3291 Northpointe Drive, Zanesville, OH 43701 · Muskingum County · (740) 452-3000
75 certified beds, about 72 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1996
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 366051 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on July 29, 2025, inspectors cited 5 health deficiencies (the Ohio average is 10.5, the national average 9.2).
Of 51 health citations since June 2022, 4 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists 3 fines totaling $97,465 in the last three years; the largest was $43,435, and the latest is dated July 13, 2026.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.73 hours per resident per day, against 3.69 across Ohio and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.22 of those hours.
CMS links it to Trilogy Health Services, an affiliated group of 127 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 51 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, review of on-call notes, review of the emergency medical services (EMS) run report, review of outside hospital medical records, interview and policy review, the he facility failed to timely respond to a change in condition. This resulted in Actual Harm when on [DATE], Resident #28 had a change in condition. Facility staff failed to notify the medical provider and or respond to the change in condition. Resident #28 suffered a moderate diffuse ileus (the normal wave-like contractions of your intestines have slowed or stopped across a broad area, causing a backup of gas and fluids) which resulted in hypotension, sepsis colitis, respiratory failure, coagulopathy, volume depletion, acidosis and renal failure. Resident #38 died on [DATE]. This affected one (Resident #28) of five residents reviewed for change in condition. The facility census was 69.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to complete respiratory assessments pre and post administration of a nebulizer (aerosol) breathing treatment. This affected one resident (#73) of three residents reviewed for respiratory care. The facility census was 71.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, and facility policy the facility failed to administer medication as prescribed. This affected one resident (Resident #73) of three residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 71.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure Resident #35's family was notified of missing hearing aids in a timely manner. This affected one (Resident #35) out of three residents reviewed for notification of change. The facility census was 73.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the physician ordered diet was followed for Resident #35, who had a swallowing impairment. This affected one (Resident #35) out of three residents reviewed for diet orders. The facility census was 73.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, employee statement review, facility investigation review, hospital record review, employee file review, interviews and facility policy review the facility failed to timely and adequately assess and identify a major injury status post fall resulting in a delay in medical intervention. Actual harm occurred on 06/13/25 at approximately 9:30 P.M. when Resident #54, who was dependent on staff and the use of a mechanical lift for transfers, was discovered by Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #250 lying on the floor of her room, in front of her wheelchair. Resident #54 appeared to be in pain and was unable to recall what had occurred. CNA #250 and CNA #169 used a mechanical lift to place the resident in bed, without an assessment or direction from Licensed Practical Nurse #131. On 06/14/25 at 6:51 A.M. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure fall interventions were implemented. This deficient practice affected one resident (Resident #61) out of four residents reviewed for accidents and hazards. The facility census was 65. Findings Include: Review of the medical record for Resident #61 revealed an admission date of 06/01/22 with diagnoses including but not limited to Parkinson's disease, dementia, chronic kidney disease, and depression. Review of Resident #61's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #61 had impaired cognition with a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of two out of possible 15. Resident #61 required assistance from staff for transfers and Resident #61 used a walker and wheelchair for assistance for mobility. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure physician ordered nutritional interventions were implemented for residents with significant weight loss and dietician recommendations were addressed. This affected one resident (Resident #17) of two residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility census was 65.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, interview and policy review the facility failed to ensure non-pharmacologic pain interventions were implemented prior to the administration of as needed pain medication. This affected two residents (#25 and #45) of three residents reviewed for pain management.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure infection control guidelines were maintained during a dressing change. This affected one resident (Resident #47) of one residents observed for dressing changes. The facility census was 65.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of facility assessment, review of concerns logs, review of time sheets, review of facility policy, observation, and interviews the facility failed to ensure adequate nursing staff to ensure residents received medication timely and failed to provide adequate supervision. This affected five residents (#20, #23, #26, #32, and #51) of six residents reviewed for medication administration and one resident (#66) of two residents reviewed on the secure unit with the potential to affect all 72 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the Payroll Base Journal (PBJ) Staffing Data Report and interview the facility failed to submit staffing information to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) timely. This had the potential to affect all 72 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure medication carts were properly secured and medication were properly stored and labeled. This had the potential to affect 11 residents (#1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10, #11) of 11 residents residing on 100 hall and 40 residents (#12, #13, #14, #15, #16, #17, #18, #19, #20, #21, #22, #23, #24, #25, #26, #27, #28, #29, #30, #31, #32, #33, #34, #35, #36, #37, #38, #39, #40, #41, #42, #43, #44, #45, #46, #47, #48, #49, #50, and #51) of 40 residents residing on 200 hall. The facility census was 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of self-reported incident (SRI), review of the facility investigation, interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure all allegations of resident abuse was reported immediately to the administrator and to the state survey agency. This affected two residents (#66, #70) of four residents reviewed for abuse.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of a self-reported incident (SRI) and investigation, and interview the facility failed to ensure a dependent resident was provided adequate oral hygiene. This affected one resident (#36) of one resident reviewed for neglect.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of self-reported incident (SRI), review of the facility's investigation, interview, and policy review the facility failed to timely assess, monitor, and report weight gain. This affected one resident (#70) of three residents reviewed for falls and one resident (#20) three residents reviewed nutrition.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of hospital notes, review of wound clinic notes, and interviews, the facility failed to comprehensively assess and provide treatment as ordered to a resident foot. This affected one resident (#2) of three residents reviewed for skin alterations.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure safety measures were implemented to prevent resident injuries. This affected one resident (#34) of three residents reviewed for accidents. Findings Include: Review of the medical record for Resident #34 revealed an admission date 08/07/24. Diagnoses included diabetes mellitus, respiratory failure with hypoxia, chronic kidney disease, heart failure, dysphagia, and other feeding difficulties. Review of the physician orders dated 06/10/25 revealed wound care for left leg to be cleansed with normal saline, apply skin prep and leave upon to air. Monitor steri strips and allow them to fall off on their own. Review of the wound evaluation dated 12/10/24 revealed new skin tear to right lateral calf noted measuring 3.4 centimeter (cm) by 2.8 cm by 0.2 cm. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, it was determined the facility failed to treat Urinary Tract Infections (UTI) in a timely manner for all residents. This affected one resident (#34) of one resident (Resident #34) for UTI. Findings Include: Review of the medical record for Resident #34 revealed an admission date 08/07/24. Diagnoses included diabetes mellitus, respiratory failure with hypoxia, chronic kidney disease, heart failure, dysphagia, and other feeding difficulties. Resident #34 had intact cognition. Review of the quarterly Minimum data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #34 had intact cognition. Resident #34 was dependent on transfers and had frequent incontinence of bowel and bladder. Review of the progress note dated 06/04/25 at 8:00 A.M. revealed the Nurse Practitioner (NP) #300 saw Resident #34. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of Medscape, observation, interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure the facility medication error rate was not greater than five percent. The facility had five medication errors out of 28 opportunities resulting in a medication error rate of 17.8%. This affected two residents (#20 and #49) of three residents observed for medication administration.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, interview, observation, and policy review the facility failed to ensure residents were free from significant medication errors. This affected one resident (#49) of three residents reviewed for medication administration and one resident (#34) of three residents reviewed for urinary tract infections (UTI).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure all residents had required assistive device available during meal times. This affected one resident (#34) of one resident that was reviewed for assistive devices. Findings Include: Review of the medical record for Resident #34 revealed an admission date 08/07/24. Diagnoses included diabetes mellitus, respiratory failure with hypoxia, chronic kidney disease, heart failure, dysphagia, and other feeding difficulties. Resident #34 had intact cognition. Review of physician orders for June 2025 revealed regular diet, regular texture and thin consistency for liquids. Divided plate, Kennedy cup (cup with handles and lid) and built-up utensils for all meals as tolerated dated 11/26/24. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure medication administration was accurately documented on the medication administration record (MAR). This affected one resident (#49) of three residents reviewed for medication administration.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure enhanced barrier precaution (EBP) were maintained during resident care and failed to ensure infection control practices were maintained during medication administration. This affected one resident (#4) of 72 residents observed during the tour and one resident (#49) of three residents observed for medication administration.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide appropriate assistance and follow care planned interventions for Resident #48 to prevent a fall with an injury. The facility failed to complete a fall investigation and neurological checks as ordered for Resident #29 and failed to ensure appropriate interventions were in place to prevent Resident #37 from leaving the secured unit. Actual harm occurred on 04/03/24 when Resident #48, who was severely cognitively impaired sustained a fall and fractured left hip when ambulating wearing inappropriate footwear and without her walker. At the time of the incident, staff told the resident to go put shoes on but failed to provide any additional intervention or assistance to prevent the fall with injury. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and medical record review the facility failed to ensure residents #16, #18, #40, and #59, had comprehensive care plans that addressed activity of daily living (ADL), wandering behaviors, and contracture. This affected four residents (#16, #18, #40, and #59) of 22 residents whose care plans were reviewed. The facility census was 69.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to appropriately document, revise, and implement care plans, and appropriately address Resident #35's dementia related behaviors. This affected one (Resident #35) of five residents reviewed for dementia and had the potential to affect all 12 residents on the memory care unit. The facility census was 69.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure pureed food items were an appropriate texture, requiring surveyor intervention. This affected six residents (Residents #6, #9, 11, #16, #49 and #320) who had an ordered pureed diet. The facility census was 69. Findings Include: Observations completed on 06/18/24 from 4:02 P.M. to 4:37 P.M. with Dining Services Assistant (DSA) #123 of pureed swiss steak revealed the facility had six residents on an ordered pureed diet and the cook would be preparing seven servings of swiss steak. DSA #123 washed his hands with soap and water at the sink and donned clean gloves. DSA #123 added seven whole swiss steak patties to the puree blender at 4:06 P.M. At 4:08 P.M., DSA #123 added one cup and one teaspoon of beef base and added ¼ teaspoon and ½ teaspoon of thickener to the swiss steak. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to follow appropriate hand hygiene and glove use during dinner meal service. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure prepared food temperatures were taken prior to delivering the foods to be served to the residents who resided on the Memory Care Unit (Residents #5, #18, #34, #35, #37, #42, #43, #48, #51, #59, #60, and #174). This had the potential to affect a total of 68 residents who resided in the facility and received foods from the kitchen. The facility had one resident (Resident #21) on an ordered nothing by mouth (NPO) diet. Findings Include: Observations of food temperatures with [NAME] #123 were attempted on 06/18/24 at 4:55 P.M. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, medical record review, and interviews the facility failed to have enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) in place for Resident #58, #63, #171, and #371. This affected four (Resident #58, #63, #171, and #371) out of eight residents reviewed for enhanced barrier precautions. Also, the facility failed to follow contact isolation precaution procedures. This affected one (Resident #2) of five residents reviewed for infection control. The census was 69.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, review of medical records, and facility policy review, the facility failed to report potential abuse between Resident #35 and #37 to the state agency. This affected two residents (#35 and #37) of three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 69.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews the facility failed to have an initial care conference in a timely manner for Resident #53. This affected one (Resident #53) out of one reviewed for care planning. Facility census was 69.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview the facility failed to provide a discharge summary when Resident #66 was discharged . This affected one (Resident #66) out of two residents reviewed for discharge. Facility census was 69.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to provide Resident #53 with bathing as scheduled and per Resident #53's preference. This affected one (Resident #53) out of three reviewed for assistance with activities of daily living. Facility census was 69.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident and staff interviews, medical record review, review of hospital records, and review of invoices for wound care equipment, the facility failed to ensure one resident's (Resident #63) wound vac and supplies were received prior to admission. This affected one resident (Resident #63) of one reviewed for medical equipment. The facility census was 69. Findings Include: Review of the medical record for Resident #63 revealed an admission date on 05/28/24 at 5:12 P.M. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to timely identify, accurately assess, and timely treat one resident's (Resident #9) pressure ulcer areas of her right heel and ankle. This affected one resident (Resident #9) of two residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility census was 69. Findings Include: Review of the closed medical record for Resident #9 revealed an admission date on 02/02/23 and a discharge date of 06/22/24. Medical diagnoses included Alzheimer's Disease, Type II Diabetes Mellitus with unspecified complications, mixed receptive-expressive language disorder, difficulty in walking, unsteadiness on feet, generalized weakness, cognitive communication deficit, and need for assistance with personal care. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure orders were in place for Resident #171 who had a catheter. This affected one resident (#171) of one resident reviewed for catheters. The facility census was 69.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to timely address all pharmacy recommendations. This affected one (Resident #31) of five residents reviewed for medication administration. The census was 69. Findings Include: Resident #31 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses were Parkinson's disease, psychosis, hypertensive heart disease, chronic kidney disease (stage III), heart failure, old myocardial infarction, osteoarthritis, syncope and collapse, major depressive disorder, hyperlipidemia, hypomagnesemia, hypokalemia, mild cognitive impairment, anxiety disorder, dysphagia, cognitive communication deficit, and pain in right shoulder. Review of her minimum data set (MDS) assessment, dated 03/31/24, revealed she was cognitively intact. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to timely address all pharmacy recommendations. This affected one (Resident #31) of five residents reviewed for medication administration. The census was 69. Findings Include: Resident #31 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses were Parkinson's disease, psychosis, hypertensive heart disease, chronic kidney disease (stage III), heart failure, old myocardial infarction, osteoarthritis, syncope and collapse, major depressive disorder, hyperlipidemia, hypomagnesemia, hypokalemia, mild cognitive impairment, anxiety disorder, dysphagia, cognitive communication deficit, and pain in right shoulder. Review of her minimum data set (MDS) assessment, dated 03/31/24, revealed she was cognitively intact. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to keep accurate medical records for two residents (Residents #9 and #48). This affected two residents (Residents #9 and #48) of 21 residents reviewed in the sample. The facility census was 69.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive and individualized pain management program to provide adequate pain control for Resident #35. Actual harm occurred on 06/21/22 when Resident #35, who received Hospice services for terminal Parkinson's Disease, complained of continued, unrelieved pain despite scheduled and as needed narcotic pain medication doses, exhibited by verbal complaints of pain and moaning. The facility failed to comprehensively assess the resident's pain and notify Hospice services and/or the primary care physician regarding the resident's increased pain resulting in the resident being very restless and unable to get adequate rest due to increased pain despite additional dosages of as needed pain medication. This affected one resident (#35) of one resident reviewed for pain. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on personal funds record review, interview and facility policy and procedure review the facility failed to ensure residents and/or representatives were notified timely and aware of the need to spend-down personal funds once the account balance reached/exceeded the maximum resource limit. This affected two residents (#13 and #38) of five current residents reviewed for facility-managed funds. The facility managed 39 resident personal funds accounts. The total census was 71.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to notify Resident #6's representative when the resident experienced a skin tear on the arm requiring treatment. This affected one resident (#6) of 21 sampled residents reviewed for notification.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure an allegation of rape, involving Resident #9 was thoroughly investigated and included written details of the total circumstances of the allegation being made. This affected one resident (#9 of three residents reviewed in facility self-reported incidents (SRIs).
Inspectors wroteBased on closed record review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #70 was provided a notice of the facility bed hold policy prior to a hospital transfer. This affected one resident (#70) of one resident reviewed for hospitalization.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview the facility failed to develop a comprehensive psychotropic plan of care identifying target behaviors related to the use of antipsychotic, anti-anxiety and antidepressant medications for Resident #50. This affected one resident (#50) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medication use.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure non-pressure related wound care was provided for a surgical wound for Resident #168 and a skin tear for Resident #6 as ordered. This affected two residents (#6 and #168) of two residents reviewed for non-pressure skin conditions.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to adequately assess a pressure ulcer for Resident #67 to identify the proper stage of the ulcer. This affected one resident (#67) of two residents reviewed for pressure ulcers.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure fall prevention interventions were implemented as planned for Resident #14 and Resident #51 to decrease the residents' risk of falls. This affected two residents (#14 and #51) of four residents reviewed for falls.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #49's weights were obtained as recommended by the dietician to adequately monitor the resident's nutritional status and to identify a significant weight loss in a timely manner. This affected one resident (#49) of three residents reviewed for nutrition.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, facility policy and procedure review and interview the facility failed to identify and/or monitor and measure specific targeted behaviors, perform Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) testing and/or complete gradual dose reductions as required for the use of psychotropic medication to ensure psychotropic medications were justified and administered at the lowest effective dose for each resident. This affected three residents (#41, #50 and #51) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medication use. The facility identified 55 residents who received psychoactive medications. The facility census was 71.
11 fire safety citations on file: 2 on July 29, 2025, 5 on June 25, 2024, 4 on June 28, 2022.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| July 13, 2026 | Fine | $43,435 |
| July 29, 2025 | Fine | $37,229 |
| June 25, 2024 | Fine | $16,801 |
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) | 3.73 | 3.69 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.22 | 0.64 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.43 | 3.28 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.42 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.09 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | not reported | 48.7% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | not reported | 43.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | not reported |
CMS expects 4.35 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 3.85 on weekdays and 3.43 on weekends, 11% 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 3.28 in April to June 2025 to 3.73 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 | 3.73 | 0.22 | 3.85 | 3.43 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 72 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.70 | 0.25 | 3.88 | 3.24 | 0.0% | 2 of 92 | 71 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.74 | 0.27 | 3.90 | 3.34 | 0.0% | 2 of 92 | 70 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.28 | 0.31 | 3.36 | 3.07 | 0.0% | 2 of 91 | 72 |
| 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.
| 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 | 3.4 | 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 | 8.0 | 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 | 2.5 | 6.1 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.0 | 3.4 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.5 | 8.8 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 25.3 | 24.9 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 15.7 | 12.9 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.8 | 1.7 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.7 | 1.8 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for The Oaks Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it better than the national rate (59.5% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
59.5% this home
Better than 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. 157 eligible stays.
13.5% 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. 163 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. 113 eligible stays.
57.1% 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. 84 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. 106 residents counted.
1.0% 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. 106 residents counted.
97.4% this home
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. 39 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: TRILOGY HEALTHCARE OF MUSKINGUM, LLC. CMS links this home to Trilogy Health Services, a group of 127 nursing homes averaging 4.2 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Continental Merger Sub LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10/01/2021 | |
| Northstar Healthcare Income Inc | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10/01/2021 | |
| Northstar Healthcare Income Operating Partnership LP | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10/01/2021 | |
| Trilogy Holdings Nt-Hci, LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 10/01/2021 | |
| Corbin, Kathy | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 02/25/2011 | |
| Fightmaster, Lisa | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 12/01/2015 | |
| Barney, Leigh | Corporate officer | Individual | 11/01/2019 | |
| Bryant, William | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/05/2016 | |
| Bufford, Randall | Corporate officer | Individual | 11/01/2019 | |
| Conner, Gregory | Corporate officer | Individual | 06/03/2021 | |
| Davis, David | Corporate officer | Individual | 08/21/2017 | |
| Mehaffey, Todd | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/31/2022 | |
| Pietrowski, Cristina | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/31/2022 | |
| Prosky, Danny | Corporate officer | Individual | 11/01/2019 | |
| Streiff, Mathieu | Corporate officer | Individual | 11/01/2019 | |
| Trilogy Management Services LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 10/01/2021 | |
| Guthrie, Megan | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/21/2020 |
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.