HENNIS CARE CENTRE OF DOVER
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Hennis Care Centre of Dover has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the quality of care provided. They rank #698 out of 913 nursing homes in Ohio, placing them in the bottom half of facilities in the state, and #8 out of 10 in Tuscarawas County, meaning only two local options are worse. Although the facility is improving, with reported issues decreasing from 5 in 2024 to 3 in 2025, they still have a high number of total issues, totaling 52, which includes a critical incident involving improper medication management that posed life-threatening risks. Staffing is rated at 2 out of 5 stars, with a turnover rate of 56%, which is average for Ohio, but the facility does boast good RN coverage, exceeding that of 96% of other homes. However, the concerning $154,504 in fines suggests serious compliance problems, and there have been specific incidents, such as inadequate food storage conditions and HVAC failures that could affect resident comfort and safety.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Ohio
- #698/913
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 56% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $154,504 in fines. Lower than most Ohio facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 49 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Ohio. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 52 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Below Ohio average (3.2)
Below average - review inspection findings carefully
Near Ohio avg (46%)
Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity
Well above median ($33,413)
Significant penalties indicating serious issues
8 points above Ohio average of 48%
The Ugly 52 deficiencies on record
Apr 2025
3 deficiencies
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** Based on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to provide a dignified dining experience for Resident #2...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Assessments
(Tag F0636)
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 Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual review, the facility failed to accurate...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure infection control practices were follo...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2024
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
Room Equipment
(Tag F0908)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to maintain a permanent operational and functional Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) system and failed to ensure ne...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2024
4 deficiencies
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
Based on record review, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents representatives were informed of changes in condition including new skin impairments. This affected two re...
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
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, review of the facility standing orders, and interview, the facility failed to provide appropriate treatm...
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 F0713
(Tag F0713)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review, Physician Communication Book review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure physician services responded to facility requests for resident care 24 hours a day. This affec...
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
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, policy review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure infection control practices wer...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2023
4 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
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on closed medical record review, review of hospital records, review of an ambulance run report, facility policy review, in...
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
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, medical record review, resident grievance/complaint forms review, staff education review, and interviews t...
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
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, medical record review, interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure comprehensive pressure u...
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 F0921)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, photograph review and interviews the facility failed to ensure resident rooms were sanitary and in good repair. This affected eight residents residing in six rooms (Resident #4, ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2023
24 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Transfer Requirements
(Tag F0622)
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 provide evidence in the medical record to support the receiving prov...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Assessments
(Tag F0636)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review, interview, and review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) manual the facility failed to ensure an annual comprehensive MDS assessment was completed timely. This affected one (Residen...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0638
(Tag F0638)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, interview and review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) manual, the facility failed to ensure a quarterly MDS...
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 record review and interview the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessments were accurate. Thi...
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 review of the medical record and staff interview the facility failed to ensure a new Preadmission Screening and Residen...
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
2. Review of Resident #20's medical record revealed an admission date of 10/26/22 with diagnoses of atherosclerotic heart disease of native coronary artery without angina pectoris, unspecified severe ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, review of the medical record, staff interview and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure Res...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0679
(Tag F0679)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, record review and policy review the facility failed to provide activities to meet the residents' needs, and did not provide a scheduled activity calendar or activities...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of the medical record, observation, staff interviews and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure R...
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 observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure falls risk interventions were consistently im...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to obtain an order for oxygen administration for Reside...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0698
(Tag F0698)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review an interview, the facility failed to assess a fistula for dialysis access. This affected one (Resident #13) of one resident reviewed for dialysis. The facility identified three ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0700
(Tag F0700)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record review and policy review the facility failed to ensure residents were assessed for the r...
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
Based on medical record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident #26 did not receive excessive doses of antibiotics. This affected one (Resident #26) of two residents reviewed for ...
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
Based on observation and staff interview the facility failed to ensure ophthalmic (eye drops) medication was dated as to when opened and discarded after eight weeks. This affected one of 10 residents ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Review of Resident #57's record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses of vascular d...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Antibiotic Stewardship
(Tag F0881)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, interview and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure sufficient information was obtained p...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0558
(Tag F0558)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 4. Review of Resident #29's medical record revealed an admission date of 05/11/20 with the diagnoses of anxiety disorder, chroni...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
MDS Data Transmission
(Tag F0640)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure minimum data set (MDS) assessments were completed and submitted within required timeframes. This affected 10 (Resident's #1, #4, #9,...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. Review of Resident #5's medical record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses of wedge compre...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0805
(Tag F0805)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview and facility policy review the facility failed to provide food in a form to meet the nutritional needs of residents. This had the potential to affect eight 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 observation, interview, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure food was stored under sanitary conditions. This had the potential to 67 residents receiving food from the faci...
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 review of Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) meeting sign in sheets and interview, the facility failed to ensure the Medical Director or his designee attended quarterly meetings. This had...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, interview, and policy review the facility failed to provide notification to the ombudsman regarding tran...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2022
2 deficiencies
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 and record review, the facility failed to notify Resident #79's emergency contact in a timely manner, after R...
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
MDS Data Transmission
(Tag F0640)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure minimum data set (MDS) assessments for Resident #67 and Resident #79's were completed and submitted within required timeframes. This...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2020
14 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0553
(Tag F0553)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review, interview and policy review the facility failed to ensure Resident #64 was provided the right to participate in the development and implementation of her person-centered plan o...
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, interview and policy review the facility failed to ensure Advanced Directives were consistent between fa...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0582
(Tag F0582)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #15 and Resident #117, remaining in the facility received the required liability notices once Medicare Part A services ended...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, staff interview and policy review the facility failed to ensure Resident #53 and Resident #108's wheelchairs were maintained in a clean and sanitary manner. This affected two res...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
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 Resident #53, #107 and #108, who required ...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure pressure ulcer treatments and/or pressure reveal...
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** Based on observation, record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were re-weighed ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0698
(Tag F0698)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review, interview and policy review the facility failed to ensure weights, fluid restriction monitoring and access site assessments were completed for Resident #59 related to hemodialy...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, interview and policy review the facility failed to ensure proper infection control practices were maintained following perineal care for Resident #56 to prevent th...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Antibiotic Stewardship
(Tag F0881)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review, interview and policy review the facility failed to ensure Resident #16, who received antibiotics for urinary tract infections was comprehensively assessed to determine appropri...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Review of Resident #64's medical record revealed and admission date of [DATE] with diagnoses which included heart disease, ch...
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 observation and staff interview the facility failed to ensure the kitchen was maintained in a clean and sanitary manner to prevent contamination. This had the potential to affect 114 of 114 r...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
MDS Data Transmission
(Tag F0640)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 assessment were submitte...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Staffing Information
(Tag F0732)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on review of the daily nursing postings, interview and policy review the facility failed to ensure the daily nursing posting was accurate and included all required information. This had the pote...
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?"
- "Why is there high staff turnover? How do you retain staff?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s), $154,504 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 52 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $154,504 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in Ohio. Major compliance failures.
- • Grade F (18/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Hennis Care Centre Of Dover's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns HENNIS CARE CENTRE OF DOVER an overall rating of 2 out of 5 stars, which is considered below average nationally. Within Ohio, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. A rating at this level reflects concerns identified through health inspections, staffing assessments, or quality measures that families should carefully consider.
How is Hennis Care Centre Of Dover Staffed?
CMS rates HENNIS CARE CENTRE OF DOVER's staffing level at 2 out of 5 stars, which is below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 56%, which is 10 percentage points above the Ohio average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs.
What Have Inspectors Found at Hennis Care Centre Of Dover?
State health inspectors documented 52 deficiencies at HENNIS CARE CENTRE OF DOVER during 2020 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 48 with potential for harm, and 3 minor or isolated issues. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates Hennis Care Centre Of Dover?
HENNIS CARE CENTRE OF DOVER is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 147 certified beds and approximately 73 residents (about 50% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in DOVER, Ohio.
How Does Hennis Care Centre Of Dover Compare to Other Ohio Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Ohio, HENNIS CARE CENTRE OF DOVER's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (56%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Hennis Care Centre Of Dover?
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?" "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "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?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations, the facility's high staff turnover rate, and the below-average staffing rating.
Is Hennis Care Centre Of Dover Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, HENNIS CARE CENTRE OF DOVER 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 2-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 Hennis Care Centre Of Dover Stick Around?
Staff turnover at HENNIS CARE CENTRE OF DOVER is high. At 56%, the facility is 10 percentage points above the Ohio average of 46%. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?
Was Hennis Care Centre Of Dover Ever Fined?
HENNIS CARE CENTRE OF DOVER has been fined $154,504 across 4 penalty actions. This is 4.5x the Ohio average of $34,624. 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 Hennis Care Centre Of Dover on Any Federal Watch List?
HENNIS CARE CENTRE OF DOVER 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.