
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.