60 Marietta Road, Chillicothe, OH 45601 · Ross County · (740) 772-5900
100 certified beds, about 76 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1987
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 365694 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on February 26, 2026, inspectors cited 10 health deficiencies (the Ohio average is 10.5, the national average 9.2).
Of 45 health citations since April 2023, 3 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $134,320 in the last three years; the largest was $101,940, and the latest is dated February 26, 2026.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.25 hours per resident per day, against 3.69 across Ohio and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.37 of those hours.
46.4% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Ohio average 48.7%).
CMS links it to Citadel Healthcare, an affiliated group of 16 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 45 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, resident and staff interviews, wound nurse practi-tioner interview, review of wound notes, hospital records, wound clinic records, review of the information from the National Pressure Injury Advisory Panel (NPIAP), and policy re-view, the facility failed to ensure the physician ordered treatments were completed as di-rected and failed to ensure interventions were implemented to prevent the development of, worsening of and promote the healing of avoidable facility acquired stage IV and un-stageable pressure ulcers with the development of osteomyelitis (a serious infection and inflammation of the bone or bone marrow, typically caused by bacteria (most commonly Staphylococcus aureus) or fungi. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure foods were stored in a sanitary manner. This had the potential to affect all 74 residents residing in the facility who were identified as eating food prepared in the facility kitchen. The facility census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to implement and maintain a comprehensive Quality Assurance Improvement Program (QAPI) program and plan to address care issues and/or concerns in the facility. This had the potential to affect all 74 residents who reside in the facility. The facility census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure insulin and eye drops were labeled with the date opened and failed to ensure insulin glargine was discarded timely after being opened. This affected six residents (#9, #10, #24, #47, #55 and #60) whose medications were observed during the medication storage task. The facility census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident record reviews, review of hospital discharge records, interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure advance directives were ordered and implemented timely upon admission or readmission to the facility. This affected two residents (#72 and #92) out of the two residents reviewed for advance directives. The facility census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, policy review, and staff interview, the facility failed to provide and document sufficient preparation to ensure a safe and orderly transfer or discharge from the facility and ensure the discharge planning process addressed each residents discharge goals and needs. This affected two residents (#4, #32) of three residents reviewed for transfer or discharge from the facility. The facility census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure Level II Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) recommendations were implemented timely and appropriately. This affected the one resident (#10) of one resident who was reviewed for PASARR recommendations. The facility census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews, interviews and facility policy review, the facility failed to document non pressure areas upon admission and initiate treatments for Residents #6, #22, #34. The facility also failed to ensure new and/or ongoing non pressure areas treatments were accurate. This affected Resident #2 and Resident #6. This affected four residents (#2, #6, #22, and #34) of the six residents reviewed for non-pressure skin alterations. The facility census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, policy review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the smoking policy was implemented to ensure the environment was free from hazards, and failed to implement assistive devices to prevent falls. This affected two residents (#39, #41) of three residents reviewed for accidents. The facility census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, policy review, and staff interview, the facility failed to implement the antibiotic stewardship policy to ensure antibiotics were prescribed appropriately. This affected three of three residents reviewed for antibiotic use (Residents #2, #5, and #33). The facility census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, interviews and facility policy review, the facility failed to assess, develop and implement a comprehensive and individualized prevention program to prevent the development of avoidable pressure ulcers, ensure pressure ulcer dressings were provided as ordered and/or prevent the risk of pressure ulcer infection for Resident #43 and #49. Actual harm occurred on 02/05/25 when Resident #43 was readmitted to the facility following an acute care hospital stay, was determined to be at high risk for skin breakdown, dependent on staff for bed mobility and with known pressure ulcers that were found not to have a comprehensive assessment of the known pressure ulcers upon readmission to the facility. Additionally, the resident's physician ordered treatments for pressure ulcers that were not provided as ordered. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure staffing to meet residents needs. This affected two (Resident #50 and #72) residents and had the potential to affect all 67 residents residing in the facility. The census was 67. Finding Include: 1. On 02/11/25 at 11:15 A.M., observation of Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #168 administer Resident #50 morning medication due at 6:00 A.M. via his peg-tube revealed the resident's medication was being administered late. On 02/11/25 at 11:30 A.M., interview with LPN #168 confirmed Resident #50's morning medication was administered outside of the allotted timeframe. LPN #168 revealed the the facility only had three nurses on duty so she had half of another hallway and had three residents who she had to administer morning medications yet. 2. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were treated in a dignified manner. This affected three residents (#43, #48, #49) of three residents reviewed for indwelling urinary catheter. The facility census was 67. Findings Include: 1. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure one resident's (#43) bed accommodated his size and had physician ordered enabler bars to enhance bed mobility. This affected one (Resident #43) of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility census was 67. Findings Include: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to complete a comprehensive admission assessment on admission for two residents (#43, #49). This affected two (Resident #43 and #49) of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility census was 67. Findings Include: 1. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure one resident (#72) who was dependent on staff received routine bathing. This affected one (Resident #72) of three residents reviewed for bathing. The facility census was 67. Findings Include: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure an indwelling urinary catheter was changed as physician ordered for Resident #43. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure one resident (#73) received routine indwelling catheter care. This affected two (Resident #43 and #73) of three residents reviewed for indwelling urinary catheter. The facility census was 67. Findings Include: 1. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to maintain two residents (#50, #72) enteral feeding tube in proper working order. This affected two (Resident #50 and #72) of three residents reviewed for enteral feedings. The facility census was 67. Findings Include: 1. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure one resident (#72) was provided the physician ordered chest vest (help clear patients ' airways. It dislodges mucus from the bronchial walls, and helps move secretions and mucus from smaller to larger airways, where it can be coughed or suctioned out.) for chest physiotherapy. This affected one (Resident #72) of one resident reviewed for chest vest use. The facility census was 67. Findings Include: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interviews, the facility failed to maintain a complete and accurate record for one resident (#43) in the area of physician ordered treatments. This affected one (Resident #43) of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility census was 67. Findings Include: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to maintain infection control practices to prevent the potential spread of infection during pressure ulcer dressing change for one resident (#43). Additionally, the facility failed to implement enhance barrier precautions for one resident (#50) with an indwelling medical device. This affected one resident (#43) of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers and one resident (#50) of three residents reviewed for enteral feeding tubes. The facility census was 67.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff and Hospice Director Physician #100 interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident's pain medication order was transcribed correctly resulting in medication errors. This affected one (Resident #64) of three residents reviewed for medications. The facility census was 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, observation, policy review, and record review, the facility failed to follow Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for a resident with a wound. This affected one (Resident #37) of three residents reviewed for wounds. The facility census was 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of hospital progress notes, staff interview, observation, resident interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a resident received medication timely and as ordered by the physician. Actual Harm occurred when the facility failed to administer two scheduled doses of Suboxone (a medication used for opioid withdrawal) resulting in Resident #52 experiencing nausea, diaphoresis (sweating), and discomfort and resulted in the resident being transported to the hospital and admitted for opioid withdrawal symptoms. This affected one (Resident #52) of three residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 72 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure toileting assistance was provided in a timely manner to a dependent resident. This affected one (Resident #57) of three residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL) care. The facility census was 72 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, staff interview, resident interview, review of Resident Council meeting minutes, and review of call light audits, the facility failed to provide timely toileting services to dependent residents. This affected one (Resident #24) of three residents reviewed for call light response time. The facility census was 58 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to timely submit Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments for residents. This affected four (#16, #52, #57, and #61) of six residents reviewed for assessments. The facility census was 61.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, medical record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure resident were placed in enhanced barrier precautions appropriately and failed to ensure staff were wearing appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) when interacting with residents in enhanced barrier precautions. This affected six (#10, #14, #47, #51, #55, and #376) of six residents the facility identified to be in enhanced barrier precautions. The facility census was 61.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident was provided assistance in obtaining a resident representative to make appropriate decision on behalf of the resident, concerning exercising resident rights and care and treatment at the faciltiy. This affected one (#56) of one resident reviewed for decision making. Facility census was 61.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of the Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) and Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice (SNFABN), and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the resident notice letter was accurately completed. This affected three (#41, #66, and #71) of three residents reviewed for Beneficiary Notification. The facility census was 61.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, policy review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the medical record contained documentation reflecting the reason resident was transferred to the hospital. This affected one (#64) of one resident reviewed for hospitalization. The facility census was 61.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to complete an accurate comprehensive annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment when they failed to include a diagnosis of post traumatic stress disorder. This affected one (#25) of six residents reviewed for comprehensive assessments. The facility census was 61.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for a resident identifed with the diagnosis of post traumatic stress disorder. This affected one (#25) of 19 residents reviewed for care plans. The facility census was 61.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure resident care plans were updated and to include appropriate interventions for elopement for Resident #56 and for nutrition and weight loss prevention for Residents #23 and #51. This affected three (#23, #51, and #56) of 16 residents care plans reviewed. The facility census was 61.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to recognize and timely address severe resident weight loss. This affected one (#27) of three residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility census was 61.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure resident drug regimen were free from unnecessary medications when there was not a valid diagnosis for the use of antibiotics. This affected one (#325) of six residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 61.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure influenza and pneumonia vaccinations were offered and provided to residents. This affected two (#47 and #56) of five residents reviewed for influenza and pneumonia vaccination. The facility census was 61.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of personnel files and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure nurse aides received a performance review at least every 12 months. This affected three State Tested Nurse Aide (STNA) (#90, #503, and #514) of four nurse aide personnel records reviewed, with the potential to affect all 61 residents in the facility. The facility census was 61.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, family interview, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to hold care conferences where the resident and resident representatives were invited to discuss the resident's care. This affected two (#31 and #157) of two residents reviewed for care plan conferences. The facility census was 48.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations, family and staff interviews and policy review, the facility failed to inform a resident's family of an injury/change in condition. This affected one (#157) of one resident reviewed for change in condition. The facility census was 48.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interviews, resident and family interviews and policy review, the facility failed to maintain a homelike environment in a resident room. This affected one (#157) of five residents reviewed for environment. The facility census was 48.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, staff interviews and policy reviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident with a wound was assessed timely and evaluate the wound for treatment. This affected one (#157) of two residents reviewed for wound care. The facility identified seven current residents with wounds. The facility failed to correlate hospice services with the facility service for a resident on hospice. This affected one (#106) of one resident reviewed for hospice service. The facility identified three current residents receiving hospice services. The facility census was 48.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, staff and resident interviews and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents remained free of accidents/ hazards and failed complete a thorough fall investigation. This affected two (#157 and #45) of five residents reviewed for accidents and hazards. The facility census was 48.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to timely act upon a pharmacy drug regimen review to draw laboratory test. This affected one (#45) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 48.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to maintain infection control practices during a dressing change. This affected one (#157) of one resident observed for dressing change. The facility identified seven residents who currently have wounds. The facility census was 48.
16 fire safety citations on file: 4 on May 23, 2024, 9 on April 27, 2023, 3 on May 24, 2021.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| February 26, 2026 | Fine | $101,940 |
| February 20, 2025 | Fine | $32,380 |
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) | 3.25 | 3.69 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.37 | 0.64 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.93 | 3.28 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.91 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.97 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 46.4% | 48.7% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 66.7% | 43.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 4.52 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 3.37 on weekdays and 2.93 on weekends, 13% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 1.3% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.69 in April to June 2025 to 3.25 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 | 3.25 | 0.37 | 3.37 | 2.93 | 1.3% | 1 of 90 | 76 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.27 | 0.41 | 3.43 | 2.87 | 0.0% | 1 of 92 | 68 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.23 | 0.47 | 3.36 | 2.90 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 69 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.69 | 0.56 | 3.86 | 3.25 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 63 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Ohio, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.64 | 0.60 | 3.80 | 3.24 | 4.6% | 0.4% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ohio, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $18.76 | $17.93 to $21.44 | 63,280 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $29.78 | $27.34 to $31.68 | 39,900 |
| Registered nurses | $39.67 | $38.08 to $47.61 | 143,730 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Ohio | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.5 | 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 | 2.4 | 3.2 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.5 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 6.1 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.6 | 3.4 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 13.9 | 8.8 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 27.0 | 24.9 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 17.6 | 12.9 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 3.6 | 1.7 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.7 | 1.8 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Hopewell Grove Rehabilitation and Healthcare's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (56.7% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
56.7% 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. 82 eligible stays.
11.1% 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. 95 eligible stays.
7.9% 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. 61 eligible stays.
49.1% 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. 59 residents counted.
0.9% 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. 107 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. 106 residents counted.
93.1% 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. 29 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: HOPEWELL GROVE REHABILITATION AND HEALTHCARE CENTER LLC. CMS links this home to Citadel Healthcare, a group of 16 nursing homes averaging 2.9 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Daubenmire, Kevin | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 12/01/2024 | |
| Daubenmire, Kevin | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 12/01/2024 | |
| Capital Finance LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 12/01/2024 | |
| Elkins Way LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 12/01/2024 | |
| Daubenmire, Kevin | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/01/2024 | |
| Juschka, Dirk | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/01/2024 | |
| Obryant, Ramona | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/01/2024 | |
| Daubenmire, Kevin | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/01/2024 | |
| Juschka, Dirk | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/01/2024 | |
| Obryant, Ramona | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/01/2024 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in Ohio. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.