60583 State Route 7, Shadyside, OH 43947 · Belmont County · (740) 676-8381
88 certified beds, about 82 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 2003
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 366285 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on April 22, 2025, inspectors cited 8 health deficiencies (the Ohio average is 10.5, the national average 9.2).
Of 36 health citations since October 2021, 3 were 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 2.62 hours per resident per day, against 3.69 across Ohio and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.27 of those hours.
41.2% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Ohio average 48.7%).
CMS links it to Certus Healthcare, an affiliated group of 14 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 36 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents received refunds due to the residents within 30 days. This affected two residents (#1 and #2) of three residents reviewed for refunds. The facility census was 80.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to accurately reflect on the facility assessment the overall number of facility staff needed to ensure sufficient number of qualified staff are available to meet each resident's needs as identified through resident assessments and care plans. This had the potential to affect all residents of the facility. The facility census was 83.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to protect residents dignity. This affected one resident (#25) of the memory care unit. The facility census was 83.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of medical records, review of facility policies, observation, and interview, the facility failed to maintain the privacy of personal health information for three residents (#7, #42, and #79) of 83 residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 83.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to have sufficient nursing staff to maintain the highest practicable psychosocial well-being of each resident when a resident was brought to the dining room in a hospital gown which was opened in the back or to assist the resident with breakfast in a reasonable time. This affected one resident (#25) of six residents residing on the memory care unit. The facility census was 83.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and policy review, the facility failed to maintain an environment free from risk of infection by allowing a dog to be at the lunch table with residents eating their meal. This affected two residents (#77, #65) sitting together in the memory care dining area at lunchtime. The facility census was 83.
Inspectors wroteTHE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCY REPRESENTS AN INCIDENT OF PAST NON-COMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY. Based on closed record review, facility policy review and interview, the facility failed to provide a timely assessment and necessary and timely treatment for Resident 3181 following an unwitnessed fall with injury. This affected one resident (#181) of two residents reviewed for accident hazards. Actual harm occurred on 02/07/25 at 7:30 P.M. when Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) observed Resident #181 on the floor in front of her wheelchair. The CNA notified Registered Nurse (RN) #109 of the resident having an unwitnessed fall; however, the RN failed to assess and provide needed treatment to the resident thereby delaying necessary treatment including transfer to the hospital. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident #8's bedroom furniture was maintained in a safe manner to prevent the resident from sustaining an injury when her foot hit the board as she was attempting to sit up. This affected one resident (#8) of two residents reviewed for edema. Actual harm occurred on 05/21/24 when Resident #8 required seven sutures to the top of her right foot as a result of her foot being cut on the footboard of her bed. Following the incident, the facility identified the footboard was in need of repair as it was torn and rough in texture. Findings Include: Record review revealed Resident #8 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including respiratory failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and type II diabetes. Review of a nursing note dated 05/21/24 at 3:48 A.M. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, hospital record review and interview, the facility failed to provide adequate and timely respiratory care and treatment for Resident #2, related to a decline in the resident's respiratory status and need for oxygen use. This affected one resident (#2) of one resident reviewed for edema. Actual harm occurred beginning on 03/10/25 when the facility failed to adequately and timely treat respiratory complications exhibited by Resident #2 which included shortness of breath, abnormal lung sounds and decreased oxygen saturation. On 03/11/25 staff had increased the resident's oxygen to seven liters (the resident had an order for oxygen at one to five liters at that time) with no additional intervention noted. On 03/14/25 at 11:45 P.M. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure antibiotics usage met criteria. This affected four residents (#7, #28, #51, and #54) of four residents reviewed for antibiotic use.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and interview the facility failed to notify the resident representative of an unwitnessed fall that resulted in the resident's injury. This affected one resident (#181) of four residents reviewed for accidents. The facility census was 75.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure dialysis dietary recommendation to administer protein snack at night was implemented and failed to ensure meal intakes were adequately monitored and documented. This affected two residents (#44 and #51) of three residents reviewed for nutrition.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure dialysis orders to hold medications were clarified and implemented. This affected one resident (#51) of one resident reviewed for dialysis.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and interview the facility failed to ensure medications were reconciled correctly on admission. This affected one resident (#181) of one resident reviewed for psych/opioid medication review. The census was 75.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, review of operational manual, observation, and interview the facility failed to ensure a pressure relieving air mattress was accurately set per the resident's weight and maintained per the manufacturer's guidelines. This affected one resident (#34) of four residents reviewed for pressure ulcers.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, facility document review and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure staff wore the appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) when caring for COVID-19 positive residents, performed hand hygiene and disposed of sharps appropriately, and failed to ensure the disinfectant wipes outside of COVID-19 isolation rooms was not expired. Staff not wearing the appropriate PPE and the expired disinfectant wipes had the potential to affect all 56 residents residing in the facility who had not tested positive for COVID-19. The hand hygiene concern affected Resident #233 and the improper disposal of sharps had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 69.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, review of liability notices, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident received appropriate notice prior to the end of their Medicare (MCR) Part A services and residents that opted to receive those services continued to receive them while MCR was billed for an official decision on payment. This affected two residents (#1 and #48) of three residents reviewed for liability notices.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident record review, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents who were being transferred to the local emergency room for care received a copy of the bed hold notice. This affected two residents (#24 and #66) of two residents reviewed for hospitalization. The facility census was 69.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure all resident Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) documents were accurate to resident current conditions and diagnoses. This affected three residents (#44, Resident #9, and Resident #15) of three residents reviewed for PASARR documents. The census was 69. Findings Include: 1. Medical record review revealed Resident #44 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including hemiplegia and hemiparesis, osteomyelitis, major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, and dementia. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment, dated 09/01/23, revealed the resident was cognitively intact, and had diagnoses of dementia, depression and bipolar disorder. Review of Resident #44's PASARR document, dated 10/27/22, revealed under Section E, there were no diagnoses listed. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was dependent on staff for personal care received the assistance needed with the removal of unwanted facial hair. This affected one resident (#48) of three residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL's).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure Resident #32's constipation was treated timely. This affected one resident (#32) of two residents reviewed for constipation.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to properly store Resident #19's nebulizer machine, tubing, and mouthpiece and failed to ensure Resident #31 received the correct dosage of oxygen as ordered by the physician. This affected two residents (#19 and #31) of two residents reviewed for respiratory care.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, review of the dialysis contract, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure dialysis communication forms were completed by the facility and the dialysis center to maintain good communication of the resident's condition and services rendered during dialysis treatments. This affected one resident (#1) of one resident reviewed for hemodialysis treatments.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and interview the facility failed to ensure residents were free from unnecessary medications. This affected two residents (#11 and #15) of seven residents reviewed for unnecessary medication. The facility census was 69.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, staff interview, facility self-reported incident (SRI) review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from abuse by Resident #73, a resident with a known history of aggressive behaviors. In addition, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from verbal abuse from State Tested Nurse Aide (STNA) #300. This affected six residents (#44, #53, #75, #76, #77, and #78) of eight residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 73.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview, facility self-reported incident (SRI) review, and policy review, the facility failed to report physical abuse to the state agency. This affected four residents (#44, #53, #73, #75).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview, facility self-reported incident (SRI) review, and policy review, the facility failed to have evidence that allegations of physical abuse was thoroughly investigated. This affected four residents (#44, #53, #73, #75).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure residents were adequately supervised to assist in the prevention of resident to resident altercations. This affected one resident (#73) of three residents reviewed for resident-to-resident abuse.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to maintain sufficient levels of nursing staff to meet the total care needs of all residents. This affected seven residents (#13, #14, #50, #162, #48, #55 and #165) and had the potential to affect all 68 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of department head schedules and interview the facility failed to ensure the Director of Nursing only served as a charge nurse when the census was 60 residents or fewer. This affected all 68 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure resident preferences for bathing and/or rising time were honored. This affected five residents (#13, #14, #50, #55 and #165) of 11 residents interviewed regarding choices and one additional resident (Resident #48). The facility census was 68.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, facility admission Guidance review and interview the facility failed to maintain acceptable infection control practices, including the proper use, cleaning and disposal of personal protective equipment when entering the room of a resident (Resident #214) who was in quarantine for COVID-19 precautions to prevent the potential spread of COVID-19. This had the potential to affect all 36 residents (#3, #4, #7, #12, #13, #14, #15, #16, #17, #18, #20, #21, #22, #23, #24, #28, #35, #36, #39, #42, #43, #48, #49, #50, #54, #55, #57, #58, #162, #163, #164, #165, #166, #213, #214 and #215) who resided on the East Hall.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, review of facility policy and procedure and interview the facility failed to exercise reasonable care for the protection of Resident #55's property from loss or theft and ensure timely follow up regarding missing/lost items. This affected one resident (#55) of two residents reviewed for missing property.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #53 and Resident #55 and/or their responsible parties were notified timely and invited to participate in quarterly care conferences. This affected two residents (#53 and #55) of four residents reviewed for care planning conferences.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #25 received oxygen therapy as ordered. This affected one resident (#25) of three residents reviewed who had orders for oxygen.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure antibiotics were prescribed based on culture and sensitivity results to ensure appropriate antibiotic use. This affected two residents (#6 and #47) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medication use.
8 fire safety citations on file: 2 on April 22, 2025, 3 on September 25, 2023, 3 on October 25, 2021.
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) | 2.62 | 3.69 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.27 | 0.64 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.38 | 3.28 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.53 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.82 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 41.2% | 48.7% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 66.7% | 43.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.78 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 2.72 on weekdays and 2.38 on weekends, 13% 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 3.08 in April to June 2025 to 2.62 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 | 2.62 | 0.27 | 2.72 | 2.38 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 82 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 2.79 | 0.31 | 2.91 | 2.48 | 0.0% | 4 of 92 | 81 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 2.93 | 0.42 | 3.05 | 2.65 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 80 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.08 | 0.44 | 3.18 | 2.82 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 77 |
| 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 | 2.5 | 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 | 10.8 | 3.2 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.9 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.9 | 6.1 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.2 | 3.4 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.5 | 8.8 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 30.1 | 24.9 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 24.9 | 12.9 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 3.4 | 1.7 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 3.7 | 1.8 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Continuing Healthcare of Shadyside's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (57.9% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
57.9% 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. 83 eligible stays.
10.4% 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. 94 eligible stays.
6.3% 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. 66 eligible stays.
20.9% 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. 43 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. 64 residents counted.
5.0% this home
Median of homes: Ohio1.4% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 64 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. 7 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: CONTINUING HEALTHCARE SHADYSIDE LLC. CMS links this home to Certus Healthcare, a group of 14 nursing homes averaging 1.6 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chm Oh West Opco Holdco LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 12/28/2021 |
| Ohio Care Skld LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 50% | 12/28/2021 |
| Dipasqua, Jason | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 12/28/2021 | |
| Dipasqua, Jason | Corporate officer | Individual | 12/28/2021 | |
| Fishman, Shmuel | Corporate officer | Individual | 12/28/2021 |
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.