819 Rockside Road, Seven Hills, OH 44131 · Cuyahoga County · (216) 487-7557
80 certified beds, about 70 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 2016
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 366441 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on July 7, 2025, inspectors cited 16 health deficiencies (the Ohio average is 10.5, the national average 9.2).
Of 38 health citations since September 2019, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $57,194 in the last three years; the largest was $57,194, and the latest is dated July 7, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.90 hours per resident per day, against 3.69 across Ohio and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.67 of those hours.
58.9% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Ohio average 48.7%).
CMS links it to Saber Healthcare Group, an affiliated group of 126 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 38 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to provide evidence that enteral tube feedings were administered to prevent weight loss. This affected two residents (#57 and #60) out of three reviewed for tube feeding. The facility also failed to obtain weekly weights as ordered. This affected four residents (#11, #20, #57, and #60) out of six reviewed for nutrition. The facility also failed to provide adequate hydration to prevent dehydration. This affected one resident (#11) out of three reviewed for hydration. The facility census was 63. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure notice of transfer and bed hold notice was provided to the resident, and the discharge summary was completed. This affected six Residents #28, # 46, #55, #66 #118, and #119 of eight residents reviewed for hospitalization and discharge.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, review of resident council meeting minutes, review of dining council minutes, the facility failed to ensure palatable meals were being provided. This affected three residents (Resident #11, #30 and #45) and had the potential to affect 56 residents receiving food from the kitchen (except Residents # 6, #44, #51, #55, #57, #60, and #218 whom the facility identified as nothing by mouth). The facility census was 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of shower documentation and interviews, the facility failed to ensure accurate and complete bathing documentation was completed as required for four residents (Residents #5, #19, #33 and #57) of four residents reviewed for activities of daily living. The facility census was 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to follow enhanced barrier precautions as indicated during care for Resident #46, Resident #33, and #5. This affected one resident (#46) of three reviewed for pressure ulcers, one resident (#33) of three reviewed for catheter use, and one resident (#5) out of four reviewed for incontinence. The facility also failed to ensure staff performed hand hygiene during medication pass. This affected six residents (#23, #29, #48, #52, #61, and #130) out of eight observed for medication administration. The facility also failed to ensure staff followed contact precautions when entering Resident #12's room. This affected one resident (#12) of one reviewed for contact precautions. The facility census was 63.
Inspectors wrote3. Review of the medical record for Resident #28 revealed an admission date of 05/02/24 with diagnoses including diabetes mellitus, hypertension, anxiety, depression, bipolar disorder, and chronic kidney disease. Review of the minimum data set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #28 was cognitively intact and required substantial or maximum assistance for activities of daily living (ADLs). On 06/24/25 at 3:01 P.M., an observation of Resident #28's room revealed Resident #28 was laying in bed calling for help and her call light was observed on the floor and out of reach. An interview at the time of observation with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #27 verified Resident #28's call light was on the floor and out of reach. On 06/25/25 at 10:40 A.M., an observation revealed Resident #28 was lying in bed and the call light was not in reach. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to honor resident preferences as ordered by the physician. This affected one resident (#19) out of two reviewed for choices. The facility census was 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, review of the facility's self-reported incident (SRI), and interview, the facility failed to conduct a thorough investigation of an allegation of abuse. This affected one resident (#32) out of four reviewed for abuse.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) user manual review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was accurate related to wounds. This affected one (Resident #46) of 21 residents reviewed for comprehensive assessments. The facility census was 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the appropriate Ohio Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services was timely notified of a significant change in a residents Pre-admission Screen (PASRR). The affected one (Resident #20) of three reviewed for PASRR status. The facility census was 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the baseline care plan included person-centered care that included goals to properly care for the resident's specific health and safety concerns and physician orders to prevent decline for Resident #118. This affected one (Resident #118) out of eight residents reviewed for baseline care planning. The facility census was 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure medical records were accurate. This affected one (Resident #5) of 16 resident medical records reviewed. The facility census was 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations and interviews, the facility failed to provide meaningful resident-centered activities for Resident #57. This affected one (Resident #57) out of three residents reviewed for activities. The facility census was 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview, policy review, and review of the employee handbook, the facility failed to ensure staff performed transfers in a safe manner per physician's orders and re-assess fall risk after a fall occurred. This affected one resident (#19) out of four reviewed for accident hazards. The facility census was 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interviews, and observations, the facility failed to ensure that colostomy care was provided as ordered and per resident's preference. This affected one resident (Resident #26) out of two residents reviewed for ostomy care.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure pain medications were administered timely to ensure effective pain management. This affected one resident (#120) out of eight residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations and interviews the facility failed to ensure insulin was dated, labeled, and discarded properly. This affected six residents (#11, #12, #16, #30, #41 and Resident #53) of 12 residents reviewed for insulin storage.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5% (percent). A total of 24 medications were observed with two errors for a medication error rate of 8.33%. This finding affected two (Resident #39 and #41) of three residents observed for medication administration.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, interview and policy review the facility failed to maintain infection control standards when administering medications. This affected one (Resident #30) of three residents reviewed for infection control during medication administration.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation of video from camera in room and record review, the facility failed to ensure call lights were kept within reach and residents were able to use if desired. This affected Resident #152, one of three sampled residents. The census was 62.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure previously placed Fentanyl transdermal patches were removed prior to placing a new patch. This affected Resident #152, one of three sampled residents. The census was 62.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure controlled substances (two Fentanyl transdermal patches) were disposed of properly after removal from resident. This affected Resident #152, one of three sampled residents. The total census was 62.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation of video from camera in room, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure infection control protocols were followed when providing resident care. This affected Resident #152. The total census was 62.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure State Tested Nursing Assistants (STNA) received 12 hours of inservices annually. This had the potential to affect all 75 of 75 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, facility policy review, and review of online resources for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the facility failed to ensure staff wore personal protective equipment (PPE) as required when entering Resident #127 and #266's room who were under droplet precautions for COVID-19 observation. This had the potential to affect all 75 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents had accurate advance directives within the medical records. This affected four residents (Residents #14, #43, #59, and #62) of twelve residents reviewed for advanced directives.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure meal intakes were monitored. This affected five residents (Resident #8, #14, #23, #61, and #62) of five residents reviewed for nutrition monitoring.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure regular nail care was provided for Resident #23. This affected one resident (Resident #23) of three reviewed for activities of daily living care. The facility census was 75.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure regular podiatry care was provided for Resident #23. This affected one resident (Resident #23) of three reviewed for activities of daily living care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure Resident #25's aerosol treatment was administered properly. This affected one resident (Resident #25) of out four residents observed for medication administration.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, interview, and review of manufacture's guidelines, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than five percent (%). Four errors occurred within 26 opportunities for error resulting in a medication error rate of 15.38%. This affected two residents (Resident #25 and #31) of four residents observed during the mediation administration observation. The facility census was 75.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to document Resident #126's hospitalization. This affected one resident (Resident #126) of four residents reviewed for hospitalization.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the duration of Resident #18 antibiotic use was implemented and monitored properly. This affected one resident (Resident #18) out of three residents reviewed for urinary tract infections. The facility census was 75.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to use alcohol-based hand sanitizer within dispensers mounted within resident care areas on the first and second facility resident care hallways. This had the potential to affect all 77 residents residing within the facility. The facility also failed to ensure Tuberculosis (TB) tests were completed or had the first step read before new employees started to work for five new employees (State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #640, STNA #641, STNA #660, STNA #663, and STNA #697) out of ten employees reviewed. This had the potential to affect all 77 residents in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure treatments were given per physician's orders. This affected one resident (Resident #56) of two residents reviewed for non-pressure skin conditions. The facility census was 77.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure tube feed bags delivering enteral nutrition to residents were labeled with the formula, resident name, and time administered. This affected one resident (Resident #33) out of five residents identified by the facility as receiving tube feeds. The total census was 77.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview the facility failed to prevent significant medication errors for two residents (#31 and #58) of five residents reviewed for medication administration. The census was 77.
Inspectors wroteBased on personnel record review, policy review, and interviews, the facility failed to implement their abuse policy and procedure in relation to employee reference checks prior to hire. This affected seven new employees out of ten employees reviewed (Licensed Nursing Home Administrator (LNHA), Maintenance Director (MD) #638, State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA) #640, STNA #641, STNA #660, STNA #663, and STNA #697) and had the potential to affect all 77 residents in the facility.
45 fire safety citations on file: 18 on July 7, 2025, 15 on September 19, 2022, 12 on September 9, 2019.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| July 7, 2025 | Fine | $57,194 |
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) | 3.90 | 3.69 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.67 | 0.64 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.47 | 3.28 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.09 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.13 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 58.9% | 48.7% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 63.6% | 43.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 2 |
CMS expects 4.33 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 4.07 on weekdays and 3.47 on weekends, 15% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 13.8% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.98 in April to June 2025 to 3.90 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 | 3.90 | 0.67 | 4.07 | 3.47 | 13.8% | 0 of 90 | 70 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.87 | 0.57 | 3.98 | 3.59 | 9.3% | 0 of 92 | 70 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.98 | 0.65 | 4.18 | 3.47 | 9.0% | 0 of 92 | 65 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.98 | 0.57 | 4.14 | 3.57 | 5.6% | 0 of 91 | 63 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Ohio, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.64 | 0.60 | 3.80 | 3.24 | 4.6% | 0.4% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review. 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 | 2.5 | 5.3 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.4 | 3.2 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.4 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 6.1 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.6 | 3.4 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.2 | 8.8 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 34.7 | 24.9 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 16.2 | 12.9 | 12.0 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Seven Hills Health & Rehab Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (52.4% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
52.4% 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. 66 eligible stays.
9.7% 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. 62 eligible stays.
9.2% 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. 32 eligible stays.
33.3% 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. 48 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. 48 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. 15 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: SEVEN HILLS HEALTHCARE GROUP LLC. CMS links this home to Saber Healthcare Group, a group of 126 nursing homes averaging 2.9 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wwbv Holdings LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 09/30/2019 |
| Mandat, Thomas | Contracted managing employee | Individual | 09/30/2023 | |
| Kelfman-Baroni, Kaylee | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 02/20/2023 | |
| Volpe, Benjamin | Corporate director | Individual | 03/01/2019 | |
| Weisberg, William | Corporate director | Individual | 03/01/2019 | |
| Nicoluzakis, Gregory | Corporate officer | Individual | 03/01/2019 | |
| Volpe, Benjamin | Corporate officer | Individual | 03/01/2019 | |
| Weisberg, William | Corporate officer | Individual | 03/01/2019 | |
| Saber Governance LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 09/01/2019 | |
| Shg Management LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 09/01/2019 | |
| Youell, Valerie | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/02/2024 |
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.