How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Lochearn Nursing Home, LLC
4800 Seton Drive, Baltimore, MD 21215 (opens Google Maps) · Baltimore City County · (410) 358-3410· 200 certified beds · avg 192 residents/day · certified since Jun 1, 1989 · Medicare and Medicaid certified
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: FUTURE CARE/LIFEBRIDGE HEALTH (18 facilities, chain avg rating 3.8★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jan 8, 2026
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.66
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5 · how star ratings work →
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.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 30 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. F-0550
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
The 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. F-0657
View all 30 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jan 8, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · F-0550 |
| Jan 8, 2026 | 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 |
| Jan 8, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0657 |
| Jan 8, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0761 |
| Jan 8, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0880 |
| Jan 8, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. · F-0947 |
| Jan 8, 2026 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms. · F-0912 |
| Oct 8, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 · F-0580 |
| Oct 8, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, 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 |
| Oct 8, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · from a complaint · F-0657 |
| Oct 8, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · from a complaint · F-0697 |
| Oct 8, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint · F-0842 |
| Jul 19, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883 |
| Jul 19, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | When a resident had a planned discharge, the facility did not make sure the necessary information was communicated to the resident and to the doctors or facility taking over their care. · from a complaint · F-0661 |
| Jul 19, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint · F-0842 |
| Jul 19, 2024 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms. · F-0912 |
| Jun 4, 2019 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584 |
| Jun 4, 2019 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842 |
| Jun 4, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · F-0550 |
| Jun 4, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0656 |
| Jun 4, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0657 |
| Jun 4, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. · F-0676 |
| Jun 4, 2019 | 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 |
| Jun 4, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697 |
| Jun 4, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755 |
| Jun 4, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0757 |
| Jun 4, 2019 | 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 |
| Jun 4, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0761 |
| Jun 4, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have firmly secured handrails on both sides of its hallways. · F-0924 |
| Jun 4, 2019 | C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread | The facility had resident rooms smaller than required — at least 80 square feet per person in shared rooms and 100 square feet in single rooms. · F-0912 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (2 → 7).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2019
All citations: 14
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 4
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 5
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 7
Serious citations (G–L): 0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 14 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 4 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 5 | 0 | D |
| 2026 | 7 | 0 | D |
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)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityMaryland averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.66
Maryland average: 3.83
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.41
Maryland average: 0.83
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.21
Maryland average: 3.43
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | Maryland avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 3.66 | 3.83 | 3.95 | top 42% in Maryland; bottom 45% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.41 | 0.83 | 0.69 | bottom 7% in Maryland; bottom 24% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.21 | 3.43 | 3.50 | top 49% in Maryland; bottom 42% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.27 | 0.63 | 0.48 | bottom 6% in Maryland; bottom 26% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 38.1 | 40.2 | 45.8 | top 43% in Maryland; top 31% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 34.8 | 38.7 | 42.9 | top 41% in Maryland; top 38% in the U.S. |
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 3.91, RN 0.44, weekend 3.43.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.91 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
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.
Quality measures rating: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Lochearn Nursing Home, 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.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
Who owns this facility
How to read ownership records →
Ownership records as published by CMS on 2026-08-01. CMS records when an owner joined but not when they left. Listed here and no longer involved? Tell us →
For profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Attman, Gary | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2005 |
| Jeffrey Mark Attman 2005 Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 18% | 06/01/2005 |
| Lifebridge Investments, INC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 10% | 05/01/2016 |
| LSJW Lochearn LLC | Organization | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2005 |
| Michelle Way LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 30% | 06/01/2005 |
| Practice Dynamics, INC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 10% | 05/01/2016 |
| Attman, Gary | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2005 |
| Attman, Gary | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2005 |
| Attman, Leonard | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2005 |
| Attman, Leonard | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2005 |
| Finglass, Brian | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2005 |
| Finglass, Brian | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2005 |
| Finglass, Brian | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2005 |
| Future Care Health and Management Corporation | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2005 |
| Miller, Tamara | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2022 |
| Miller, Tamara | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2022 |
| Spadaro, John | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/05/2013 |
| Spadaro, John | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2005 |
All 18 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Future Care/Lifebridge Health — 18 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.
- Atlee Hill Health and Rehab Center — Westminster, MD · overall 2/5
- Courtland, LLC — Baltimore, MD · overall 1/5abuse
- Future Care Annapolis — Annapolis, MD · overall —/5
- Future Care Canton Harbor — Baltimore, MD · overall 5/5
- Future Care Capital Region — Landover, MD · overall 4/5
- Future Care Charles Village — Baltimore, MD · overall 4/5
- Future Care Cherrywood — Reisterstown, MD · overall 5/5
- Future Care Chesapeake — Arnold, MD · overall 5/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 17 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
- "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "What specific training do your nurse aides complete in dementia care and abuse prevention, and how often is it refreshed?"
- "Can I see the actual room my family member would live in before we decide?"
- "If my family member falls or their condition changes, exactly when and how will I be notified?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 38% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 18 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 85 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Resorts of Augsburg | 0.9 mi | Baltimore, MD | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Autumn Lake Healthcare at Arlington West | 1.4 mi | Baltimore, MD | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Autumn Lake Healthcare at Bridgepark | 1.6 mi | Baltimore, MD | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| King David Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | 1.6 mi | Baltimore, MD | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Autumn Lake Healthcare at Pikesville | 2.3 mi | Pikesville, MD | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Northwest Healthcare Center | 2.4 mi | Baltimore, MD | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Blue Point Healthcare Center | 2.4 mi | Baltimore, MD | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Levindale Hebrew Ger Ctr & HSP | 2.5 mi | Baltimore, MD | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Courtland, LLC | 2.6 mi | Baltimore, MD | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Autumn Lake Healthcare at Alice Manor | 3.2 mi | Baltimore, MD | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Meadow Park Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center | 3.5 mi | Catonsville, MD | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Roland Park Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center | 3.6 mi | Baltimore, MD | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Baltimore City, MD — 27 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Maryland Baptist Aged Home — Baltimore, MD · overall 3/5
- Roland Park Place — Baltimore, MD · overall 5/5
- St. Elizabeth Rehabilitation & Nursing Center — Baltimore, MD · overall 2/5abuse
- The Nursing and Rehab Center at Stadium Place — Baltimore, MD · overall 2/5
- Transitional Care Services at Mercy Medical Center — Baltimore, MD · overall 5/5
- Westgate Hills Rehab & Healthcare Ctr — Baltimore, MD · overall 2/5
Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 215207.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).