Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →
Part of chain: RHG HEALTHCARE SERVICES (2 facilities, chain avg rating 1.0★)
1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Oct 5, 2023
3
Serious findings on record
most recent Dec 29, 2025
$119,308
Fines, last 3 years
2.14
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
⚠ The most recent standard health inspection was more than 2 years ago — conditions may have changed.
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 quality measures from resident assessments and claims.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Dec 29, 2025 · F-0627 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely.
Why it matters: A rushed or poorly planned move can leave a resident somewhere that can't meet their needs.
Severity (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Dec 30, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, widespread · Oct 5, 2023 · F-0880 · triggered by a complaint
The 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.
Why it matters: Weak infection control lets illnesses like flu, COVID-19, and drug-resistant infections spread quickly among vulnerable residents.
Severity (L): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was widespread: a systemic or pervasive problem. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Dec 8, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Oct 31, 2023 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Oct 13, 2023 (Past Non-Compliance)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 19 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated
The facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely. · from a complaintF-0627
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). · from a complaintF-0628
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing. · from a complaintF-0727
View all 19 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.
Date
Severity
What the facility was cited for
Dec 29, 2025
▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated
The facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely. · from a complaint · F-0627
Dec 29, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). · from a complaint · F-0628
Aug 13, 2025
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing. · from a complaint · F-0727
Oct 31, 2023
▲ G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Oct 5, 2023
▲ L · Immediate jeopardy, widespread
The 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. · from a complaint · F-0880
Oct 5, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not properly notify residents about the balance of money it holds for them, or failed to return those funds when a resident was discharged, evicted, or died. · F-0569
Oct 5, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need. · F-0644
Oct 5, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids. · F-0685
Oct 5, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The 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. · F-0758
Oct 5, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide each resident with a nourishing, tasty, well-balanced diet that meets their daily nutritional and special dietary needs. · F-0800
Jun 9, 2022
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not properly notify residents about the balance of money it holds for them, or failed to return those funds when a resident was discharged, evicted, or died. · F-0569
Jun 9, 2022
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need. · F-0644
Jun 9, 2022
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · F-0686
Jun 9, 2022
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Aug 15, 2019
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · F-0607
Aug 15, 2019
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · F-0609
Aug 15, 2019
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · F-0610
Aug 15, 2019
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require. · F-0640
Aug 15, 2019
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (4 → 6).
Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2019
All citations:
5
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2022
All citations:
4
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2023
All citations:
7
Serious citations (G–L):
2
2025
All citations:
3
Serious citations (G–L):
1
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Year
Citations
Serious (G–L)
Worst severity that year
2019
5
0
D
2022
4
0
E
2023
7
2
L ▲
2025
3
1
J ▲
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.
1 fine totaling $119,308, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.
Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.
Date
Type
Amount / length
Oct 5, 2023
Fine
$119,308
Oct 5, 2023
Payment Denial
38 days from Oct 31, 2023
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityOhio averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility:
2.14
Ohio average:
3.45
U.S. average:
3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility:
0.30
Ohio average:
0.60
U.S. average:
0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility:
1.95
Ohio average:
3.07
U.S. average:
3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Measure
This facility
Ohio avg
U.S. avg
Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
2.14
3.45
3.95
bottom 1% in Ohio; bottom 1% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours
0.30
0.60
0.69
bottom 5% in Ohio; bottom 10% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing
1.95
3.07
3.50
bottom 1% in Ohio; bottom 2% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)
0.24
0.42
0.48
bottom 16% in Ohio; bottom 20% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)
—
48.7
45.8
—
RN turnover (%)
—
43.9
42.9
—
Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — 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 2.11, RN 0.30, weekend 1.93.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (2.11 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 1/5.
Quality measures: assessments & claims
Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Hillsboro Health and Rehab LLC. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
Calculate a stay from a quote you receive
Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.
Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.
Before you compare prices
Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.
Showing 20 of 22 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 2 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain RHG Healthcare Services — 2 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.
Health inspection rating 1/5 · CMS overall 1/5· Fines (3y): $119,308
Most serious findings on record:
▲ Dec 29, 2025 (F-0627, Immediate jeopardy, isolated): The facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely.
▲ Oct 5, 2023 (F-0880, Immediate jeopardy, widespread): The 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.
▲ Oct 31, 2023 (F-0689, Actual harm, isolated): The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Questions for the administrator:
☐ "Before a resident is discharged or transferred, how do you make sure the new place can actually meet their needs?"
☐ "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
☐ "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
☐ "What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
☐ "How many hours a day is a registered nurse physically in the building, including weekends?"
☐ "If you manage my family member's personal funds, how often will we get statements and how quickly are funds returned?"
☐ "How do you identify and arrange specialized services for residents with mental health conditions or disabilities?"
☐ "How do you arrange eye and hearing care for residents, including appointments and equipment like glasses or hearing aids?"
☐ "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Ohio midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
☐ "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
☐ "The ownership record on file lists 22 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
☐ "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
While you're there, notice:
☐ Smell and cleanliness in hallways, not just the lobby
☐ How staff speak to residents; call lights answered promptly
☐ Residents up, dressed, and engaged (visit mealtimes and a weekend if you can)
Data: CMS Provider Data Catalog, version 2026-08-01 · CCN 365994 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)