OhioMinster

Carecore at Minster

24 North Hamilton Street, Minster, OH 45865 · Auglaize County · 83 certified beds · avg 61 residents/day · certified since Jun 18, 1981

3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
2
Serious findings on record
$28,743
Fines, last 3 years
4.33
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5

The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and self-reported quality measures.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Jul 21, 2025 · F-0600 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors.

Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.

Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Jul 22, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Dec 4, 2023 · F-0684 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.

Why it matters: Care that strays from doctor's orders or ignores the resident's wishes can lead to declining health and avoidable harm.

Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Jan 12, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (29)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Sep 18, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Sep 18, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Sep 18, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines.
Sep 18, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required.
Sep 18, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle.
Sep 18, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Sep 18, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail.
Sep 18, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason.
Sep 18, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
Sep 18, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective.
Jul 21, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint
Feb 18, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility's activities program was not run by a qualified professional. The person directing recreation and social activities must have proper training or credentials. · from a complaint
Jan 17, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not properly hold, secure, and manage residents' personal money that was deposited with it for safekeeping. Facilities holding residents' funds must keep careful, honest accounts. · from a complaint
Jul 23, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint
Apr 19, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint
Dec 4, 2023▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint
Dec 4, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · from a complaint
Dec 4, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · from a complaint
Dec 4, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · from a complaint
Jan 12, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Jan 12, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
Jan 12, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable.
Jan 12, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines.
Jan 12, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits.
Jan 12, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.
Jan 12, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide.
Aug 28, 2019F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility's quality committee — the internal group responsible for finding and fixing care problems — did not have the required members or did not meet at least every three months.
Aug 28, 2019F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide.
Aug 28, 2019D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (7 → 10).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
201930F
2023111G ▲
202420E
2025131G ▲

Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.

Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)

1 fine totaling $28,743, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.

DateTypeAmount / length
Jul 21, 2025Fine$28,743
Dec 4, 2023Payment Denial15 days from Dec 28, 2023

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

MeasureThis facilityOhio avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)4.333.453.95top 9% in Ohio; top 28% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.490.600.69bottom 38% in Ohio; bottom 36% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.833.073.50top 9% in Ohio; top 28% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.330.420.48bottom 37% in Ohio; bottom 38% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)26.548.745.8top 4% in Ohio; top 9% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)12.543.942.9top 6% in Ohio; top 6% in the U.S.

Hours are per resident per day, case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 4.45, RN 0.50, weekend 3.93. Staffing rating: 4/5.

Self-reported quality measures

Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.

Quality measures rating: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Ownership Data Not Available

Questions to ask on your visit

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Otterbein St Marys Retirement Community8.7 miSt Marys, OH★★★★☆4/5
Ohio Living Dorothy Love10.2 miSidney, OH★★★★★4/5
Transitional Care Unit10.3 miSaint Marys, OH★★★★☆4/5
Vancrest of St Mary's10.4 miSt Marys, OH★★★★★5/5
Grande Lake Healthcare Center10.8 miSt Marys, OH★★★☆☆3/5
Momentous Health at Sidney12.9 miSidney, OH★★☆☆☆2/5
Fair Haven Shelby County13.1 miSidney, OH★☆☆☆☆1/5SFF
Versailles Rehabilitation and Health Care Center13.7 miVersailles, OH★★★★☆4/5
Shelby Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation14.3 miSidney, OH★★★☆☆4/5
Gardens at St Henry the14.6 miSaint Henry, OH★★★★☆4/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Minster →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 365566.