BURLINGTON HOUSE REHAB & ALZHEIMER'S CARE CENTER
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Burlington House Rehab & Alzheimer's Care Center has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns and a poor overall performance. Ranking #427 out of 913 facilities in Ohio places them in the top half, while their county rank of #33 out of 70 suggests there are better options nearby. The facility's trend is improving, as issues decreased from seven in 2024 to one in 2025. Staffing is a relative strength, with a rating of 4 out of 5 stars and a turnover rate of 36%, which is below the state average. However, the facility has concerning fines of $109,083, which are higher than 90% of Ohio facilities. Specific incidents include a critical finding where a resident who required extensive assistance for transfers was moved by a single staff member instead of the required two, creating a risk of injury. Additionally, the facility failed to implement necessary care for a resident with pressure ulcers, leading to an advanced stage ulcer that developed during their stay. Another serious incident involved not providing nutritional supplements as recommended, which resulted in significant weight loss for a resident. While there are strengths in staffing and a trend towards improvement, families should weigh these against the facility's serious deficiencies and financial penalties.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Ohio
- #427/913
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 36% turnover. Near Ohio's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ○ Average
- $109,083 in fines. Higher than 51% of Ohio facilities. Some compliance issues.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 55 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Ohio. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 36 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
-
5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (36%)
12 points below Ohio average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Near Ohio average (3.2)
Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities
Near Ohio avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Well above median ($33,413)
Significant penalties indicating serious issues
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 36 deficiencies on record
May 2025
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
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 interview and closed and open record reviews and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident was f...
Read full inspector narrative →
Sept 2024
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
Safe Environment
(Tag F0921)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation and staff the facility failed to ensure a clean and sanitary environment in resident bathrooms. This affected two (Residents #25 and #27) of three residents reviewed for physical ...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2024
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
Incontinence Care
(Tag F0690)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observations, staff interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to provide timely inc...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2024
5 deficiencies
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 medical record review, review of a facility self-reported incident (SRI), observations, staff interviews, review of per...
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 staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a valid Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PA...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0692
(Tag F0692)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Review of the medical record for Resident #33 revealed an admission date of 07/31/21. Diagnoses included the following: Alzhe...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medication Errors
(Tag F0758)
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 review of medication information, the facility failed to ensure residents were free ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0921)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on [NAME] record review, observations, staff interviews, review of facility documents and policy review, the facility fail...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 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
Dental Services
(Tag F0791)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review, observation, resident interview, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a resident received timely assistance with missing dentures. This...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2023
12 deficiencies
1 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3) Review of the medical record for Resident #32 revealed an admission date of [DATE]. Diagnoses included dementia, type two dia...
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, family and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure resident assessments were completed ac...
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** 2. Review of the medical record of Resident #91 revealed an admission date of 01/19/23. Diagnoses included metabolic encephalopa...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on medical record review, staff and family interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents and resid...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Room Equipment
(Tag F0908)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observation, and resident and staff interview, the facility failed to provide timely servicing of the re...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, review of manufacturer recommendations, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure expire...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0801
(Tag F0801)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on record review, observations, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure dietary staff were competent to fulfill their responsibilities. This had the potential to affect 100 residents...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on record review, observations, staff interviews, review of facility policies, and review of manufacturer guidelines, the facility failed to ensure the refrigerator was functioning properly, foo...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0865
(Tag F0865)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to have a developed Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement Plan (QAPI). This had the potential to affect all 101 ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
QAPI Program
(Tag F0867)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to develop and implement action plans to improve performance or address concerns as part of their Quality Assurance and ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0868
(Tag F0868)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to conduct Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) meetings at least quarterly. This had the potential to a...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0944
(Tag F0944)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure all staff were properly trained on the facility's Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) program...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2023
5 deficiencies
1 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review, staff interview, review of facility policy, and review of guidelines from the National Pressure Injury Advisory Panel (NPIAP), the facility failed to implement physician-recomm...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure dependent residents received bathing services per the plan of care. This affected one (#100) o...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
Deficiency F0757
(Tag F0757)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review, observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from unnecessary medications by failing to provide adequate m...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 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
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review, observation, resident and staff interviews, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure resident trash and soiled linen were properly stored. This affected...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 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
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure medications were stored ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2019
10 deficiencies
1 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Deficiency F0692
(Tag F0692)
A resident was harmed · 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 provide nutritional supplementation as recommen...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
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** 2. Review of Resident #7's medical record revealed an admission date of 11/07/17 with diagnoses including Alzheimer's, dementia,...
Read full inspector narrative →
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 record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the resident's advance directives were...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Notification of Changes
(Tag F0580)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to notify a resident's physician when they experienced a significant unplanned weight loss. Thi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0604
(Tag F0604)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from physical restraint imposed to address a behavioral outburst and prevent the resident fr...
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 provide all necessary transfer and discharge notices to three...
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** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to develop, implement, and update the care plan of one re...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observation, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure fall prevention interventions were in p...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff interviews, and manufacturer recommendations, the facility failed to ensure medications were labeled...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to maintain complete and accurate documentation, inclu...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "What changes have you made since the serious inspection findings?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • 36% turnover. Below Ohio's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s), 2 harm violation(s), $109,083 in fines, Payment denial on record. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 36 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $109,083 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in Ohio. Major compliance failures.
- • Grade F (23/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Burlington House Rehab & Alzheimer'S's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns BURLINGTON HOUSE REHAB & ALZHEIMER'S CARE CENTER an overall rating of 3 out of 5 stars, which is considered average nationally. Within Ohio, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This mid-range rating indicates the facility meets federal standards but may have areas for improvement.
How is Burlington House Rehab & Alzheimer'S Staffed?
CMS rates BURLINGTON HOUSE REHAB & ALZHEIMER'S CARE CENTER's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 36%, compared to the Ohio average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Burlington House Rehab & Alzheimer'S?
State health inspectors documented 36 deficiencies at BURLINGTON HOUSE REHAB & ALZHEIMER'S CARE CENTER during 2019 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 2 that caused actual resident harm, and 33 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates Burlington House Rehab & Alzheimer'S?
BURLINGTON HOUSE REHAB & ALZHEIMER'S CARE 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 HEALTH CARE FACILITY MANAGEMENT, LLC, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 122 certified beds and approximately 96 residents (about 79% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in CINCINNATI, Ohio.
How Does Burlington House Rehab & Alzheimer'S Compare to Other Ohio Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Ohio, BURLINGTON HOUSE REHAB & ALZHEIMER'S CARE CENTER's overall rating (3 stars) is below the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (36%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Burlington House Rehab & Alzheimer'S?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "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 facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations.
Is Burlington House Rehab & Alzheimer'S Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, BURLINGTON HOUSE REHAB & ALZHEIMER'S CARE CENTER has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 3-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Ohio. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.
Do Nurses at Burlington House Rehab & Alzheimer'S Stick Around?
BURLINGTON HOUSE REHAB & ALZHEIMER'S CARE CENTER has a staff turnover rate of 36%, 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 Burlington House Rehab & Alzheimer'S Ever Fined?
BURLINGTON HOUSE REHAB & ALZHEIMER'S CARE CENTER has been fined $109,083 across 2 penalty actions. This is 3.2x the Ohio average of $34,170. Fines at this level are uncommon and typically indicate a pattern of serious deficiencies, repeated violations, or failure to correct problems promptly. CMS reserves penalties of this magnitude for facilities that pose significant, documented risk to resident health or safety. Families should request specific documentation of what issues led to these fines and what systemic changes have been implemented.
Is Burlington House Rehab & Alzheimer'S on Any Federal Watch List?
BURLINGTON HOUSE REHAB & ALZHEIMER'S CARE 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.