50 Blymyer Avenue, Mansfield, OH 44903 · Richland County · (419) 774-5100
66 certified beds, about 61 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1967
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 365118 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on July 1, 2025, inspectors cited 22 health deficiencies (the Ohio average is 10.5, the national average 9.2).
Of 57 health citations since August 2019, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $130,240 in the last three years; the largest was $130,240, and the latest is dated April 15, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.15 hours per resident per day, against 3.69 across Ohio and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.46 of those hours.
53.7% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Ohio average 48.7%).
CMS links it to Jag Healthcare, an affiliated group of 9 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 57 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident interviews, staff interviews, review of the Facility Assessment (FA) and review of staffing reports, the facility failed to have sufficient staff to meet resident needs as identified in the FA. This had the potential to affect all 57 residents in the facility. The facility census was 57.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interviews, the facility failed to serve an appropriate amount of meat (protein) with the lunch meal. This had the potential to affect all residents at the facility. The facility census was 57.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure expired food items were disposed of and not stored with other food items used for resident meals. This had the potential to affect all 57 residents residing at the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) meeting sign-in documentation, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to have required Quality Assessment and Assurance quarterly meetings with required members. This had the potential to affect all residents. The facility census was 57.
Inspectors wrote5. Review of the medical record for Resident #110 revealed an admission date of 06/13/25. Diagnoses included chronic pain, hemiplegia and hemiparesis, cerebral infarction, hypertension, atrial fibrillation, congestive heart failure, and narcissistic personality disorder. Review of the admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had intact cognition. Review of a physician order dated 06/20/25 revealed the resident had orders for contact precautions due to bilateral lower extremities wound infection. Review of a wound assessment report dated 06/20/25 revealed the resident had bilateral lower extremity venous ulcers. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the medical record, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents on psychotropic medications were monitored for effectiveness and adverse consequences. This affected five (#47, #51, #19, #161, and #1) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medication. The facility identified 52 residents receiving psychotropic medications. The facility census was 57.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the medical record, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were accurate. This affected four (#26, #6, #5, and #30) of 20 reviewed for accuracy of MDS assessments. The facility census was 57.
Inspectors wrote2. Review of the medical record for Resident #51 revealed an admission date of 01/27/25. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, anxiety, depressive disorder, dementia, and bipolar disorder. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had severe cognitive impairment. Review of the plan of care last revised 06/24/25 revealed the resident had no individualized interventions in place for bipolar disorder. Interview on 06/30/25 at 9:54 A.M., LPN MDS Nurse #208 verified Resident #51's care plan lacked interventions for bipolar disorder. 3. Review of the medical record for Resident #6 revealed an admission date of 11/09/23. Diagnoses included schizoaffective disorder, dementia, and depressive disorder. Review of the quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed the resident had moderate cognitive impairment. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, record review, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure residents received proper assistance with personal hygiene and grooming tasks. This affected three residents (#43, #45 and #47) of 28 (#1, #2, #6, #7, #8, #9, #11, #15, #18, #19, #22, #28, #30, #35, #40, #42, #46, #51, #52, #53, #54, #57, #110, #161, #162 and #164) residents who required assistance from staff for activities of daily living. The census was 57.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, review of the water temperature logs, and policy review, the facility failed to maintain safe water temperatures between 105 degrees Fahrenheit (F) and 120 degrees F. This had the potential to affect all residents except eleven residents (#5, #7, #10, #16, #20, #32, #33, #36, #39, #162, and #163) who the facility identified as dependent for mobility. The facility census was 57.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to puree food items to a smooth texture with no chunks of food remaining. This had the potential to affect four residents, Resident #8, #20, #34, and #160, identified by the facility as receiving a pureed only diet. The facility census was 57.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and review of service provider quotes, the facility failed to maintain the function of the wheelchair automatic push pad door openers for the facility front entrance double doors. This affected 14 residents (#1, #6, #8, #15, #17, #19, #27, #28, #30, #37, #40, #43, #45, and #53) identified by the facility as independent with wheelchair mobility. The facility census was 57.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the medical record, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure resident code status was consistent throughout the medical record. This affected two (#26 and #110) of 20 residents reviewed for code status. The facility census was 57.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to assure missing items were investigated and followed up on for one resident, (Resident #32), of three residents reviewed for missing items. The facility census was 57.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to complete a baseline care plan for one, (Resident #160) of eight reviewed for baseline care plans. The facility census was 57.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident interview, medical record review, review of the facility policy and review of the facility assessment, the facility failed to provide an individualized activity program designed to meet the interest and care needs of one resident (#16) of two residents reviewed for activities. The facility census was 52.
Inspectors wrote2. Review of the medical record for Resident #110 revealed an admission date of 06/13/25. Diagnoses included chronic pain, hemiplegia and hemiparesis, cerebral infarction, hypertension, atrial fibrillation, congestive heart failure, and narcissistic personality disorder. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had intact cognition. Review of a wound assessment report dated 06/20/25 revealed the resident had bilateral lower extremity venous ulcers. Review of a physician order dated 06/21/25 revealed to cleanse the bilateral lower extremities with wound cleanser, pat dry, apply ammonium lactate lotion to both lower legs topically, apply non-adhering dressing then a dry dressing over wounds, cover with an elastic tubular bandage and then wrap with and outer elastic bandage daily and as needed for venous ulcer wound care. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review revealed the facility failed to ensure an indwelling catheter for one resident, Resident #160 was addressed timely to include a physical assessment and reinsertion when Resident #160 removed the catheter. The facility also failed to notify the primary care physician of the catheter and failed to notify the primary care physician and Hospice provider of the results of a urinalysis timely that resulted in bacterial growth requiring treatment of an antibiotic. This affected one resident, Resident #160 and had the potential to affect an additional seven residents, Resident #5, #26, #35, #36, #40, #43, and #50 identified by the facility as having indwelling catheters. The facility census was 57.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a resident with significant weight loss received timely follow up and the physician was notified. This affected one, (#30) of two residents reviewed for weight loss. The facility census was 57.
Inspectors wrote2. Record review for Resident #160 revealed an admission date of 05/28/25. Diagnosis included heart failure, obesity, and diabetes mellitus with diabetic polyneuropathy. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] for Resident #160 revealed Resident #160 was moderately cognitively impaired. Resident #160 required partial/moderate assistants with eating and was dependent for toileting hygiene, bathing and bed mobility. Resident #160 had shortness of breath or trouble breathing with exertion and when lying flat. Review of the care plan for Resident #160 dated 06/23/25 revealed Resident #160 utilized oxygen therapy related to congestive heart failure, shortness of breath and asthma. Interventions included oxygen settings two to five liters as needed or SP02 less than 90%. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate did not exceed five percent (%). Two errors occurred for 31 observed opportunities for an error rate of 6.45%. This affected two residents (#12 and #161) of five residents reviewed for medication administration. This had the potential to affect an additional 10 residents (#3, #8, #11, #14, #16, #27, #28, #30, #43, and #57) who received insulin via insulin pen. The facility census was 57.
Inspectors wrote2. Review of the medical record for Resident #56 revealed an admission date of 04/07/25 and a discharge date of 06/02/25. Diagnoses included pneumonia, acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, heart failure, hypertension, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and Alzheimer's disease. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed the resident had moderate cognitive impairment. Review of the physician orders dated 04/08/25 revealed an order for Lasix 20 milligrams, one tablet by mouth every 24 hours as needed for edema or greater than three-pound weight gain in 24 hours, weigh daily in the morning, if greater than three-pound weight gain, give the as needed Lasix. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, resident and staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure all required personal protective equipment was available and used for residents on contact precautions, failed to implement enhanced barrier precautions as required, and failed to ensure residents were screened for tuberculosis infection as required. This affected four (#10, #30, #50, and #60) of five residents reviewed for infection control practices. The census was 41. Findings Include: 1. Review of Resident #10's medical record revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] with the most recent readmission on [DATE]. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were offered influenza vaccinations annually as required. This affected one (#40) of five residents reviewed for influenza vaccinations. The facility census was 41. Findings Include: Review of Resident #40's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included schizophrenia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, type two diabetes, dementia, anemia, delusional disorder, auditory hallucinations, and complete traumatic amputation of the left lower leg at the knee level. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #40 was cognitively intact. The resident was coded to not receive the influenza vaccination as it was not offered and the pneumococcal vaccination was coded as up to date. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and facility staff interview, the facility failed to offer the vaccination or obtain documentation of residents' SARS-CoV2 (COVID-19) vaccination status for three (#10, #30, and #50) of five residents reviewed for vaccinations. The facility census was 41. Findings Include: 1. Review of Resident #10's medical record revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] with the most recent readmission on [DATE]. Diagnoses include osteomyelitis of the shoulder, bacteremia, extended spectrum beta lactamase resistance (ESBL), klebsiella pneumoniae, methicillin susceptible staphylococcus aureus infection, pseudomonas, pneumonia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, depression, atrial fibrillation, and fusion of the spine. Review of the most recent quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #10 was cognitively intact. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on review of facility billing records, emails, invoices and past due notices, review of bank statements, review of the facility assessment, Nursing Home admission Agreement, facility policy and procedures, and interviews with residents/family, staff, vendors, and company personnel, the facility neglected to meet financial obligations for the delivery of care and maintenance and to operate in a manner to ensure all bills were being paid in a timely manner to prevent the actual and potential interruption in services and to meet the total care needs of all residents admitted to and/or retained in the facility. This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy on 04/01/24 when the identified lack of financial solvency placed all facility residents at risk for serious harm, injury, hospitalization, displacement due to the actual and potential interruption in utility and/or outside service providers. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, facility policy review and interview, the facility failed to ensure resident mail was delivered to residents unopened and failed to ensure residents had access to a private working telephone. This affected 11 residents (#14, #15, #23, #24, #18, #30, #35, #39, #41, #52 and #55) and had the potential to affect all 56 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, review of the facility assessment, policy review and interview, the facility failed to maintain sufficient levels of staff to meet the total care needs of all residents due to a hostile work environment and insufficient funds to maintain staffing agency contracts. This had the potential to affect all 56 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a registered nurse (RN) served as a full-time director of nursing (DON). This had the potential to affect all 56 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were provided with rehabilitative services such as but not limited to physical therapy, speech-language pathology and occupational therapy. This affected 19 residents (#3, #4, #6, #7, #8, #12, #13, #14, #19, #20, #23, #26, #30, #37, #44, #51, #55, #106, #107 and #108) and had the potential to affect all 56 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, facility policy review, administrator agreement review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure an effective governing body, legally responsible to establish and implement policies regarding the management and operation of the facility, including but not limited to compliance with all financial obligations for the delivery of care. This had the potential to affect all 56 residents in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure continuous evaluations were in place to verify financial obligations were met as planned to prevent a potential disruption in resident care and services through the Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) program committee. This had the potential to affect all 56 facility residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide residents with quarterly statements of their resident trust fund account. This affected eighteen residents (#15, #17, #20, #28, #30, #31, #33, #35, #36, #39, #41, #43, #44, #46, #47, #51, #53, and #55) of eighteen residents with resident fund accounts.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure monies in a resident fund account were finalized and dispersed within 30 days as required. This affected seven residents (#92, #93, #94, #95, #96, #97 and #98) of 12 discharged residents who the facility managed a resident fund account.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents admitted to the facility were provided a description of the requirements and procedures for establishing eligibility for Medicaid, including the right to request an assessment of resources as well as information concerning Medicare and Medicaid eligibility and coverage. This finding affected 41 residents (#2, #3, #5, #6, #7, #9, #10, #11, #14, #21, #27, #34, #35, #45, #48, #104, #109, #110, #111, #112, #113, #114, #115, #116, #117, #118, #119, #120, #121, #122, #123, #124, #125, #126, #127, #128, #129, #130, #131, #132 and #133) of 100 residents whose records were reviewed for admission documentation.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure initial comprehensive assessments were completed timely and as required. This affected seven residents (#3, #5, #11, #22, #45, #130 and #133) of 24 residents reviewed for comprehensive assessments.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure comprehensive assessments were completed quarterly as required. This affected four residents (#13, #33, #90 and #126) of 24 residents reviewed for comprehensive assessments.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, facility policy review and interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident #90's discharge summary included the reconciliation of the resident's medications upon discharge. This affected one resident (#90) of one resident record reviewed for discharge.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide Resident #29 food items as ordered/planned. This affected one resident (#29) of three residents reviewed for dietary services.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff and resident interviews and policy review,the facility failed to ensure a comfortable hot water temperatures were maintained throughout the facility. This affected nine (#37, #14, #18, #26, #27, #35, #36, #45 and #46) out of 15 residents sampled for the physical environment. Facility census was 46.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of resident Personal Needs account (PNA) and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a residents personal funds were conveyed within 30 days upon the death of a resident. This affected one (#94) of 24 residents (Resident #94), whom have PNA accounts set up with the facility. The facility census was 43.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record reviews and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure the residents Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were completed to accurately reflect the resident's status. This affected one (#19) of 12 residents sampled during the survey. The facility census was 43.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents were invited to attend care conferences and/or meetings regarding their care. This affected one (#19) of 12 sampled residents. The facility census was 43.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observations and staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to ensure a residents wound care was completed as physician ordered. This affected one (#19) out of 12 sampled residents. The facility census was 43.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interviews and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from unnecessary medications when the facility administered medications outside of the physician ordered parameters. This affected two (#1 and #42) out of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 43.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interview and review of maintenance report, the facility failed to provide a safe homelike environment for all residents. This affected three (#11, #31 and #42) out of 43 resident rooms observed during the survey. The facility census is 43. Finding Include: Observation on 08/15/22 at 10:34 A.M. of Resident #11's room revealed the wall behind resident's bed had two large areas of paint pealed off the wall and multiply gouged marks, revealing drywall. Observation on 08/15/22 at 10:58 A.M. of Resident #31's room revealed the air condition vents broken and missing. Observation on 08/15/22 at 11:00 A.M. of Resident #42's room revealed the air condition vents were broke and missing. Interview and observation on 08/16/22 at 2:26 P.M. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observations, staff interview, review of a maintenance task list and policy review, the facility failed to ensure an effective pest control program was in place to ensure a resident's room did not have an infestation of flies. This affected one (#36) out of 12 sampled residents for pest control. The facility census was 43.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure food service equipment was maintained in a sanitary manner and resident food items were dated and labeled. This affected 66 of 67 residents who receive food from the kitchen (Resident #17 received nothing by mouth). The facility census was 67.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, staff interview and review of facility policy and procedure, the facility failed to notify the physician timely when Resident #58's had new onset of swelling/edema. This affected one (#58) of one resident reviewed for edema. The facility census was 67.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain a wheelchair cushion clean and in good repair for one (Resident #13) of 20 residents reviewed for maintenance and cleanliness of resident equipment and supplies. The facility census was 67.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, review of facility's Self-Reported Incident, medical record review and review of facility policy, the facility failed to prevent physical abuse for one (Resident #22) of two residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 67.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, review of facility's Self-Reported Incident, review of medical records and review of facility policy, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate an allegation of physical abuse for one (Resident #22) of two residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 67.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident and staff interview, review of the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) and review of the medical record, the facility failed to complete accurate Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments for two (Resident #11 and #20) of 20 residents reviewed for accurate MDS assessments. The census was 67.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, family interview, staff interview and review of facility policy and procedure, the facility failed to assess and monitor Resident's #40's ongoing scab to his nose. This affected one (#40) of one resident reviewed for skin conditions. The facility census was 67.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, resident interview, staff interview, and review of facility policy and procedure, the facility failed to re-assess Resident #36's pain after the discontinuation of a pain relieving medicated patch. This affected one resident (#36) of one resident reviewed for pain management. The facility identified 30 residents on a pain management program. The facility census was 67.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, staff interview and review of facility policy and procedure, the facility failed to maintain infection control after personal care for three residents. This affected three (#40, #52 and #120) of three residents reviewed for urinary tract infections. The facility identified three residents with indwelling urinary catheters. The census was 67.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure daily staff postings were updated each day. This had the potential to affect all 67 residents residing in the facility.
22 fire safety citations on file: 12 on July 1, 2025, 5 on August 18, 2022, 5 on August 28, 2019.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| April 15, 2024 | Fine | $130,240 |
| April 15, 2024 | Payment Denial | 60 days from April 18, 2024 |
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) | 3.15 | 3.69 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.46 | 0.64 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.76 | 3.28 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.81 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.88 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 53.7% | 48.7% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 50.0% | 43.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 4.08 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 3.30 on weekdays and 2.76 on weekends, 16% 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 3.49 in April to June 2025 to 3.15 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 | 3.15 | 0.46 | 3.30 | 2.76 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 61 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.18 | 0.37 | 3.34 | 2.77 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 61 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.13 | 0.25 | 3.27 | 2.79 | 0.0% | 2 of 92 | 60 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.49 | 0.32 | 3.70 | 2.98 | 0.0% | 2 of 91 | 53 |
| 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 | 7.7 | 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 | 3.3 | 3.2 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.1 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.6 | 6.1 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.3 | 3.4 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 17.2 | 8.8 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 33.8 | 24.9 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 16.0 | 12.9 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.1 | 1.7 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 0.9 | 1.8 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Jag Healthcare Mansfield's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (47.0% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
47.0% 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. 52 eligible stays.
9.4% 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. 58 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. 37 eligible stays.
50.0% 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. 24 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. 35 residents counted.
7.1% 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. 35 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Ohio100.0% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 11 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: JAG HEALTHCARE MANSFIELD LLC. CMS links this home to Jag Healthcare, a group of 9 nursing homes averaging 3.3 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cooley, David | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 33% | 11/01/2024 |
| Cooley, David | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 11/01/2024 | |
| Griffiths, James | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 11/01/2024 | |
| Jag Healthcare Inc | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 11/01/2024 | |
| Mansfield Memorial Homes, Inc | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 11/01/2024 | |
| Chawla, Ajay | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 11/01/2024 | |
| Cooley, David | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 11/01/2024 | |
| Griffiths, James | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 11/01/2024 | |
| Romero, Zallaca | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 11/01/2024 | |
| Jag Healthcare Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/01/2024 | |
| Mansfield Memorial Homes, Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/01/2024 | |
| Chawla, Ajay | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/01/2024 | |
| Cooley, David | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/01/2024 | |
| Griffiths, James | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/01/2024 | |
| Romero, Zallaca | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/01/2024 | |
| Tremmel, Martin | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 06/11/2025 |
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.