17322 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, OH 44112 · Cuyahoga County · (216) 486-2280
109 certified beds, about 101 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1974
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 365129 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on January 15, 2026, inspectors cited 4 health deficiencies (the Ohio average is 10.5, the national average 9.2).
Of 42 health citations since March 2022, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $23,989 in the last three years; the largest was $23,989, and the latest is dated October 23, 2023.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.59 hours per resident per day, against 3.69 across Ohio and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.44 of those hours.
57.1% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Ohio average 48.7%).
CMS links it to Garden Springs Healthcare, an affiliated group of 6 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 42 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interviews, the facility failed to maintain resident rooms in a safe and sanitary condition. This affected 14 residents (#1, #3, #36, #39, #52, #60, #63, #64, #65, #72, #84, #94, #100 and #101) out of 24 residents reviewed for environment. The facility census was 103.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to provide restorative services to prevent a decline of the residents' functional abilities in the facility. This affected three residents (#10, #14 and #54) out of four residents reviewed for rehabilitation services. The facility census was 103.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed ensure there was accurate documentation. This affected two residents (#31 and #42) out of 24 medical records reviewed for accuracy of medical records. The facility census was 103.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to post the most recent survey results readily accessible to residents and family members. This had the potential to affect all 103 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of the facility's contract with therapy services, resident interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to administer the facility in a manner to maintain therapy equipment in proper working order. This affected one resident (#51) and had the potential to affect all 91 residents in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, facility investigation review, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure Resident #73 was transferred safely resulting in a fall. This affected one resident (#73) of three residents reviewed for accidents. Facility census was 83.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered with an error rate of less than 5%. A total of two errors out of 29 opportunities observed resulting in a 6.9% medication error rate. This affected two resident (#36 and #73) out of four observed for medication administration.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, resident interview, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure food served was palatable for all residents. This affected four residents (#45, #47, #50, and #62) of five residents observed for food palatability and had the potential to affect all residents receiving food from the facility. The facility census was 90.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure food items were appropriately labeled, dated and contained. This had the potential to affect 85 residents receiving meals from the kitchen as three residents (#41, #71 and #77) were ordered nothing-by-mouth (NPO). The facility census was 88.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide spend-down letters for each month residents were approaching or over the resource limit. This affected two residents (#11 and #16) of five residents reviewed for resident funds. The facility census was 88.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to accurately code comprehensive assessments for two residents (#54 and #88) of 24 residents reviewed for assessments. The facility census was 88. Findings Include: 1. Medical record review revealed Resident #88 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including surgical aftercare following skin grafts to bilateral feet for burns, diabetes, stroke, end stage renal disease dependent on dialysis, and high blood pressure. Review of the physician's orders dated 02/13/24 revealed an order for oxycodone (an opioid pain medication) 5 milligrams (mg) orally every six hours as needed for pain. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, medical record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than five percent (%). Six medication errors occurred within 31 observed opportunities for error resulting in an error rate of 19.35% . This affected three residents (Residents # 241, #41, and #58) of nine residents observed during medication administration. The facility census was 88.
Inspectors wroteTHE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCY REPRESENTS AN INCIDENT OF PAST NON-COMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY. Based on closed medical record review, review of Emergency Department notes, review of facility investigative information, review of facility elopement and missing resident policy and procedures and interviews, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent Resident #92, who had cognitive impairment, wandering behaviors and diagnoses of schizophrenia and dementia, from eloping from the facility. This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy and the potential for serious life-threatening harm on 08/18/23 at approximately 8:30 P.M. when Resident #92 walked through the secured third-floor nursing unit back hallway door leading to a stairwell without staff knowledge; [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, review of personnel files and review of the facility abuse prevention policy and procedure, the facility failed to implement policies and procedures to include screening of all employees against the State of Ohio Nurse Aide Registry to identify if an employee had a finding concerning abuse, neglect, exploitation, mistreatment of residents or misappropriation of resident property This had the potential to affect all 91 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure Resident's #15, #26, #49 and #50 were supervised while they were smoking and failed to ensure Resident #15 was wearing a smoking apron while smoking. This affected four residents (#15, #26, #49 and #50) reviewed for smoking safety and had the potential to affect all 33 residents (Resident's #1, #2, #5, #6, #8, #9, #11, #13, #14, #15, #18, #23, #25, #26, #33, #36, #43, #49, #50, #54, #56, #58, #59, #61, #62, #64, #67, #74, #75, #80, #87, #89, #95) who smoked in the facility. The facility census was 91.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and review of facility policy the facility failed to ensure Resident #67's right knee skin impairment was accurately documented to include wound type in the medical record. This affected one resident (Resident #67) out of three residents reviewed for wounds. The facility census was 91.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure the services of a Registered Nurse (RN) were maintained for at least eight hours a day, seven days a week. This had the potential to affect all 85 residents currently residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure medications were secured, not expired and medications carts did not contain loose unidentifiable medications. This had the potential to affect all 85 residents currently residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview the facility failed to employ a designated person to serve as director of food services who meets qualifications. This had the potential to affect 77 residents who received meals in the facility. The facility identified Residents #11, #12, #21, #40, #65, #67, #57, and #434 as receiving no food from the kitchen. The facility census was 85.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and resident and staff interview the facility failed to ensure foods were served at a palatable temperature and were visually pleasing. This affected six (Residents #5, #39, #66, #74, #435 and #438) of six residents reviewed for food and had the potential to affect and additional 71 residents who received meals prepared by the kitchen. The facility identified Residents #11, #12, #21, #40, #65, #67, #57, and #434 as receiving no food from the kitchen. The facility census was 85.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to maintain a clean and sanitary kitchen area. This had the potential to affect 77 residents who received meals in the facility. The facility identified Residents #11, #12, #21, #40, #65, #67, #57, and #434 as receiving no food from the kitchen. The facility census was 85.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to properly dispose of garbage and refuse in the dumpster. This had the potential to affect all 85 residents currently residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview the facility failed to ensure it maintained a clean and sanitary environment. This had the potential to affect all 85 residents currently residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, medical record review, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure residents' code status (level of medical interventions a resident wishes to have performed in the event they experienced an absence of a heartbeat or breathing) entered in the electronic medical record matched the State of Ohio Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) written documents for three residents (#31, #57, and #67) of nine residents reviewed for advanced directives. The facility census was 85.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview the facility failed to accurately code the pre-admission screening and resident review (PASRR) accurately on the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment. This affected five (Residents #24, #52, #61, #64 and #76) of six residents reviewed for accuracy of PASRR coding of MDS assessments. The facility identified twelve residents as having a level two mental illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview the facility failed to develop resident specific care plans to address residents individual needs and to implement care planned interventions as required. This affected six (Residents #31, #35, #65, #66, #435 and #436) of 24 sampled residents. The facility census was 85. Findings Include: 1. Resident #66 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included end stage renal disease, bi-polar disorder and schizophrenia. Review of the care plan initiated 02/01/22 revealed the care plan contained the following information. Resident has potential and desires to be discharged to No destination was noted. Resident is at risk for isolation. No cause of isolation risk was given. Resident is at risk for constipation. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, medical record review, and policy review the facility failed to provide documentation that residents and/or their representatives were provided educational information regarding the risks and benefits, and informed consent/refusal for influenza and pneumococcal vaccinations. This affected five (Residents #12, #13, #67, #429, and #439) of seven residents reviewed for influenza and pneumococcal immunizations. The facility census was 85.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, medical record review, and facility policy review, and review of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) guidance the facility failed to provide documentation that residents and/or their representatives were provided educational information including risks and benefits, and informed consent/refusal for COVID-19 vaccinations. This affected three (Residents #67, #429, and #439) of seven residents reviewed for COVID-19 immunizations. The facility census was 85.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview the facility failed to complete a Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment as required upon resident discharge to the hospital. This affected one (Resident #2) of one resident reviewed for MDS accuracy. The facility census was 85.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure the pre-admission screen and resident review (PASRR) was accurate and reflective of current mental healthcare needs. This affected one (Resident #66) of twelve residents reviewed for PASRR status. The facility census was 85.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and medical record review the facility failed to develop a person-centered care plan for Resident #31. This affected one of six residents reviewed for care plan timing and revision. The facility census was 85. Review of the medical record for Resident #31 revealed an admission date of 08/22/19. Diagnoses included orthopedic care following surgical amputation, local infection of the skin and subcutaneous (under the skin) tissue, type 2 diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), moderate protein calorie malnutrition, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction, Methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) of unspecified site, idiopathic aseptic necrosis of left toes, acquired absence of right leg above knee, major depressive disorder, and chronic viral hepatitis C. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure routine turning and positioning for Resident #67 and adequate nail care for Residents #65 and #30. This affected three (Residents #67, #65 and #30) of six residents reviewed who were dependent for activities of daily living care. The facility census was 85.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure heel pressure offloading devices (PODs) were appropriately applied and routine repositioning was completed to promote the healing of existing pressure ulcers for Resident #18 and failed to provide adequate wound care for Resident #66. This affected two (Resident #18 and #66) of four residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility census was 85.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure ancillary podiatry visits were provided and adequate foot care was administered to Resident #65. This affected one (Resident #65) of three residents reviewed for ancillary services. The facility census was 85.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview the facility failed to provide adequate care for the use of an indwelling urinary catheter. This affected one (Resident #67) of one resident observed for catheter care. The facility census was 85.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and review of facility policy the facility failed to ensure Resident #18 was assessed for nutritional needs and to implement new interventions to address a significant unplanned weight loss and failed to ensure the resident was provided feeding assistance with meals. This affected one of eight residents reviewed for nutritional status. The facility census was 85.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure medications were administered with an error rate of less than 5%. A total of 12 errors out of 27 opportunities observed resulted in a 44.4% medication error rate. This affected one resident (#40) of three (#41, #49 and #40) observed for medication administration. The facility census was 85.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents were free of significant medication errors. This affected one (Resident #40) of three observed for medication administration.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, taste test and diet manual review the facility failed to prepare pureed foods at the proper consistency. This had the potential to affect two (Residents #280 and #432) of two residents prescribed a pureed diet. The facility census was 85.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, observation, and medical record review the facility failed to ensure accurate documentation was contained in the medical record. This affected two (Residents #31 and #47) of six residents reviewed for accurate documentation. The facility census was 85.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and policy review the facility failed to follow appropriate infection control procedures during provision of incontinence care for Resident #31 and medication administration for Resident #40. This affected one (Residents #31) of three residents observed for personal care and one (Resident #40) of three residents observed for medication administration. The facility census was 85.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure posted staffing information was updated daily. This had the potential to affect all 85 residents.
32 fire safety citations on file: 14 on January 15, 2026, 12 on May 8, 2024, 6 on March 17, 2022.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| October 23, 2023 | Fine | $23,989 |
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) | 3.59 | 3.69 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.44 | 0.64 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.08 | 3.28 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.27 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.88 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 57.1% | 48.7% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 16.7% | 43.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 5.10 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 3.79 on weekdays and 3.08 on weekends, 19% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 3.3% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.54 in April to June 2025 to 3.59 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 | 3.59 | 0.44 | 3.79 | 3.08 | 3.3% | 1 of 90 | 101 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.65 | 0.47 | 3.86 | 3.13 | 3.1% | 0 of 92 | 100 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.59 | 0.46 | 3.80 | 3.06 | 2.3% | 0 of 92 | 100 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.54 | 0.44 | 3.73 | 3.06 | 2.7% | 1 of 91 | 98 |
| 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 | 3.3 | 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 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.5 | 3.2 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.1 | 6.1 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.4 | 3.4 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.8 | 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 | 7.9 | 12.9 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.0 | 1.7 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.4 | 1.8 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Eastbrook Healthcare 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. 23 eligible stays.
9.9% 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.
7.5% 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. 32 eligible stays.
35.5% 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. 31 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. 41 residents counted.
0.0% 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. 41 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. 15 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: 17322 EUCLID AVENUE COMPANY LLC. CMS links this home to Garden Springs Healthcare, a group of 6 nursing homes averaging 2.3 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Castle Rock Nursing Member, LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 45% | 06/04/2019 |
| Elm Arbor, LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 10% | 06/04/2019 |
| Meb Irrv Tr | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 11% | 06/04/2019 |
| Friedman, Matis | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 50% | 06/04/2019 |
| Friedman, Matis | Contracted managing employee | Individual | 06/15/2015 | |
| Friedman, Matis | Corporate director | Individual | 06/04/2019 | |
| Friedman, Matis | Corporate officer | Individual | 06/04/2019 | |
| Castle Rock Nursing Member, LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 06/04/2019 |
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.