8800 Walther Boulevard, Parkville, MD 21234 (opens Google Maps) · Baltimore County · (410) 882-3248· 80 certified beds · avg 77 residents/day · certified since Jun 5, 1997 · 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: ERICKSON SENIOR LIVING (17 facilities, chain avg rating 4.2★)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5 · 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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Sep 6, 2024 · F-0600
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): 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: Nov 30, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Sep 6, 2024 · F-0689
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: Nov 30, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Sep 6, 2024 · F-0692
The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
Why it matters: Malnutrition and dehydration can quickly weaken a resident and lead to serious complications.
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: Nov 30, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 26 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · from a complaint F-0552
The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · from a complaint F-0583
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
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Oct 10, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · from a complaint · F-0552 |
| Oct 10, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · from a complaint · F-0583 |
| Oct 10, 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 10, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0676 |
| Oct 10, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 · F-0684 |
| Oct 10, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not arrange hospice services for a resident who needed them, or help the resident move to a facility that could arrange hospice. Hospice provides comfort-focused care for people nearing the end of life. · from a complaint · F-0849 |
| Oct 10, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not train its staff on dementia care and on recognizing and reporting abuse, neglect, and exploitation. · from a complaint · F-0943 |
| Sep 6, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | 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. · F-0600 |
| Sep 6, 2024 | ▲ 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. · F-0689 |
| Sep 6, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692 |
| Sep 6, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| Sep 6, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812 |
| Sep 6, 2024 | 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 |
| Sep 6, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. · F-0558 |
| Sep 6, 2024 | 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 |
| Sep 6, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · from a complaint · F-0658 |
| Sep 6, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 · F-0684 |
| Sep 6, 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 |
| Oct 11, 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 |
| Oct 11, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584 |
| Oct 11, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal. · F-0623 |
| Oct 11, 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 |
| Oct 11, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · F-0658 |
| Oct 11, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684 |
| Oct 11, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · F-0925 |
| Oct 11, 2019 | C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day. · F-0732 |
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 8 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 11 | 3 | G ▲ |
| 2025 | 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.
How to file a complaint about care →
1 fine totaling $49,725.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 6, 2024 | Fine | $49,725 |
What these staffing numbers mean →
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) | 4.76 | 3.83 | 3.95 | top 13% in Maryland; top 17% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 1.09 | 0.83 | 0.69 | top 14% in Maryland; top 12% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.35 | 3.43 | 3.50 | top 12% in Maryland; top 15% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.71 | 0.63 | 0.48 | top 25% in Maryland; top 16% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 50.0 | 40.2 | 45.8 | bottom 24% in Maryland; bottom 38% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 43.5 | 38.7 | 42.9 | bottom 35% in Maryland; bottom 46% 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 4.39, RN 1.01, weekend 4.01.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.39 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.
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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 2/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Oak Crest Village. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
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.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
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 →
Non profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| National Senior Communities, INC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 01/14/2021 |
| Bison, Michael | Individual | Individual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/14/2025 |
| Brown, Ian | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2023 |
| Brown, Patricia | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2022 |
| Butler, Richard | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2014 |
| Clupper, Katherine | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2024 |
| Colins, Mary | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2018 |
| Colins, Mary | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2019 |
| Elwood, Richard | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2025 |
| Embley, Mark | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/27/2021 |
| Embley, Mark | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/27/2021 |
| Embley, Mark | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/27/2021 |
| Erickson Senior Living LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/23/2020 |
| Erickson Senior Living LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/12/2025 |
| Erstad, Eileen | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/15/2007 |
| Erstad, Eileen | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/15/2007 |
| Gantert, Neal | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2018 |
| Gantert, Neal | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2018 |
| Gantert, Neal | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2018 |
| Hall, John | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/30/2010 |
Showing 20 of 48 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 28 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
CMS lists this facility under the chain Erickson Senior Living — 17 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.
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 16 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Autumn Lake Healthcare at Loch Raven | 2.9 mi | Baltimore, MD | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Autumn Lake Healthcare at Parkville | 2.9 mi | Baltimore, MD | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Autumn Lake Healthcare at Perring Parkway | 3.1 mi | Baltimore, MD | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Franklin Woods Center | 3.1 mi | Baltimore, MD | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Autumn Lake Healthcare at Overlea | 3.5 mi | Baltimore, MD | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Rossville Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center | 3.6 mi | Baltimore, MD | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Glen Meadows Retirement Com. | 3.6 mi | Glen Arm, MD | ★★★★☆ | 2/5 | |
| Towson Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center | 4.8 mi | Towson, MD | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Good Samaritan Nursing Home Operator, LLC | 4.8 mi | Baltimore, MD | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Autumn Lake Healthcare Post-Acute Care Center | 4.8 mi | Baltimore, MD | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Future Care Cold Spring | 4.8 mi | Baltimore, MD | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Oakwood SNF LLC | 5.0 mi | Middle River, MD | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
CMS records place this facility in Baltimore, MD — 43 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
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 215308.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details