5700 Karl Road, Columbus, OH 43229 · Franklin County · (614) 846-5420
225 certified beds, about 209 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1978
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 365379 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on August 13, 2025, inspectors cited 18 health deficiencies (the Ohio average is 10.5, the national average 9.2).
Of 52 health citations since November 2022, 2 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $114,649 in the last three years; the largest was $103,669, and the latest is dated August 13, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.92 hours per resident per day, against 3.69 across Ohio and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.73 of those hours.
29.6% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Ohio average 48.7%).
CMS links it to Ciena Healthcare/Laurel Health Care, an affiliated group of 81 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 52 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, open and closed medical record review, interviews and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure weekly comprehensive wound assessments were completed, ensure skin interventions were in place and ensure wounds were accurately classified. This affected two residents (#117 and #214) of three residents reviewed for wounds. The facility census was 209. Findings Include:1. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on closed record review, fall investigation review, interviews and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide the care and supervision to prevent an unavoidable fall. This affected one resident (#214) of three residents reviewed for falls. The facility census was 209. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, staff interview, interviews with staff at orthopedic medical office, review of National Pressure Injury Advisory Panel (NPIAP) guidance, and facility policy review, the facility failed to implement interventions to prevent the development of pressure ulcers when wearing a splint device and failed to timely identify the resident's pressure ulcers until it reached an advanced stage. Actual harm occurred on 07/30/25 when Resident #37 developed two avoidable unstageable (full-thickness skin and tissue loss in which the extent of tissue damage within the ulcer cannot be confirmed because the wound bed is obscured by slough or eschar) pressure ulcers to the underside of the index finger and to the left side of the palm hand when the facility did not remove Resident #37's splint device by the orthopedic clinic's instructions. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, resident interviews, staff interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program. This affected eight residents (#47, #57, #70, #90, #116, #134, #179, and #225) and had the potential to affect all residents living in the facility. The facility census was 209.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, record reviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure residents advance directives were readily available to facility staff and Emergency Medical Service (EMS) personnel. This affected four residents (#17, #129, #198, and #236) of the 51 residents reviewed for advance directives. The facility census was 209.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, guardian and staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to complete quarterly care conferences for the residents. This affected eight (Residents #6, #18, #37, #53, #82, #110, #170, and #198) of 43 residents reviewed for care conferences. The facility census was 209.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, resident and staff interviews, medical record review, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to provide residents who were dependent on staff for activities of daily living (ADLs) adequate care and services for personal hygiene. This affected four (#8, #15, #134, and #209) of eight residents reviewed for ADLs. The facility census was 209.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, resident and staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to provide personal privacy to the residents. This affected one (Resident #48) of 51 residents reviewed for privacy. The facility census was 209.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations, resident, guardian and staff interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to maintain a safe, clean and homelike environment in resident rooms. This affected two (Resident #18 and #70) of seven residents reviewed for homelike environment. The facility census was 209 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview, policy review, and review of the facilities Self-Reported Incidents (SRI), the facility failed to timely report allegations of physical and verbal abuse and injuries of unknown origin to the State Survey Agency. This affected three (#6, #72, and #183) of eight residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 209.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews, staff interviews, and review of a facility policy, the facility failed to ensure allegations of verbal and physical abuse and injuries of unknown origin were thoroughly investigated. This affected three (#6, #72 and #183) of eight residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 209.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, resident interview, staff interview and review of facility policy, the facility failed to obtain an audiology consult for a resident in a timely manner. This affected one (Resident #46) of four residents reviewed for ancillary services. The facility census was 209.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews, observations, staff interviews and review of facility policy, the facility failed to provide residents who had contractures their splint devices as physician ordered. This affected two (Residents #144 and 209) of four residents reviewed for range of motion. The facility identified 19 residents with contractures. The facility census was 209.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to complete a thorough fall investigations, failed to ensure residents had adequate footwear to prevent accidents, and failed to appropriately secure the resident's smoking materials. This affected three (Residents #70, #84, and #110) of 12 residents reviewed for accidents. The facility census was 209.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations, staff interviews, policy review, and review of hospital records, the facility failed to provide adequate respiratory care for Resident #47 who had localized fly larvae infestation to her tracheostomy and stoma and required hospitalization. This affected one (#47) of five residents reviewed for respiratory care. The facility identified 36 residents residing on the tracheostomy unit. The facility census was 209.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to consistently evaluate the effectiveness of regularly scheduled opioid pain medication in accordance with the resident's comprehensive care plan. This affected one (#159) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 209.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, resident and staff interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to identify post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) triggers on the care plan for Resident #48 and failed to assess Resident #8 for PTSD upon admission. This affected two (Residents #8 and #48) of five residents reviewed for mood and behavior. The facility census was 209.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure medications were properly stored. This affected two of six medication carts observed. The facility identified 11 medication cart in the facility. This affected three residents (#33, #53, and #237). The facility census was 209.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, record review, review of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure staff followed Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) in designated resident rooms. This affected one (Resident #10) of four residents reviewed for EBP. The facility census was 209.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, medical record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure the call light was positioned within reach of a resident. This affected one (#15) of 51 residents observed for call light placement. The facility census was 209.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, medical record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to monitor bruising and bleeding risk for a resident on an anticoagulant. This affected one resident (Resident #45) out of three residents reviewed for anticoagulant medications, and had the potential to affect 48 residents that the facility identified as being on anticoagulant medication. The facility census was 205 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to investigate or assess a resident after a significant weight gain. This affected one resident (Resident #208) out of four residents reviewed for weight changes. The facility census was 205 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, medical record review, resident interview, staff interviews, review of admission checklists and review of facility policy, the facility failed to reconcile admission orders with a resident's previous medication orders to provide required eye drops per resident's expectations and physician orders. This affected one resident (Resident #156) out of three residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 205 residents. Findings Include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #156 was admitted on [DATE] readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included end stage renal disease, status post cadaver - donor kidney transplant, dependence on renal dialysis, congestive heart failure, presence of cardiac pacemaker, immunodeficiency due to drugs, type two diabetes mellitus with diabetic neuropathy, depression, chronic pain, and sarcoidosis. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to monitor side effects of a resident on antipsychotic medications. This affected one resident (Resident #106) out of three residents reviewed for antipsychotic medications, and had the potential to affect 47 residents that the facility identified as being on antipsychotic medication. The facility census was 205 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, resident and staff interview, review of a facility self reported incident, review of facility investigation, review of hospital records, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure one resident (Resident #145) was free from physical abuse in the facility. The deficient practice affected one (Resident #145) of three reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 204. Findings Include: Review of the medical record for Resident #145 revealed an admission date of 02/01/21. Diagnoses included fracture of nasal bones (01/14/25), hemiplegia affecting unspecified side, personal history of traumatic brain injury, difficulty in walking, other seizures, and unspecified mental disorder due to a known physiological condition. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 11/26/24, revealed Resident #145 had intact cognition. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, resident and staff interviews, review of a facility self reported incident, review of the facility investigation, and facility policy review, the facility failed to complete a thorough investigation of an allegation of physical abuse of one resident (Resident #145). The deficient practice affected one resident (Resident #145) of three reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 204. Findings Include: Review of the medical record for Resident #145 revealed an admission date of 02/01/21. Diagnoses included fracture of nasal bones (01/14/25), hemiplegia affecting unspecified side, personal history of traumatic brain injury, difficulty in walking, other seizures, and unspecified mental disorder due to a known physiological condition. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 11/26/24, revealed Resident #145 had intact cognition. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on closed medical record review, hospital record review, review of facility policy and interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident #215 received adequate, timely and necessary care and services to prevent an acute change in condition related to hypokalemia (decreased potassium) level. Actual Harm occurred beginning on 10/25/24 at 3:33 P.M. when Resident #215's laboratory results reflected a low potassium level of 3.0 mmol/L (normal range 3.5 -5.0) (indicative of hypokalemia) which went unreviewed and unaddressed by facility staff. On 10/28/24 Resident #215 began to experience shortness of breath and required supplemental oxygen. On 10/30/24 Resident #215's heart rate was noted to be between 41 and 46 beats per minute (low/bradycardic) and the resident informed staff his automated implanted cardioverter defibrillator (AICD) had alarmed. On 10/31/24 at 7:30 A.M. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure timely notification to the physician or Certified Nurse Practitioner (CNP) of abnormal laboratory values for Resident #37. This affected one (Resident #37) of three residents reviewed for quality of care. The facility census was 215.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to appropriately investigate a resident incident. This affected one (Resident #301) of three resident incidents reviewed. The census was 219. Findings Include: Resident #301 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses were chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease, asthma, acute respiratory failure, hypotension, atrial fibrillation, anemia, vascular dementia, congestive heart failure, epilepsy, dorsalgia, alcohol abuse, diverticulitis, suicidal ideation, hydronephrosis, restlessness and agitation, nicotine dependence, sleep apnea, polyneuropathy, and depression. Review of his minimum data set (MDS) assessment, dated 08/28/24, revealed he had a severe cognitive impairment. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one resident (#11) attended a scheduled medical appointment out of the facility out of three residents reviewed. The facility census was 210.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy the facility failed to provide care and supervision to prevent residents from eloping from the facility. This affected one (Resident #10) of ten facility-identified residents at risk for elopement. The facility census was 202. Findings Include: Review of the medical record for Resident #10 revealed an admission date of 12/20/23 with diagnoses including metabolic encephalopathy, type two diabetes, hypertension, and chronic kidney disease. Resident #10 was discharged to the hospital on [DATE] following an elopement from the facility. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #10 dated 12/20/23 revealed resident was cognitively impaired. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident room was maintained in a homelike manner. This affected two (Resident #3 and Resident #4) of five resident rooms reviewed for a homelike environment. The facility census was 206.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, self reported incident (SRI) review, and policy review, the facility failed to properly store controlled substances. This affected one resident (Resident #20) out of the one resident reviewed for controlled substance storage. The facility census was 201.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure Section C for assessing a resident's cognition and mood were assessed in the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment. This affected six (Residents #77, #151, #57, #406, #15, and #25) of six residents reviewed for accuracy of assessments. The facility census was 207.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure Resident #12's dignity was maintained by ensuring she had clothes available to her. This affected one (Resident #12) of one resident reviewed for dignity. The facility census was 207.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview and manual review the facility failed to complete a discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS) resident assessment. This affected one (Resident #100) out of three residents reviewed for resident assessments. Facility census was 207.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, resident and staff interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to complete quarterly care conferences. This affected one (Resident #44) of three residents reviewed for care conferences. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure a resident's care plan was updated to reflect current advanced directives. This affected one (Resident #81) of one reviewed for care planning advanced directives. The facility's census was 207.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure Resident #159's preferred activities were available to him. This affected one (Resident #159) of two residents reviewed for activities. The facility's census was 207.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, staff interview, and facility policy and procedure, the facility failed to ensure residents secured their smoking contraband. This affected one (Resident #25) out of five residents reviewed for accidents. The facility census was 207.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interviews, review of the facility policy, and medical record review, the facility failed to ensure Resident #406's nephrostomy bag was in the proper position at all times to prevent backflow of urine into the bladder. This affected one (Resident #406) of two residents reviewed for catheters. The facility census was 207.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview, and review of the Federal Drug Administration Approving Labeling Text, the facility failed to ensure a resident did not receive an antipsychotic medication without an appropriate diagnosis. This affected one (Resident #83) of five residents reviewed unnecessary medication. The facility census was 207.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate below five percent (%). There were five medication errors out of 28 opportunities resulting in a 17.86% medication error rate. This affected two (Resident #34 and #131) of four residents observed during medication pass. The facility census was 207.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure Resident #159's activity participation was recorded accurately and by the staff who initiated it. This affected one (Residents #159) of 39 resident records reviewed. The facility census was 207.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and medical record review, the facility failed to ensure personal protective equipment (PPE) was disposed of properly after providing care for Resident #179, who had Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA) in her wound. This affected one (Resident #179) of one resident under transmission-based precautions. The facility census was 207.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure the proper personal protective equipment (PPE) was worn when providing care for residents who tested positive for COVID-19 to prevent the potential spread of COVID-19. This had the potential to affect 33 residents (#37, #93, #125, #10, #178, #156, #153, #98, #56, #136, #161, #127, #3, #59, #101, #84, #14, #11, #114, #139, #15, #38, #103, #55, #130, #137, #108, #163, #33, #42, #120, #106 and #121) who resided on the 300 unit (non-COVID unit) who received care from Registered Nurse (RN) #213. The facility census was 185.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #146 was provided the opportunity to participate in decisions regarding the continued use of an indwelling urinary catheter. This affected one resident (#146) of the three residents who were reviewed for urinary catheters or urinary tract infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #164 was not physically restrained for staff convenience. This affected one resident (#164) of the two residents reviewed for physical restraints.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, and staff interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #116 was referred for a Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) assessment following a significant change in status and new mental health diagnoses. This affected one resident (#116) of five residents reviewed for PASARR.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview the facility failed to timely complete a Preadmission Screen and Resident Review (PASARR) for Resident #147 at the time of admission. This affected one resident (#147) of five residents reviewed for PASARR.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, facility policy review and interview the facility failed to ensure timely follow up appointments were scheduled to promote an optimal continuum of care for Resident #23 and Resident #174. The facility also failed to ensure preventative skin interventions were provided as ordered for Resident #33. This affected three residents (#23, #33 and #174) of 37 sampled residents reviewed for quality of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure interventions related to contracture management were in place for Resident #39, Resident #77 and Resident #158 as ordered. This affected three residents (#39, #77 and #158) of four residents reviewed for limited range of motion.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, review of dialysis communication forms, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure accurate dialysis communication was communicated between the facility and dialysis center for Resident #126. This affected one resident (#126) of two residents reviewed for hemodialysis.
24 fire safety citations on file: 11 on August 13, 2025, 5 on April 27, 2023, 8 on November 8, 2022.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| August 13, 2025 | Fine | $103,669 |
| August 13, 2025 | Payment Denial | 62 days from September 10, 2025 |
| November 26, 2024 | Fine | $10,980 |
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) | 3.92 | 3.69 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.73 | 0.64 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.51 | 3.28 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.10 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.10 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 29.6% | 48.7% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 34.1% | 43.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 4.67 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 4.09 on weekdays and 3.51 on weekends, 14% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 1.3% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.97 in April to June 2025 to 3.92 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 | 3.92 | 0.73 | 4.09 | 3.51 | 1.3% | 0 of 90 | 209 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.96 | 0.80 | 4.15 | 3.47 | 1.0% | 0 of 92 | 207 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.86 | 0.76 | 4.06 | 3.34 | 1.3% | 0 of 92 | 207 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.97 | 0.79 | 4.19 | 3.43 | 1.4% | 0 of 91 | 207 |
| 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 | 2.3 | 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 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.0 | 3.2 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.2 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.0 | 6.1 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.2 | 3.4 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.6 | 8.8 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 24.9 | 24.9 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 14.3 | 12.9 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.3 | 1.7 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 0.8 | 1.8 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for The Laurels of Walden Park's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (38.1% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
38.1% 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. 39 eligible stays.
11.4% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Ohio: 3 better, 7 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 42 eligible stays.
8.4% 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. 29 eligible stays.
51.9% 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. 27 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. 16 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: THE LAURELS OF WALDEN PARK, LLC. CMS links this home to Ciena Healthcare/Laurel Health Care, a group of 81 nursing homes averaging 2.8 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Laurel Ohio Operations Group, LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 06/01/2018 |
| Laurel Health Care Holdings, Inc. | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 06/30/2018 |
| Laurel Acquisition Holding Corporation | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 06/30/2018 | |
| Khan, Anis | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 06/30/2018 | |
| Qazi, Mohammad | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 06/30/2018 | |
| Laurel Health Care Company | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 06/30/2018 | |
| Mason, James | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/01/2025 | |
| Qazi, Mohammad | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 06/30/2018 | |
| Slaybaugh, Randall | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/01/2025 | |
| Qazi, Mohammad | Trustee of the SNF | Individual | 06/18/2018 | |
| Laurel Health Care Company | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/27/2025 | |
| Khan, Anis | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 06/30/2018 | |
| Mason, James | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 03/06/2022 | |
| Qazi, Mohammad | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 06/30/2018 | |
| Slaybaugh, Randall | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/2025 | |
| Stobb, David | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 06/30/2018 |
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.