CHARDON CENTER
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Chardon Center has a Trust Grade of B, which means it is a good choice, indicating solid overall performance. It ranks #40 out of 913 facilities in Ohio, placing it in the top half, and #2 out of 8 in Geauga County, showing it is one of the better local options. However, the facility is experiencing a worsening trend, with reported issues increasing from 2 in 2023 to 3 in 2025. Staffing is a mixed bag; while the turnover rate of 35% is good and lower than the state average, the staffing rating is only 2 out of 5 stars, indicating below-average performance. There have been some concerning incidents at the facility, including a serious issue where a resident developed unstageable pressure ulcers due to a failure to complete timely assessments and interventions. Additionally, during a COVID-19 outbreak, staff were found reusing N95 masks, which could impact all residents. Finally, residents reported that food was often served at unappetizing temperatures, affecting their meal experience. Overall, while there are strengths in staffing stability and overall quality, these weaknesses raise important questions for families considering this nursing home.
- Trust Score
- B
- In Ohio
- #40/913
- Safety Record
- Moderate
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 35% turnover. Near Ohio's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $6,500 in fines. Lower than most Ohio facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 20 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Ohio. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 16 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (35%)
13 points below Ohio average of 48%
Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
11pts below Ohio avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 16 deficiencies on record
Apr 2025
3 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0583
(Tag F0583)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on medical record review, observation, staff interview and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure staff knocked on Resident #21's room door and/or asked permission to enter...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure Residents #67, #189 and #196 were pr...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observations, interviews and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure oxygen tubing ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2023
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(F)
📢 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
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure staff were not re-using N95 masks during a COVID-19 outbreak. This had the potential to affect all 74 resi...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 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
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observations and interviews the facility failed to provide a dignified existence for all residents. This...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2019
11 deficiencies
1 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure timely assessments were completed and adequate ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0559
(Tag F0559)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, interview and policy review, the facility failed to provide written notification of room changes to Resident #29 prior to conducting the room changes. This affecte...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure Resident #10 and Resident #29 were free from ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Abuse Prevention Policies
(Tag F0607)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review, interview and policy review, the facility failed to implement the policy and procedure for reporting alleged physical abuse for Resident #29. This affected one Resident (#29) o...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review, interview and policy review, the facility failed to report alleged physical abuse for Resident #29. This affected one Resident (#29) of three residents reviewed for abuse and n...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Investigate Abuse
(Tag F0610)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, interview and policy review, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate a physical abuse incident inv...
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, interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0645
(Tag F0645)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a valid Pre-admission Screen and Resident Review (PASRR) was...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0660
(Tag F0660)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure Resident #52 had a current discharge plan of care and failed...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure Resident #52 was wearing a wander/elopement alarm per physician's order. This affected one (Resident #52) of two (Resid...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0804
(Tag F0804)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on record review, observation and interviews, the facility did not ensure foods were served at palatable temperatures. This had the potential to affect all residents in the facility except for o...
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
- • 35% turnover. Below Ohio's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • 16 deficiencies on record, including 1 serious (caused harm) violation. Ask about corrective actions taken.
About This Facility
What is Chardon Center's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns CHARDON CENTER 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 Chardon Center Staffed?
CMS rates CHARDON CENTER's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 35%, compared to the Ohio average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care. RN turnover specifically is 62%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.
What Have Inspectors Found at Chardon Center?
State health inspectors documented 16 deficiencies at CHARDON CENTER during 2019 to 2025. These included: 1 that caused actual resident harm and 15 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Chardon Center?
CHARDON CENTER 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 COMMUNICARE HEALTH, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 99 certified beds and approximately 84 residents (about 85% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in CHARDON, Ohio.
How Does Chardon Center Compare to Other Ohio Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Ohio, CHARDON CENTER's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (35%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Chardon Center?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "Can you walk me through typical staffing levels on day, evening, and night shifts?" "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?" These questions are particularly relevant given the below-average staffing rating.
Is Chardon Center Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, CHARDON CENTER 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 Chardon Center Stick Around?
CHARDON CENTER has a staff turnover rate of 35%, which is about average for Ohio nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.
Was Chardon Center Ever Fined?
CHARDON CENTER has been fined $6,500 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Ohio average of $33,144. While any fine indicates a compliance issue, fines under $50,000 are relatively common and typically reflect isolated problems that were subsequently corrected. Families should ask what specific issues led to these fines and confirm they've been resolved.
Is Chardon Center on Any Federal Watch List?
CHARDON CENTER 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.