4320 Bridgetown Road, Cincinnati, OH 45211 · Hamilton County · (513) 574-4550
108 certified beds, about 100 residents a day · For profit - Individual · Medicare and Medicaid since 1967
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 365045 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on March 26, 2026, inspectors cited 11 health deficiencies (the Ohio average is 10.5, the national average 9.2).
Of 32 health citations since February 2020, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $16,801 in the last three years; the largest was $16,801, and the latest is dated June 28, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.49 hours per resident per day, against 3.69 across Ohio and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.50 of those hours.
31.1% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Ohio average 48.7%).
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 32 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a Registered Nurse (RN) was working in the facility for at least eight consecutive hours a day seven days a week. This had the potential to affect all of the residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 98 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure residents experienced a dignified dining experience. This affected one (Resident #104) of three residents reviewed for dignity. The facility census was 98 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, resident interview, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure resident call lights were accessible to the resident. This affected one (Resident #86) of three residents reviewed for accidents and hazards. The facility census was 98 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure advance directives were accurate. This affected two (Residents #1 and #11) of three residents reviewed for advance directives. The facility census was 98 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of facility Self-Reported Incidents (SRIs), review of staff witness statements, observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from verbal/emotional abuse. This affected one (Resident #104) of three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 98 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of facility Self-Reported Incidents (SRIs), staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure allegations of abuse were reported to the state agency in a timely manner. This affected one (Resident #21) of three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility also failed to report allegations of abuse to the state agency. This affected one (Resident #10) of three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 98 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of facility Self-Reported Incidents (SRIs), review of staff witness statements, observation, staff interviews, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to prevent possible further abuse by not removing staff from the facility during the investigation. This affected three (Residents #104, #21, and #10) of three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 98 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of facility fall investigations, resident interview, and staff interview the facility failed to ensure safe resident transfers to prevent falls. This affected one (Resident #4) of three residents reviewed for accidents and hazards. Based on medical record review, observation, and staff interview, the facility failed to follow safe swallowing recommendations during mealtime. This affected one (Resident #104) of three residents reviewed for accident hazards. The facility census was 98 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents had adaptive utensils at meals as ordered by the physician. This affected one (Resident #104) of 24 residents sampled. The facility census was 98 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure staff donned proper personal protective equipment (PPE) when providing gastrostomy tube (g-tube) care to residents with physician's orders for enhanced barrier precautions (EBP.) The affected one (Resident #23) of two facility-identified residents with orders for EBP. The facility census was 98 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were offered pneumococcal vaccines and failed to ensure resident medical records included documentation of receipt or refusal of the vaccine. This affected two (Residents #4 and #8) of five residents reviewed for infection control. The facility census was 98 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure resident's medical record contained documentation for completed care and services provided by staff. This affected one (#216) out of three residents reviewed for quality of care. The facility census was 103.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, review of facility in-service records, review of a personnel file, review of the safety inspection bus checklist, review of the facility's Self-Reported Incidents (SRIs), review of facility policies, review of the emergency medical services (EMS) run report, review of hospital documentation, resident interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident was safely secured in the wheelchair with an appropriate seat belt during transportation in a facility bus from an activity department outing. This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy when one resident (#05) was placed at potential risk for serious life-threating harm and/or injuries when on 05/28/24, Activity Director (AD) #300 abruptly stopped the facility bus, causing Resident #05 to fall forward out of his wheelchair, hitting another resident, and then landing on the floor. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interviews and policy review, the facility failed to obtain additional instructions/orders from the physician when a vacuum-assisted closure (wound vac) was not available and/or not applied as ordered. Additionally, the facility failed to obtain instructions/orders to provide care for a residents peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) line. This affected one (#130) of three reviewed for quality of care. The facility census was 103.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure food items were properly sealed and dated and that the ice machine was clean. This had the potential to affect all 97 residents residing in the facility. All 97 residents were served food from the kitchen. The facility census was 97.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, family and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide a clean and homelike environment. This affected five (#30, #82, # 347, #349, and #350) of five residents reviewed for environment. The facility census was 97.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and staff interview the facility failed to ensure proper storage of medications including ensuring that expired medications were not being used. This affected one of the three medication carts reviewed and one out of two medication storage rooms in the facility. This had the potential to affect 18 residents (#1, #8, #12, #19, #27, #33, #42, #55, #57, #61, #73, #78, #86, #155, #245, #247, #346, #347) due to expired medications. The facility census was 97.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident and staff interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a resident with dignity and respect regarding his personal possessions. This affected two (#21 and #27) of three residents reviewed for dignity and respect of personal possessions. The facility census was 97.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed ensure residents were provided form of communication, to communicate the needs of the resident and have their personal needs met. This affected two resident (#87 and #60) of two residents reviewed for communication. The facility census was 97.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure the resident's attending physician was notified of significant weight loss. This affected one (#22) of eight residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility census was 97.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview, and review of policies, the facility failed to develop care plans for residents receiving dialysis services. This affected one (#38) of four residents reviewed for dialysis. The facility identified six residents receiving hemodialysis services. The facility census was 97.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to revise care plans as needed. This affected two (#15 and #23) of eight residents reviewed for pressure ulcers and unnecessary medications. The facility census was 97.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to arrange for a resident to receive services to address hearing difficulties. This affected one (#52) of two residents reviewed for communication. The facility census was 97.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interviews, observations, review of policies, and review of guidelines from the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (NPUAP), the facility failed to thoroughly assess resident's skin, failed to notify the physician when areas developed and change soiled gloves during a dressing change. This affected three (#15, #23, and #155) of four residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility census was 97.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident and staff interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who smokes was following the facility policy on securing smoking materials. This affected one (#349) of two residents identified as smokers. The facility census was 97.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to implement interventions for a resident with significant weight loss and failed to monitor weights per policy. This affected three (#22, #23, and #87) of eight residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility census was 97.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) was maintained. This affected one (Resident #151) of three residents reviewed for IV therapy services. The facility census was 97.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents had an appropriate diagnosis for the use of anti-psychotic medications. This affected two (Residents #23 and #51) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 97.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, policy review and manufacturer's instructions, the facility failed to properly clean and sanitize the glucometer before and after use. This affected one (#68) of one resident observed for glucometer check. The census was 97.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, review of facility policy and review of the facility maintenance binder the facility failed to perform monitoring per their policy. This had the potential to affect all residents of the facility. The census was 95.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, interviews and review of Medscape the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was less than five percent when extended release (ER) and delayed release (DR) medications were crushed. There were 27 opportunities with three medication errors for a medication error rate of 11.11 percent. This affected one (Resident #89) of four residents observed. The facility identified 18 residents (#16, #24, #25, #34, #36, #37, #38, #39, #42, #45, #48, #54, #62, #66, #67, #70, #74, and #89) on Registered Nurse (RN) #51's assignment. The census was 95.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facilities surveys, observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure survey results including complaint surveys for the preceding three years were available for review. This had potential to affect all residents in the facility. The census was 95.
33 fire safety citations on file: 5 on March 26, 2026, 8 on February 22, 2023, 20 on February 6, 2020.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| June 28, 2024 | Fine | $16,801 |
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) | 3.49 | 3.69 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.50 | 0.64 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.29 | 3.28 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.87 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.12 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 31.1% | 48.7% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 9.1% | 43.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 4.02 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 3.57 on weekdays and 3.29 on weekends, 8% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 1.5% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.40 in April to June 2025 to 3.49 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 | 3.49 | 0.50 | 3.57 | 3.29 | 1.5% | 0 of 90 | 100 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.46 | 0.47 | 3.53 | 3.27 | 1.6% | 0 of 92 | 102 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.41 | 0.49 | 3.47 | 3.24 | 1.5% | 0 of 92 | 103 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.40 | 0.49 | 3.49 | 3.19 | 1.5% | 0 of 91 | 103 |
| 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 | 7.5 | 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 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.4 | 3.2 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.3 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.9 | 6.1 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.1 | 3.4 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 7.9 | 8.8 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 22.3 | 24.9 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 8.0 | 12.9 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.4 | 1.7 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.2 | 1.8 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Hillebrand Nursing and Rehabilitation Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (48.6% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
48.6% 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. 213 eligible stays.
9.3% 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. 232 eligible stays.
6.4% 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. 124 eligible stays.
44.4% 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. 90 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. 129 residents counted.
1.6% 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. 129 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. 63 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: JAMES D, INC.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jmg Family LLP | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 49% | 06/25/2009 |
| Glass, James | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 24% | 06/25/2009 |
| Ridgely, Deborah | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 24% | 06/25/2009 |
| Glass, James | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 01/01/2014 | |
| Suer, Daniel | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 08/07/2006 | |
| Glass, James | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2014 | |
| Schneider, Michelle | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2014 | |
| Glass, James | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/01/2014 | |
| Ridgely, Deborah | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/01/2014 | |
| Schneider, Michelle | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/01/2014 |
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.