501 Pinecrest Drive, Beverly, OH 45715 · Washington County · (740) 984-4262
50 certified beds, about 43 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1980
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 365461 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on May 18, 2026, inspectors cited 22 health deficiencies (the Ohio average is 10.5, the national average 9.2).
Of 66 health citations since July 2022, 6 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (2 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 4 fines totaling $317,702 in the last three years; the largest was $139,780, and the latest is dated May 18, 2026.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.18 hours per resident per day, against 3.69 across Ohio and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.35 of those hours.
38.2% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Ohio average 48.7%).
CMS links it to Continuing Healthcare Solutions, an affiliated group of 12 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 66 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview, and resident interview, the facility failed to ensure residents received the proper treatment to maintain vision and hearing abilities. This affected three residents (#3, #11, and #22) of three residents reviewed for vision and hearing. The facility census was 37.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview, and resident interview, the facility failed to assist a resident in making an appointment and arranging transportation to and from the dental service location to obtain dental care. This affected one resident (#22) of three residents reviewed for dental care. The facility census was 37.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, interview, policy review, and review of hospital records, the facility failed to ensure a resident experiencing a decline in respiratory condition who requested to be sent to the hospital for evaluation and treatment for shortness of breath had the hospital transfer request approved. The resident continued to decline for 24 hours until she was subsequently sent to the hospital as originally requested. This affected one resident (Resident #19) of one resident reviewed for change in condition. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview, review of infection control log, review of facility assessment, and policy review the facility failed to ensure adequate staffing was in place to meet the needs of the residents were met. This had the potential to affect all 38 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and policy review.the facility failed to ensure food was prepared and served in a sanitary manner. This had the potential to affect 38 of 38 residents who received food from the kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, interview, policy review, review of fit testing, and review of the infection control log, the facility failed to properly store nebulizer masks and tubing and failed to maintain a comprehensive infection control log and ensure staff were fit tested. This affected two residents (Resident #19 and #48) but had the potential to affect 38 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of infection and antibiotic control logs, review of the facility assessment, interviews, and policy review the facility failed to ensure the Infection Preventionist (IP) dedicated time to IP duties to maintain a comprehensive infection control program. This affected Resident #31 and #48 with urinary tract infections but had the potential to affect all residents in the facility. The census was 38.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the resident's interdisciplinary team including the residents participated in the care planning process including care plan conferences. This affected four residents (#1, #4, #28, and #31) of five residents reviewed for care conferences. The facility census was 38.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure resident medical were complete, accurate, and readily accessible. This affected five residents (#3, #8, #41, #47, and #48) of 21 resident records reviewed. The census was 38.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of hospice records, interviews, and policy review the facility failed to ensure a resident's hospice service and medical provider were notified of a medication error and failed to ensure a resident's physician and resident representative were notified of a new skin alteration. This affected one resident (#41) of one resident reviewed for medication errors and one resident (#40) of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers.
Inspectors wroteBased on closed record review, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to provide the Notice of Medicare non coverage (NOMNC) to Medicare beneficiaries at least two days before the end of a Medicare covered part A stay. This had the potential to affect one (Resident #50) of three residents reviewed for Notice of Medicare non coverage. The census was 48. Findings Include: Closed record review revealed Resident #50 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including type two diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder, nicotine dependence, major depressive disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, obstructive sleep apnea, atrial fibrillation, and hypertension. Review of Resident #50's Beneficiary protection notification revealed the residents last covered day of part A services was 11/11/25. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure a shared resident bathroom was maintained in a sanitary manner. This affected one (Resident #31) of two resident's reviewed for environment. Findings Include: Interview on 04/28/26 at 2:52 P.M., 04/29/26 at 12:40 P.M., and 05/05/26 at 10:23 A.M., with Resident #31 revealed he had to share a bathroom with the room next door, and one of the male residents next door urinated and had bowl movements all over the bathroom and did not flush the toilet. Resident #31 shared photos from his phone of the unsanitary condition of the bathroom. The photos confirmed there was urine and bowel movements on the floors and toilet, and the toilet was not flushed. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of self-reported incident, review of concern log, observation, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure an allegation of misappropriation was reported timely to the state agency. This affected one (Resident #41) of three reviewed for personal property. Findings Include: Medical record review revealed Resident #41 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including encephalopathy, osteomyelitis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, obesity, depression, anemia, long QT syndrome, anxiety, pain, peripheral vascular disease, Vitamin D deficiency, restless legs syndrome, gastritis, constipation, occlusion and stenosis, hypomagnesemia, hyperglycemia, hyperlipidemia, and nocturia. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of concern log, review of self-reported incident, observation, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to timely investigate an allegation of misappropriation of a resident's wallet. This affected one (Resident #41) of three reviewed for personal property. Findings Include: Medical record review revealed Resident #41 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including encephalopathy, osteomyelitis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, obesity, depression, anemia, long QT syndrome, anxiety, pain, peripheral vascular disease, Vitamin D deficiency, restless legs syndrome, gastritis, constipation, occlusion and stenosis, hypomagnesemia, hyperglycemia, hyperlipidemia, and nocturia. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and interview the facility failed to ensure a resident had an individualized trauma informed plan of care. This affected one resident (#28) of four residents reviewed for behaviors. FIndings include: Record review of Resident #28's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including personality disorder, depression, generalized anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), personal history of suicidal behavior, poisoning by benzodiazepines, and sedative, hypnotic or anxiolytic dependence, in remission. Review of Resident #28's psychiatric note dated [DATE] revealed the resident had PTSD and was stable on Zoloft (anti-depressant) and Xanax (anti-anxiety). The resident had PTSD from watching a friend wreck and die on motorcycle when she was younger and it plays back in her head. She had attempted suicide. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents who were dependent on staff were provided assistance with personal hygiene and bathing. This affected two residents (#19 and #25) of four residents reviewed for activities of daily living. The facility census was 38.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure alternating air mattresses were on the correct setting to prevent pressure ulcers. This affected one resident (#19) of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers and interventions. The facility census was 38.
Inspectors wroteBased on closed medical record review, review of infection control log, review contingency medication list, and interview the facility failed to ensure an urinalysis was collected timely and antibiotics were administered per order to treat urinary tract infection. This affected one resident (#48) of five residents reviewed for urinary tract infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, laboratory test review, review of education material from the Cleveland Clinic, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure appropriate interventions were implemented for a resident with weight loss and compromised nutritional status. This affected one resident (#40) of three residents reviewed for nutrition. The census was 38.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, interviews, and policy review the facility failed to administer oxygen to residents as ordered and failed to ensure appropriate use of oxygen. This affected two residents (#19, #15) of five residents reviewed for respiratory care. The census was 38.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents with known trauma were provided trauma informed care. This affected two residents (#28 and #36) of four residents reviewed for behaviors. The facility census was 38.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, interview, review of infection control log, and review of policies the facility failed to ensure residents were free from unnecessary medications. This affected one resident (#31) of five residents reviewed for urinary tract infections and one resident (#10) of six residents reviewed for unnecessary medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of facility investigation, review of Medscape drug information, review of policies, job description reviews and interviews the facility failed to prevent a significant medication error. This affected one resident (Resident #41) of three residents reviewed for hospice services. The facility census was 38.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, interview, review of hospice contracts and hospice documentation review the facility failed to ensure hospice plans and visits were maintained at the facility and failed to ensure the facility contactwas identified for hospice service contact. This affected three residents (Resident #41, #47 and #48) of four residents reviewed for hospice services. The facility census was 38.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, review of a facility self-reported incident (SRI), review of staff statements, review of the facility's abuse policy and procedure, and interviews, the facility failed to timely report and implement immediate and effective measures to protect residents following allegations of sexual abuse. This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy and the potential for actual harm including serious injury and psychosocial harm beginning on [DATE] at approximately 11:30 P.M. when Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #108 notified the supervisor, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #115 she believed LPN #119 had assaulted Resident #22 and Resident #18 due to changes in the resident's behaviors, including yelling, screaming, crying, not complying with care, and shaking when LPN #119 was present with the resident(s). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on closed record review and interviews the facility failed to ensure residents received adequate indwelling catheter care, failed to ensure residents received adequate indwelling catheter education upon discharge, failed to ensure urine was obtained per orders, and failed to ensure bladder assessment was accurate on admission. This affected two (Resident #44 and Resident #45) of three reviewed for bladder impairments.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical records review, emergency room records review, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive, individualized and adequate pain management program to provide effective and timely pain relief to residents after falls with injury/fractures. Actual harm occurred on 06/22/24 at 10:31 P.M. when Resident #35 was not provided effective pain management following a fall with hip fracture on 06/22/24 with complaints of significant verbal and non-verbal indicators of pain. The resident was subsequently sent out to the emergency room for the fracture and continued pain on 06/23/24 at 7:15 P.M. (approximately 20 hours after the fall occurred). Actual harm occurred on 03/17/24 at 6:45 A.M. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure beds were the appropriate size for residents. This affected one (Resident #39) of one resident reviewed for positioning. The facility census was 46.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review,interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure care conferences were offered in conjunction with minimum data set (MDS) reviews. This affected two (Resident #2 and #39) of two residents reviewed for care conferences. The facility census was 46.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interviews, and observations, the facility failed to ensure pressure ulcer interventions were in place. This affected three ( Resident #36, #26, and #12) of three residents reviewed for skin breakdown. The facility census was 46.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to have fall interventions in place for Resident #3 and #12. This affected two (Resident #3 and #12) out of four reviewed for accidents. Facility census was 46.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, policy review, and interviews, the facility failed to notify a resident's family prior to a transfer to another facility. This affected one resident (#22) of four residents reviewed for resident rights. The facility census was 40.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, review of abuse policy training/acknowledgement documents, facility policy review and interview, the facility failed to ensure Residents #15 and #17 were free from abuse. This affected two residents (#15 and #17) of three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 47. Actual psychosocial harm occurred, applying the reasonable person concept, on 10/31/23 to Resident #15, a resident with impaired cognition, when State Tested Nurse Aide (STNA) #111 took humiliating pictures of the resident with the staff member's cell phone without consent of Resident #15. The pictures were of Resident #15 lying in bed wearing an incontinence (Depends) undergarment with urine and stool. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, medication error log review, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident #17 received adequate monitoring following administration of a narcotic medication and a benzodiazepine medication simultaneously. In addition, the facility failed to ensure medications listed as an allergy were not administered to the resident. This affected one resident (#17) of three residents reviewed for change in condition. The facility census was 47. Actual harm occurred to Resident #17 on 10/01/23 when the resident was administered a narcotic medication (MS Contin) and a benzodiazepine medication (Ativan) simultaneously and failed to adequately monitor the resident for sedation as ordered by the prescriber resulting in the resident requiring administration of Narcan (opiate antagonist) and transfer to the hospital for evaluation.
Inspectors wroteBased on staffing schedule review, time card report review, facility assessment review, policy review and interview, the facility failed to provide registered nurse (RN) coverage daily for a minimum of eight consecutive hours. This affected all 47 residents residing within the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, review of facility documentation of abuse training, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure training was provided to staff following an incident of resident abuse. This affected all 47 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, resident record review, review of abuse policy acknowledgement, review of the facility's Self-Reported Incidents (SRIs), and facility policy review, the facility failed to report an occurrence of abuse and failed to report an occurrence of abuse timely to the state survey agency. This affected two residents (#15 and #17) of three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 47.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, resident record review, review of abuse policy acknowledgement, review of the facility's Self-Reported Incidents (SRIs), and facility policy review, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate resident abuse. This affected two residents (#15 and #17) of three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 47.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, facility transfer/discharge documentation, facility bed hold documentation, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents received appropriate notice of transfer/discharge and bed hold and failed to ensure the Ombudsman was notified. This affected two residents (#17 and #48) of three residents reviewed for transfer/discharge and bed hold notice. The facility census was 47.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, resident record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents had comprehensive care plans developed and implemented. This affected two residents (#17 and #22) of seven residents reviewed for care planning. The facility census was 47.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and resident record review, the facility failed to ensure supervision for a resident while eating as recommended by the speech therapist. This affected one resident (#17) of twelve residents reviewed for quality of care. The facility census was 47.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, policy review and interview, the facility failed to provide appropriate urinary incontinence care. This affected one of one resident (#40) observed for incontinence care. The facility census was 47.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure physician progress notes were readily available for review. This affected one resident (#17) of three residents reviewed for discharge/transfer/bedhold notice. The facility census was 47.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure physician and nurse practitioner (NP) visits alternated as required. This affected one resident (#17) of three residents reviewed for discharge/transfer/bedhold notice. The facility census was 47.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, personnel record review, job description review and interview, the facility failed to ensure nurse staff administering medications were competent in their duties and ensured the medications were administered appropriately. This affected one resident (#8) of four residents observed for medication administration. The facility census was 47.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and resident record review, the facility failed to provide appropriate behavioral care when Resident #22 was presenting with escalating behavioral needs. This affected one resident (#22) of three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 47.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, medication insert review, policy review and interview, the facility failed to ensure both rapid-acting and long-acting insulin's were administered timely and inhalation medications were administered without error. This affected two residents (#2 and #39) of four residents. Three errors were observed during 26 opportunities resulting in a medication administration error rate of 11.54%.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, facility failed to ensure Pre-admission Screenings/Resident Reviews (PASARR) were accurate. This affected two residents (#43 and #49) of three residents reviewed. The facility census was 45.
Inspectors wroteBased on the unprecedented global pandemic that resulted in the Presidential declaration of a State of National Emergency dated 03/13/20, The Department of Health and Human Services, Center for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) Memo QSO 20-20-ALL dated 03/20/20, Nursing Home Guidance from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), record review, review of the facility COVID-19 timeline, review of the county community COVID-19 transmission rate, review of staff time sheets, review of staff screening forms, review of resident and staff COVID-19 rapid point of care (POC) test results, review of the facility COVID-19 procedure policy and staff interview the facility failed to implement effective and recommended infection control practices to prevent the spread of COVID-19 as evidenced by the facility's failure to ensure staff did not provide direct resident care to residents while symptomatic of [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on review of staffing schedules for May 2022, review of daily nurse staffing postings for 05/28/22 thru 05/29/22, time reports and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure they had Registered Nurse (RN) coverage for eight consecutive hours seven days a week as required. This had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure dependent residents were assisted with activities of daily living to include showers and nail care. This affected four residents (Residents #16, #26, #35, and #40) of five residents reviewed for activities of daily living. The census was 45.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview and policy review the facility failed to ensure residents were afforded the opportunity to make choices about their care. This affected one resident (Resident #16) of six residents reviewed for activities of daily living. The census was 45.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview and policy review the facility failed to ensure advanced directives were accurate and reflected resident wishes. This affected one resident (Resident #16) of two residents reviewed for advanced directives. The census was 45.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure preadmission screening and resident reviews were completed with a significant change in resident status. This affected one resident (Resident #35) of two residents reviewed for preadmission screening and resident review. The census was 45.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, review of the hospice agreement, review of hospice records, and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain an integrated medical record that included hospice nurse visit notes for the purposes of ensuring continuity of care between entities. This affected one (Resident #50) of one resident reviewed for hospice services.
Inspectors wroteBased on closed record review, interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure pressure ulcer care and interventions were implemented. This affected one resident (Resident #26) of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The census was 45.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview and policy review the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive fall investigation was completed and interventions were implemented to prevent falls. This affected one resident (Resident #39) of three residents reviewed for accidents. The census was 45.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, interview and policy review the facility failed to follow infection control guidelines related to incontinence care for a resident at risk for urinary tract infections. This affected one resident (Resident #35) of one resident observed for incontinence care. The census was 45.
Inspectors wroteBased on closed record review and interview the facility failed to ensure comprehensive meal intake documentation was available to adequately monitor resident nutritional status. This affected one resident (Resident #26) of three residents reviewed for nutrition. The census was 45.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, observation, record review and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure a resident's oxygen flow rate was set as ordered and failed to provide education to a resident on the risks of increasing the flow rate with a diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder. This affected one resident (Resident #40) reviewed for respiratory care. The facility census was 45.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure pharmacy recommendations pertaining to gradual dose reduction (GDR) attempts for psychoactive medications were responded to by the physician and/ or psychiatrist to include a resident specific rationale as to why a GDR attempt was contraindicated. This affected two (Resident #7 and #40) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview and policy review the facility failed to ensure gradual dose reductions were attempted for residents receiving antipsychotic medications. This affected one resident (Resident #22) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The census was 45.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, product instructions for use, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure their medication error rate did not exceed 5%. The facility had three errors out of 29 opportunities for error for a medication error rate of 10.3%. This affected two (Resident #6 and #44) of three residents observed for medication administration.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview and policy review the facility failed to ensure follow-up occurred related to consultation recommendations and dental extraction aftercare. This affected two residents (Resident #26 and #46) of four residents reviewed for dental services. The census was 45.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents received the Influenza and Pneumococcal vaccines when consenting to receive them. This affected two (Resident #7 and #10) of five residents reviewed for immunizations.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure reasons for obtaining a COVID-19 test, date the COVID-19 test was performed, and the results of the COVID-19 test were documented in the resident's medical record as required. This affected one (Resident #31) of one residents reviewed for transmission based precautions related to COVID-19.
5 fire safety citations on file: 1 on May 18, 2026, 2 on July 15, 2024, 2 on July 14, 2022.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| May 18, 2026 | Fine | $139,780 |
| May 18, 2026 | Payment Denial | 9 days from June 16, 2026 |
| August 13, 2025 | Fine | $38,636 |
| July 15, 2024 | Fine | $34,938 |
| December 4, 2023 | Fine | $104,348 |
| December 4, 2023 | Payment Denial | 37 days from December 30, 2023 |
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) | 3.18 | 3.69 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.35 | 0.64 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.88 | 3.28 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.96 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.87 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 38.2% | 48.7% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | not reported | 43.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.53 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 3.31 on weekdays and 2.88 on weekends, 13% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.12 in April to June 2025 to 3.18 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 | 3.18 | 0.35 | 3.31 | 2.88 | 0.0% | 2 of 90 | 43 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.26 | 0.43 | 3.44 | 2.82 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 40 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.20 | 0.34 | 3.27 | 3.02 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 41 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.12 | 0.36 | 3.25 | 2.80 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 44 |
| 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 | 3.1 | 5.3 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.5 | 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 | 4.7 | 3.2 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.8 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.2 | 6.1 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.4 | 3.4 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.7 | 8.8 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 19.4 | 24.9 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 17.0 | 12.9 | 12.0 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Muskingum Skilled Nursing & Rehabilitation's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (46.6% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
46.6% 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. 29 eligible stays.
10.1% 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. 44 eligible stays.
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 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. 18 eligible stays.
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: 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. 19 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. 27 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. 27 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Ohio100.0% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 7 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: BEVERLY HEALTH CARE CO LLC. CMS links this home to Continuing Healthcare Solutions, a group of 12 nursing homes averaging 2.2 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bunner, Michael | Corporate director | Individual | 01/13/2014 | |
| Mallett, Christopher | Corporate director | Individual | 01/13/2014 | |
| Parsons, Benjamin | Corporate director | Individual | 01/13/2014 | |
| Sprenger, Mark | Corporate director | Individual | 01/13/2014 | |
| Sprenger, Timothy | Corporate director | Individual | 01/13/2014 | |
| Hughey, Tracy | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/01/2026 | |
| Kauffman, Kevin | Corporate officer | Individual | 08/01/2024 | |
| Kauffman, Kevin | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 08/01/2024 | |
| Hughey, Tracy | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/15/2013 | |
| Kauffman, Kevin | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 08/01/2024 |
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.