LAURELS OF BLANCHESTER, THE
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
The Laurels of Blanchester has earned a Trust Grade of A, which means it is excellent and highly recommended. It ranks #101 out of 913 nursing homes in Ohio, placing it in the top half of facilities in the state, and #2 out of 4 in Clinton County, indicating only one other local option is better. The facility is improving, having reduced its issues from one in 2023 to none in 2025. Staffing is rated average with a turnover rate of 22%, which is well below the Ohio average of 49%, suggesting a stable workforce. Notably, there have been no fines, which is a positive sign, although there are concerns regarding care planning; for instance, one resident did not have regular care conferences, which could impact their care. Overall, while the facility has strong ratings and a stable staff, families should be aware of some procedural concerns that need attention.
- Trust Score
- A
- In Ohio
- #101/913
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ✓ Good
- 22% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 26 points below Ohio's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Ohio facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ○ Average
- Each resident gets 35 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Ohio. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 18 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Low Staff Turnover (22%) · Staff stability means consistent care
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover is low (22%)
26 points below Ohio average of 48%
Facility shows strength in quality measures, staff retention, fire safety.
The Bad
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 18 deficiencies on record
May 2023
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Notification of Changes
(Tag F0580)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to notify resident representatives about significant c...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2022
9 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0637
(Tag F0637)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review ,staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a significant change Minimum ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
MDS Data Transmission
(Tag F0640)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to complete and transmit a resident's discharge Minimum Data Set...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0646
(Tag F0646)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to notify the state mental health authority of a change ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on staff interview, observation, resident interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident with a pressure ulcer receives the necessary treatment and services to promote hea...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0757
(Tag F0757)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on medical record review, facility policy, interview, and review of the facility procedure guide, the facility failed to m...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Unnecessary Medications
(Tag F0759)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, and staff interview the facility failed to ensure that its medication error rate was less than five percent when they failed to administer senna (laxative medicati...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0919
(Tag F0919)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's call light was functioning....
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Review of the medical record for Resident #18 revealed an admission date of 04/29/21 with diagnoses including type two diabet...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Drug Regimen Review
(Tag F0756)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. Review of Resident # 19's medical record revealed an admission date of 01/21/22. Diagnoses included but are not limited to th...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2019
8 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0578
(Tag F0578)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's advanced directive was accurate. ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the resident's representative received written transfe...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's assessment was coded correctly. T...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
PASARR Coordination
(Tag F0644)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to timely complete a Preadmission Screening/Resident Review (PAS...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents had a complete and accurate plan of care. Th...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Review of Resident #42's medical record revealed an admission date of 02/28/18 with diagnoses including Alzheimer's Disease, ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a physician's order was obtained for a self-releasing seatbelt. This affected one (Resident #35) of one resident revie...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to properly store and date food items to prevent contamination and spoilage and failed to ensure proper sanita...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • Grade A (90/100). Above average facility, better than most options in Ohio.
- • No major safety red flags. No abuse findings, life-threatening violations, or SFF status.
- • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Ohio facilities.
- • 22% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 26 points below Ohio's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
- • 18 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
About This Facility
What is Laurels Of Blanchester, The's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns LAURELS OF BLANCHESTER, THE an overall rating of 5 out of 5 stars, which is considered much above average nationally. Within Ohio, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.
How is Laurels Of Blanchester, The Staffed?
CMS rates LAURELS OF BLANCHESTER, THE's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 22%, compared to the Ohio average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Laurels Of Blanchester, The?
State health inspectors documented 18 deficiencies at LAURELS OF BLANCHESTER, THE during 2019 to 2023. These included: 18 with potential for harm.
Who Owns and Operates Laurels Of Blanchester, The?
LAURELS OF BLANCHESTER, THE is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by CIENA HEALTHCARE/LAUREL HEALTH CARE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 50 certified beds and approximately 45 residents (about 90% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in BLANCHESTER, Ohio.
How Does Laurels Of Blanchester, The Compare to Other Ohio Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Ohio, LAURELS OF BLANCHESTER, THE's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (22%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (5 stars) is much above the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Laurels Of Blanchester, The?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?"
Is Laurels Of Blanchester, The Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, LAURELS OF BLANCHESTER, THE has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 5-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Ohio. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.
Do Nurses at Laurels Of Blanchester, The Stick Around?
Staff at LAURELS OF BLANCHESTER, THE tend to stick around. With a turnover rate of 22%, the facility is 23 percentage points below the Ohio average of 46%. Low turnover is a positive sign. It means caregivers have time to learn each resident's needs, medications, and personal preferences. Consistent staff also notice subtle changes in a resident's condition more quickly. Registered Nurse turnover is also low at 14%, meaning experienced RNs are available to handle complex medical needs.
Was Laurels Of Blanchester, The Ever Fined?
LAURELS OF BLANCHESTER, THE has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.
Is Laurels Of Blanchester, The on Any Federal Watch List?
LAURELS OF BLANCHESTER, THE is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.