3526 Dutchman's Lane, Louisville, KY 40205 · Jefferson County · (502) 452-6331
130 certified beds, about 110 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 2005
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 185456 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on July 4, 2025, inspectors cited 1 health deficiency (the Kentucky average is 2.9, the national average 9.2).
Of 34 health citations since April 2021, 12 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (9 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.38 hours per resident per day, against 3.95 across Kentucky and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 1.50 of those hours.
40.6% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Kentucky average 46.4%).
CMS links it to David Marx, an affiliated group of 10 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 34 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, and review of facility documents and policy, the facility failed to resolve a grievance related to a missing item in a timely manner for 1 of 3 residents (Resident (R) 83) reviewed for personal property.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide nail care for 1 of 5 residents (Resident (R) 3) reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL) care. Specifically, the facility failed to regularly trim or clean Resident #3's fingernails. Review of facility policy, Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), dated 01/02/2024, indicated, 3. A resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living will receive the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene. Review of facility policy, Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) Risk Review Meeting, dated 01/02/2024, indicated, 3. Routine cleaning and inspection of nails will be provided during ADL care on an ongoing basis. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, review of facility signage, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for one of three residents (Resident (R) 8) investigated for enhanced barrier precautions.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and review of facility policy, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents received services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs and preferences for two (2) of twenty-three (23) sampled residents, Resident #69 and Resident #78. The facility initiated a plan of care to keep a touch call light within Resident #69's reach, however observation revealed Resident #69 had a push-button call light. The facility initiated a plan of care to keep Resident #78's call light within reach; however, observation revealed the resident's call light was lying on his/her bedside table.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and review of facility policy, it was determined the facility failed to implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident that included measurable objectives and timeframe's to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs identified in the comprehensive assessment for one (1) of twenty-three (23) sampled residents, Resident #69. The facility initiated a care plan intervention to keep a touch call light within Resident #69's reach; however, observation revealed the resident had a push-button call light.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and review of the facility's policy, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, as based on the comprehensive assessment of the resident, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's choices for one (1) of twenty-three (23) sampled residents (Resident #22). Review of Resident #22's Physician's Orders dated 01/20/2024 and the resident's Treatment Administration Record (TAR) dated 02/2024, revealed wound care orders for his/her wound on the right foot anterior first digit to be provided daily at bedtime. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and review of facility policy, it was determined the facility failed to maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status, such as usual body weight or desirable body weight range unless the resident's clinical condition demonstrates that this was not possible or resident preferences indicated otherwise for one (1) of twenty-three (23) sampled residents, (Resident #22) who had exceeded a twelve (12) percent weight loss in sixty-seven (67) days.
Inspectors wroteThe facility failed to ensure all drugs and biologicals were labeled and stored in accordance with professional standards to include labels, the date opened and the securement of medication carts for two (2) of four (4) medication carts observed out of the facility's total of eight (8) medication carts. Observation of one (1) medication cart revealed it was left unlocked and unattended while the Registered Nurse (RN) passed medications to residents in their rooms. In addition, opened, undated medications were observed stored in medication carts.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections, for two (2) of twenty-three (23) sampled residents (Residents #22 and #69). Observation revealed Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) signage outside Resident #22's room with guidance for staff; however, a Registered Nurse (RN) was observed to enter the resident's room without donning the appropriate Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and provide wound care for him/her. Additionally, observation revealed no PPE located outside the resident's door as per the facility's policy. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, and review of the facility's policy, it was determined the facility failed to ensure the comprehensive care plan was reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment, including both the comprehensive and quarterly review assessments for one (1) of twenty-three (23) sampled residents (Resident #79). Resident #79 had outpatient surgery on 01/22/2024, to change his/her gastrostomy tube (g-tube) to a jejunostomy tube. However, upon return to the facility after the outpatient surgery, the facility failed to revise Resident #79's care plan to reflect the changes in his/her feeding tube.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and facility policy review it was determined the facility failed to ensure those with a provisional license were provided with direct supervision while providing resident care. The facility failed to ensure, per the Kentucky Board of Nursing regulatory requirements, that six (6) Registered Nurse Applicants (RNA) were provided direct supervision by a Registered Nurse (RN) during the provision of resident care. In addition, the facility failed to ensure one (1) Licensed Practical Nurse Applicant (LPNA) was provided direct supervision by a RN or Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) during the provision of resident care, and licensed staff were at all times physically present in the facility and immediately available to applicants while the applicants held a provisional license. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, and review of the facility's policy, it was determined the facility failed to be administered in a manner that enabled it to use its resources effectively and efficiently to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident. The failure to identify potential or actual system failure or deficient practice, which could or has led to potential or actual harm. (Refer to F656, F689, F692, F693, F726, F755, F835, F837, and F865). In addition, the facility failed to maintain standard levels of care and services to the residents. Total census 90. (Refer to F584, F606, F656, F689 and F759. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and review of the facility policy related to Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) and review of the Executive Director's Job description, it was determined the facility failed to ensure the Governing Body who was responsible for the establishment and implementation of policies managed the operation of the facility. Interviews revealed not all listed participants were aware of their GB role and/or responsibility. The facility's GB failed to hold responsible the Executive Director (ED) in regards to the establishment and implementation of policies/procedures to ensure the provision of quality care and services. Interviews revealed the ED did not report QAPI/GB findings to the Owner/CEO and the Owner/CEO did not attend QAPI/GB meetings, nor was not listed on the GB committee. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review and review of the facility's policy it was determined the facility failed to have an effective system to maintain a Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) program which developed and implemented plans of action to correct system failures in a manner to maintain compliance. The facility failed to ensure residents were free from accidents/hazards, and provided nutrition and hydration. In addition, the facility failed to ensure residents were monitored for weight loss and their care plans implemented. Further it was determine nursing applicants employed by the facility were not provided supervision and or had licensed nurse immediately available to assist with provision of resident care. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and review of the facility policy it was determined the facility failed to develop or implement the resident care plan for sixteen (16) of sixty-nine (69) sampled residents, Residents #8, #23, #28, #33, #39, #46, #54, #60, #82, #84, #85, #90, #248, #445, and #447. 1. Review of Resident #248's care plan revealed an intervention to maintain a safe environment. However, on 12/17/2020, Resident #248 eloped from the facility without staff knowledge and was discovered by staff from another facility on the ground in the parking lot. 2. The facility initally admitted Resident #85 on 04/10/2020. He/she was assessed to be at nutritional risk. However, there was no developed care plan in place to ensure his/her fluids were monitored or received. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, record reviews and review of the facility's policies it was determined the facility failed to provide and maintain pharmaceutical services to meet residents needs related to medications not being available, medication orders not initiated and/or medication errors for five (5) out of sixty-nine (69) sampled residents (Resident #23, Resident #33, Resident #39, Resident #46, and Resident #447). In addition, the facility failed to maintain proper infection control during medication pass for three (3) of four (4) halls. The facility failed to obtain a prescription for Gabapentin (medication used to treat pain associated with Neuropathy) timely and failed to obtain the medication through the emergency drug system. The facility failed to administer Resident #39 nineteen (19) doses of Gabapentin, from 01/21/2021 through 01/27/2021. [...]
Inspectors wrote2. Observation, on 03/10/2021 at 3:05 PM, revealed the facility's Maintenance Director (MD) walked through with the State Survey Agency (Surveyor) in the C/D courtyard. Observations revealed on the immediate left an unlocked gate. The opened gate revealed a steep concrete staircase leading to a door. Items on the staircase included threaded nails for a nail gun with the sharp edges facing upwards, two (2) propane gas tanks half off the second stair, flower pots, and two (2) large deck umbrellas. Further observation revealed an unlocked second gate on the opposite side. The contents included various seasonal items and a recessed window well. Continued observations revealed copious metal nails on the sidewalk, bricks raised up in several places which could cause a tripping hazard. [...]
Inspectors wrote2. Review of the clinical record revealed the facility admitted Resident #60 on 08/11/2020 with diagnoses that included Traumatic Subdural Hemorrhage, Maxillary (jawbone) Fracture, Orbital Roof Fracture (bone around the eye), and Zygomatic (cheekbone) Fracture. Review of Resident #60's Physician Orders, dated 09/2020 through 03/2021, revealed Resident #60 was taking nothing by mouth (NPO) and receiving tube feedings for nutrition. The orders included a 200 ml g-tube flush four times daily ordered on 11/03/2020 and discontinued on 12/12/2020; and flush 200 ml g-tube flush with normal saline every six hours, ordered on 12/16/2020 and started on 03/16/2021. The enteral feeding, Jevity 1.2 at a continuous rate of seventy (70) ml per hour, was ordered on 12/15/2020. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review and review of the facility's policy it was determined the facility failed to ensure hydration for one (1) of sixty-nine (69) sampled residents (Resident #85). The facility admitted Resident #85 on 04/10/2020, and assessed him/her to be at nutritional risk. Resident #85 had Physician's Orders for free water (the amount of the additional water needed to meet residents hydration needs). The NP (Nurse Practitioner) wrote the orders based on continuous free water provided by a dual pump. However, the dual pump was broken. There was no documented evidence the facility monitored or provided the free water as ordered. On 03/09/2021 the facility was notified of a critical lab report for Resident #85 which revealed a Blood Urea Nitrogen (BUN) level of 111 Critical (reference range 7 mg/dL to 25 mg/dL ) indicating dehydration. Intravenous (IV) fluids were ordered. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and review of the facility's policy it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents were treated in a dignified manner for two (2) of sixty-nine (69) sampled residents (Residents #14 and #90). Interview and observations revealed Resident #14 was transferred from a room which he/she could enter a bathroom to a room in which the size of his/her wheelchair prohibited access to the bathroom. The sink and toilet were not accessible to Resident #14. The facility provided Resident #14 a bedside commode, placed near a window leaving the resident exposed to the outside. Resident #14 was still unable to wash his/her hands. In addition, observations revealed facility staff used baby talk when talking with Resident #90. Resident #90, was able to feed himself/herself. [...]
Inspectors wrote5. Review of the clinical record revealed the facility admitted Resident #82 on 10/21/2019 with diagnoses to include Alzheimer's disease, Major depressive disorder, and Osteoarthritis. Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], revealed the facility assessed Resident #82 with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of fifteen (15) and determined he/she was interviewable. Interview with Resident #82, on 03/09/2021 at 3:24 PM, revealed the bathroom sink would not drain and the resident was not able to wash his/her face or hands. The resident revealed there had been a problem with the drain since the facility moved him/her to the room in November and he/she reported the issue to Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs), nurses, housekeeping, maintenance, and the Administrator. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review and review of the facility's policy, it was determined the facility failed to ensure the Nurse Practitioner (NP) Care Services provided timely orders for one (1) of sixty nine (69) sampled residents (Resident #85). The facility received a critical lab value of a Blood Urea Nitrogen (BUN) level of 111 (above 20 is high) mg/dl (deciLiter) on 03/09/2021 at 1:00 AM. The facility notified the NP immediately. However, there was no documented evidence the NP addressed the critical lab until 4:14 PM (03/09/2021), roughly fifteen (15) hours later. In addition, the facility failed to provide adequate fluids per dietary recommendations after the NP ordered a reduction of fluid intake per Enteral Feeding. Furthermore, the NP failed to follow-up with pharmacy regarding insulin orders which were not initiated.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, review of the clinical record, and review of facility policy it was determined the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment. The entire perimeter of the facility, and into the parking lot, contained copious discarded cigarette butts. Discarded cigarette butts were also in the C/D courtyard. Additionally, the facility failed to provide appropriate disposal devices for the discarded cigarette butts to prevent fires. The shower rooms for one (1) of four (4) units, E and F Halls, were filled with non-bathing materials. The E Hall tub contained a ladder, a lift sling, and a trash bag with unknown materials. The F Hall tub had a standing oscillating fan. The facility placed Resident #248 on a one to one (1:1) observation after he/she eloped from the facility. The resident was taken to a staff's office for 1:1 observation. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, and review of the facility's policy it was determined the facility failed to ensure staff were not listed on the Kentucky (KY) Nurse Aide Abuse Registry for five (5) of six (6) Registered Nurse Applicants (RNA) and one (1) Licensed Practical Nurse Applicant (LPNA). The facility did not check the KY Nurse Aide Abuse Registry for five (5) RNAs until after their employment began.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interview, record review and review of the facility's policy it was determined the facility failed to ensure to properly label and store drugs and biological's for three (3) of four (4) units; failed to secure medications in the medication refrigerators for four (4) of four (4) units; and, failed to secure medication carts for three (3) of four (4) units. Observations during survey revealed unlocked and unattended medication carts, medications left unattended in resident rooms, unlocked medication/biological's storage closets, no temperature logs for medication refrigerators.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review it was determined the facility failed to label and store food under sanitary conditions in the refrigerators/freezer of the kitchen; and, four (4) of four (4) nourishment refrigerators for A/B, C/D, E/F, and G Halls. Observations during the survey revealed opened, undated items in the kitchen refrigerators, freezer, and nursing unit refrigerators. Additional observations and record reviews revealed no monitoring of the unit refrigerators.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review it was determined the facility failed to develop and implement an effective infection control and prevention program to prevent and control infections to the extent possible including the COVID-19 virus for four (4) of four (4) units. In addition, the facility failed to ensure proper infection control practices to prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections during meal delivery, medication administration, tracheostomy suction, and wound care. Staff failed to disinfect glucometer's according to manufacturer recommendation for three (3) of four (4) units, A/B, C/D, and E/F. Residents were observed handling ice in the ice machine and storage cooler using their bare hands and personal cups on two (2) of four (4) units, A/B and E/F. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, and facility policy review it was determined the facility failed to follow the grievance process and failed to follow-up with completed documenation to the resident council or residents regarding the facility's efforts or plans to resolve grievances. In addition, the facility foaled to resolve a grievances related to Residents #3, #14 and #33.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, policy review, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure accurate assessments to identify the resident's status at the time of the assessment for four (4) of sixty-nine (69) sampled Residents (Residents #24, #60, #90 and #445). Resident #60's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 02/08/2021, revealed the facility assessed the resident as able to walk in the room or hall and and no limitations for range of motion of upper or lower extremities. However, observations revealed the resident's extremities had poor motion. Resident #24's Comprehensive MDS assessment, dated 12/21/2020, revealed the resident was not receiving hemodialysis treatments. However, the resident received hemodialysis three (3) times a week. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, and policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents' representatives were invited, attended, or mailed completed documentation of care plan conferences (CCC) for one (1) of sixty-nine (69) sampled resident (Resident #12).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and review of the facility's policy, it was determined the facility failed to ensure privacy during medication administration of an injection for one (1) of sixty-nine (69) sampled residents (Resident #56). The nurse administered an insulin injection in the resident's abdomen with the door and curtain open; the resident was visible from the hallway.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review and interviews it was determined the facility failed to report potential allegations of abuse for two (2) of sixty-nine (69) sampled residents (Resident #55 and Resident #7.) Resident #55 reported fear and pain from a previous occurrence, to staff who reported to the supervisor and Director of Nursing Services (DNS) on 08/18/2020. However, the facility failed to report to the appropriate agencies until 03/05/2021 when identified by the State Survey Agency (SSA). Additionally, on 03/09/2021, Resident #7 reported to the SSA that Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #13 had touched Resident #7's buttocks with his (CNA #13's) penis while providing incontinence care and at a later time stated he was going to cut Resident #7. The facility reported the allegation to appropriate agencies on 03/10/2021.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review it was determined the facility failed to provide Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care related to showers for three (3) of sixty-nine (69) sampled residents (Residents #33, #82, and #84). Interviews with Residents #33, #82, and #84 revealed the facility did not provide routine showers.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview it was determined the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5%. Observations during survey revealed forty-five opportunities during medication pass. The total medication administration errors totaled seven (7), resulting in an error rate of 15.56%. Observations and record review revealed staff failed to check for gastric-tube (g-tube) placement before administration of medications for two (2) residents (Resident #70 and #446). During observations, staff combined 2 medications together and administered the medications together trough the g-tube for 2 residents. (Resident #70 and #446). In addition, the facility did not have eye drops available and did not complete the administration into both eyes for Resident #21. [...]
24 fire safety citations on file: 12 on February 9, 2024, 12 on April 3, 2021.
CMS lists no fines or payment denials against this home in the last three years. The national average is 0.9 fines per home.
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 | Kentucky | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.38 | 3.95 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 1.50 | 0.79 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.96 | 3.49 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.68 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.20 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 40.6% | 46.4% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 22.2% | 41.8% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 4.37 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 3.55 on weekdays and 2.96 on weekends, 17% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 1.4% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.20 in April to June 2025 to 3.38 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 | 3.38 | 1.50 | 3.55 | 2.96 | 1.4% | 0 of 90 | 110 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.24 | 1.47 | 3.39 | 2.86 | 1.4% | 0 of 92 | 113 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.37 | 1.56 | 3.54 | 2.94 | 1.3% | 0 of 92 | 113 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.20 | 1.35 | 3.39 | 2.74 | 1.1% | 0 of 91 | 114 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Kentucky, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.85 | 0.71 | 4.04 | 3.40 | 3.2% | 0.1% 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kentucky, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $18.45 | $17.38 to $21.21 | 23,410 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $29.07 | $26.10 to $31.29 | 8,570 |
| Registered nurses | $38.96 | $36.38 to $46.73 | 50,300 |
| 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 | Kentucky | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.5 | 13.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.3 | 1.6 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.2 | 3.9 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.7 | 1.7 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.8 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.1 | 4.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 13.7 | 16.1 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 36.7 | 24.2 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 3.4 | 13.7 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.1 | 1.9 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.4 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Seneca Place's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (49.2% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
49.2% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Kentucky: 38 better, 49 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. 88 eligible stays.
11.8% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Kentucky: 0 better, 12 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. 85 eligible stays.
7.0% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Kentucky: 0 better, 6 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. 54 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: Kentucky49.5% · 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. 15 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Kentucky0.0% · 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. 32 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Kentucky2.6% · 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. 32 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: Kentucky98.1% · 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. 1 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: SENECA PLACE LLC. CMS links this home to David Marx, a group of 10 nursing homes averaging 3.1 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Seneca Place Holdings LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 07/25/2019 |
| Shaw, Taylor | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 08/30/2019 | |
| McGuinness, Bernard | Corporate officer | Individual | 08/30/2019 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in Kentucky. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.