1965 E Gypsy Lane Rd, Bowling Green, OH 43402 · Wood County · (419) 353-8411
93 certified beds, about 82 residents a day · Government - County · Medicare and Medicaid since 1980
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 365458 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on April 9, 2026, inspectors cited 7 health deficiencies (the Ohio average is 10.5, the national average 9.2).
None of its 29 health citations since November 2019 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.71 hours per resident per day, against 3.69 across Ohio and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.49 of those hours.
48.8% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Ohio average 48.7%).
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 29 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the medical record, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure adequate monitoring for psychotropic medication effectiveness, side effects, and adverse effects. This affected five (#1, #11, #12, #44, and #62) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 83.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure routine monitoring was implemented for mechanical lift slings and stand assist devices in the facility. This had the potential to affect 31 (#3, #15, #23, #34, #74, #83, #30, #43, #80, #9, #31, #63, #29, #12, #54, #61, #72, #25 #11, #13, #17, #32, #40, #44, #47, #51, #56, #61, #72, #78 and #81) that the facility identified as requiring the use of a mechanical lift slings or stand assist devices. The facility census was 83.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, staff interview, resident interview, review of manufacturer's instructions, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure mechanical lift slings were monitored and inspected per the manufacturer's instructions. This affected six (#83, #34, #15, #74, #23 and #3) and had the potential to affect 13 other residents (#11, #13, #17, #32, #40, #44, #47, #51, #56, #61, #72, #78 and #81) who the facility identified as requiring the use of a mechanical lift with slings for transfer. The facility census was 83.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a thorough investigation was completed when an allegation of verbal abuse and neglect was reported. This affected one (#95) of one resident reviewed for verbal abuse and neglect. The facility census was 83.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy the facility failed to complete a Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) level II following a new diagnosis of schizophrenia. This affected one (#12) of one resident reviewed for PASRR level II. The facility census was 83.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interviews, and review of manufacturer guidelines, the facility failed to maintain and inspect resident transfer equipment to ensure safe transfers. This affected one (#80) of three residents reviewed for falls. The facility census was 83.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, review of the medical record, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to administer oxygen at the correct rate. This affected one resident (#15) reviewed for oxygen. The facility identified 11 residents (#1, #2, #13, #15, #19, #21, #40 #50, #57, #65, and #84) that required the use of oxygen. The facility census was 83.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure accurate assessments were completed. This affected one (#65) of three residents reviewed for assessments. The facility census was 76.
Inspectors wroteReview of the medical record for Resident #19 revealed an admission date of 07/12/25 with diagnoses including, but not limited, to seborrheic dermatitis, pressure ulcer of sacral region stage three (full thickness to fat), pressure ulcer of right buttock stage three, pressure ulcer of left buttock stage three, and paraplegia. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 12/02/25, revealed the resident was cognitively intact. Resident #19 had two stage three pressure ulcers that were present on admission. Review of the care plan dated 07/16/25 revealed the resident had two stage three pressure ulcers upon admission and dermatitis/fungal infection related to disease processes- paraplegic, non-compliant with care and getting up out of bed. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, resident interview, staff interview and review of facility policy the facility failed to ensure residents were free from abuse. This affected one resident (#10) of two residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 71.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interviews, resident interviews, record review, and facility policy review revealed facility staff failed to report an allegation of abuse. This affected two residents (#10 and #11) of two residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 71.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, nurse practitioner interview, family interview, and review of facility policy revealed the facility failed to follow documented medication orders in resident records. This affected one (#84) resident of three residents reviewed for medication orders. The facility census was 71.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, record review, review of the facility's incident reports, and review of the facility's policies, the facility failed to complete thorough investigations into wandering/elopement and fall incidents. This affected one (#11) of two residents reviewed for elopement and one (#11) of three residents reviewed for falls. The facility census was 76.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, resident, resident representative, and staff interviews, record reviews, review of resident council notes, review of staff schedules, and review of facility policies, the facility failed to ensure there was sufficient nursing staff to meet the resident care needs. This affected three residents (#10, #34, and #45), and had the potential to affect all 74 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure foods were properly sealed, labeled, and dated in the freezer and failed to maintain the refrigerator and freezer in a sanitary condition. This had the potential to affect all 74 residents identified by the facility as reviewing food from the kitchen. The facility census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, resident and staff interviews, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure call lights were answered timely and the residents requiring assistance had access to call lights. This affected four (#10, #22, #54, and #60) of four residents reviewed for call lights. The facility census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, resident interview, resident representative interview ,staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure residents received their choice of showers or bed baths. This affected two (#34 and #54) of two residents reviewed for choices. The facility census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, staff and resident interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed implement the facility policy for self-medication administration for Resident #76 and further failed to obtain physician orders for the medications being self-administered by Resident #76. This affected one (Resident #76) of three residents reviewed for choices. The facility census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff and resident interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan to address a resident's psychosocial needs. This affected one (Resident #37) of four residents reviewed for care planning. The facility census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observations, resident representative and staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a resident received activities upon the preference of the resident and choices of activities. This affected one (Resident #54) of one resident reviewed for activities. The facility census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, staff and resident interviews, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to provide care and services to assist a resident to maintain hearing devices. This affected one resident (Resident #55) of four residents reviewed for vision and hearing. The facility census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, resident and staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to provide timely assistance to prevent a fall with injury and failed to complete a thorough fall investigation. This affected one (Resident #45) of five residents reviewed for falls. The facility census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure the care and management for an indwelling urinary catheter for Resident #40. This affected one (Resident #40) of three resident reviewed for having an indwelling urinary catheter. The facility identified 10 residents with indwelling or external catheters. The facility census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, staff and resident interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a resident received mental health services and psychiatric services per physician orders to attain the highest practicable mental well-being. This affected one resident (Resident #37) of one resident reviewed for mental health. The facility census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure medications were dated when opened and medications were used within the expiration date, and failed to store medications in a locked compartment. This affected two of three medications carts reviewed and one of two medication storage rooms. This affected one (Resident #26) of 21 residents observed for the physical environment. The facility census was 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview, resident interview and review of the facility bowel protocol, the facility failed to monitor for bowel movements and failed to administered as needed laxatives as ordered. This affected one (Resident #26) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 73.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview and policy review, the failed to ensure restorative range of motion was provided as ordered. This affected one (Resident #49) of two residents reviewed for positioning. The facility identified 24 residents with restorative programs in the last 60 days. The facility census was 73.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview and policy review, the facility failed to monitor the dialysis vascular access for function. This affected one (Resident #26) of five residents that receive dialysis. The facility census was 73.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure staffing was accurately posted in a prominent location for residents/visitors to review. This had the potentially to affect all 73 residents residing in the facility at the time of the annual survey. Facility census was 73.
21 fire safety citations on file: 2 on April 9, 2026, 16 on March 30, 2023, 3 on November 26, 2019.
CMS lists no fines or payment denials against this home in the last three years. The national average is 0.9 fines per home.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | Ohio | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.71 | 3.69 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.49 | 0.64 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.23 | 3.28 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.20 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.02 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 48.8% | 48.7% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 30.0% | 43.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.82 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 3.91 on weekdays and 3.23 on weekends, 17% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 14.4% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.80 in April to June 2025 to 3.71 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 | 3.71 | 0.49 | 3.91 | 3.23 | 14.4% | 0 of 90 | 82 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.72 | 0.53 | 3.91 | 3.26 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 77 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.75 | 0.54 | 3.96 | 3.22 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 78 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.80 | 0.57 | 4.04 | 3.21 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 74 |
| 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 | 2.4 | 5.3 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.2 | 3.2 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.6 | 6.1 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.4 | 3.4 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.0 | 8.8 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 18.3 | 24.9 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 5.4 | 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 | 1.6 | 1.8 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Wood Haven Health Care Senior Living & Rehab's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (56.5% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
56.5% 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. 117 eligible stays.
10.5% 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. 125 eligible stays.
6.0% 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. 63 eligible stays.
53.7% 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. 41 residents counted.
2.2% 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. 46 residents counted.
7.4% 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. 46 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. 11 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: WOOD COUNTY AUDITOR.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wood County Auditor | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 02/01/1971 |
| Orlowski, Jeff | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/26/2014 | |
| Orlowski, Jeff | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/09/2025 |
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.