Below average — CMS composite of the measures below.
A standard survey is most likely before around November 2026
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of July 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Eastway Health & Rehabilitation during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with a history of falls and cognitive impairment had a fall-risk care plan that directed staff to place her in the common area when restless, but it did not include monitoring instructions. Staff placed her in the common area and then went to the nurses’ station to chart, leaving her unattended. Staff later heard a thump and found her on the floor with a hip fracture.
A resident with a history of falls, wandering when anxious, and cognitive impairment was placed in a common area per care plan when restless, but staff left the area to chart in the nurses' station and did not supervise the resident. The resident fell in the common area and sustained a fractured hip. Staff interviews confirmed the resident was alone at the time of the fall, and the DON stated staff were expected to provide supervision.
The facility failed to maintain a clean, comfortable, and homelike environment when multiple resident rooms and common areas were found cluttered, sticky, dirty, and littered with soiled linens and food debris. Residents, family members, and staff reported ongoing roaches, gnats, odors, overflowing trash, infrequent linen changes, and housekeeping concerns, while dining areas were observed with stained tablecloths and an uncleaned sticky table during meal service and activities.
Diet orders, allergies, and resident food preferences were not consistently followed. A resident with a documented watermelon allergy was served watermelon, and another resident with a no pork order was still served pork and said it made her feel terrible. Several residents with documented allergies or special diets had no related care plan interventions, while resident council members and another resident reported poor meal quality, small portions, missing trays, and not enough food, leaving residents hungry and distressed.
Insufficient meal portions and snacks led multiple residents to report ongoing hunger, cold or poor-quality food, and anxiety about not having enough to eat. Several residents said they were still hungry after meals, were not offered snacks, or had to rely on food brought in from outside the facility. Staff, including CNAs, LPNs, and a medication technician, also reported that tray portions were too small and that evening snacks were not available for every resident. During meal observation, a dietary supervisor had to direct a dietary aide to increase the portion size because the initial serving did not meet the required amount.
A facility failed to ensure residents received nourishing bedtime snacks as required by policy. Residents reported they were not offered snacks, especially at night, and several said they remained hungry after meals or had to rely on family, friends, or purchased food. Staff, including a CNA, MT, LPNs, and the DON, confirmed that dietary did not send enough snacks for every resident and that the kitchen supply was insufficient for the floor.
Food service staff failed to maintain dish machine logs, store food properly, or follow hand hygiene and glove-changing practices. Surveyors found incomplete and inaccurate dishwasher temperature records, expired and undated food in kitchen storage, unlabeled and undated items in resident refrigerators, a walk-in freezer at 7 F, and outdated refrigerator/freezer logs. During meal service, a dietary aide and another staff member were observed handling food and moving between tasks without washing hands or changing gloves.
Failure to provide bed hold notifications for two residents during emergent hospital transfers. The facility policy required a written bed hold notice to be given to the resident or representative within 24 hours of an emergency transfer, but there was no documentation in the EMR or paper chart for either resident, and the facility could not produce copies of the notices. Interviews showed inconsistent understanding among staff about whether the floor nurses or the business office were responsible, while the DON stated floor nurses were expected to ensure the resident or representative received the form.
Expired treatment supplies were found in a treatment cart, including an Unna boot, a bandage, and sodium chloride irrigation. Surveyors also found an unlocked employee medication refrigerator in an orientation room with hot sauce stored alongside flu vaccine and Tuberculin testing, and the LPN, DON, and Administrator each described gaps in oversight of cart and refrigerator storage.
Failure to implement transmission-based precautions affected three residents. One resident with COVID-19 had inconsistent door signage between enhanced barrier and droplet precautions, another resident with an order for enhanced barrier precautions had the sign removed and was entered without PPE, and a third resident with an order for contact isolation had enhanced barrier precautions signage and PPE outside the room before the sign was later changed. Staff interviews showed confusion about which precautions were required and how they were communicated.
The facility failed to comply with food safety standards, as observed with undated and improperly stored food items in the pantry, refrigerator, and freezer. Additionally, kitchen staff did not consistently wear hairnets properly. Interviews with staff confirmed awareness of these requirements, but the facility did not provide relevant policies when requested.
The facility failed to maintain an effective infection prevention and control program, with staff not adhering to PPE protocols and improper laundry handling. Observations showed staff entering precaution-marked rooms without proper PPE and inadequate laundry room practices. Interviews revealed inconsistencies in training and PPE availability, highlighting potential exposure risks.
Incomplete fall-risk care plan and lack of monitoring
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to fully develop and implement the comprehensive person-centered care plan for Resident 17, who had a history of falls and was later assessed as having moderate cognitive impairment. The resident’s fall-risk care plan included an intervention dated 08/28/2024 to place her in the common area when she became restless, but the intervention did not specify that staff were to monitor her after placing her there. Facility policy stated the comprehensive care plan was to promote resident safety and reflect recognized standards of practice. On 07/29/2025, staff used the care plan intervention and placed Resident 17 in the common area for anxious behavior, but staff then left her unattended while they were in the nurses’ station charting. Staff later heard a thump and found the resident lying on the floor in the common area in front of the elevators. The resident sustained a fall with a hip fracture. Staff interviews confirmed that SRNA 4, LPN 5, and KMA 1 were in the nurses’ station at the time, and the MDS Coordinator stated that when the intervention was used, the resident was expected to be monitored and the area watched for her safety.
Failure to Supervise a Resident in the Common Area
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure adequate supervision to prevent injury for one resident with a history of falls, wandering when anxious, and cognitive impairment. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including CHF, Alzheimer's unspecified, COPD, and repeated falls. The record showed the resident had prior unwitnessed falls, fall assessments were completed after falls, and the interdisciplinary team met after each fall to complete root cause analysis. A care plan intervention was developed to place the resident in the common area when restless to address unwitnessed falls. On 07/29/2025, the resident was placed in the common area, but staff did not monitor the resident while they were in the area. Staff members were in the nurses' station charting when they heard a thump and found the resident on the floor in the common area. The resident sustained a fractured hip. Staff interviews confirmed that the resident had been left alone in the common area while the unit staff were charting in the nurses' station, and the DON stated it was her expectation that staff would provide supervision to residents.
Dirty Environment and Pest Issues in Resident Areas
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment. Review of facility policies showed the building was expected to be kept free of insects and rodents and that housekeeping and laundry services were to follow a quality control program. During observations, multiple resident rooms and common areas were found dirty or cluttered, including a resident room with clothing, books, boxes, magazines, and cups on the overbed table; another room with a sticky, dirty-looking floor; and another with dirty linens on the floor. In dining areas, a table had a sticky red substance on it while residents were seated there for lunch, and the table was not cleaned before trays were served. The dining room floor also had old food debris, and another dining area had stained tablecloths while residents were asked to sit at those tables for activities. Resident and family interviews described ongoing cleanliness and pest concerns. One resident stated housekeeping came daily but the floor remained dirty and sticky, and said the facility was the worst place he had ever been. A family member reported sending pictures and a letter showing a resident room with linens on the floor with feces on them, soiled briefs left in the garbage can, and a dirty, sticky floor; she also reported a prior roach problem, ongoing gnats, and frequent shortages of paper towels and toilet paper. Another resident stated she had seen roaches in her room and later reported a bad smell in the hallway, infrequent linen changes, and dirty linens left on the floor. Additional observations and interviews confirmed pest activity and inconsistent housekeeping. Surveyors observed flies and gnats in resident rooms, and a family member reported gnats around a resident’s food and bed, overflowing trash, trash on the floor, and a urinal left on the table near the meal tray. A resident reported seeing many cockroaches in his room despite pest control spraying, and said housekeeping had recently been coming only every two days. Staff members also reported seeing gnats, roaches, crumbs, spilled food and drinks, and residents’ complaints about pests. The DON stated linens were expected to be changed on bath days and whenever needed, and the Administrator stated she expected staff to note pests, dirty environment, soiled linens, and odors during rounds.
Diet Orders, Allergies, and Meal Service Not Followed
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide residents with diets that matched documented allergies, dietary restrictions, and preferences. Resident R44 had documented allergies to nuts, peanuts, and watermelon, and her care plan included an intervention to monitor the dietary card before serving food for allergies. However, on 07/31/2025, observation and review of her meal tray ticket showed that she was served watermelon on her tray. Her family member stated she had seen watermelon on the resident’s tray on several occasions despite the documented allergy. Resident R150 had a documented dietary order for no pork, but the meal tray ticket reviewed on 08/01/2025 did not reflect that order. In interview, R150 stated she was often served pork and that it made her feel terrible. The facility’s dietary staff and leadership stated that tray tickets were intended to communicate each resident’s diet, allergies, dislikes, and consistency needs, and that the tray tickets were supposed to match the dietary orders entered in the clinical record. The DON stated the facility’s dietary system was not integrated as expected and that manual auditing of tray tickets was incomplete. The facility also failed to care plan multiple residents’ allergies and specialized diets. R25 had lactose intolerance documented on the face sheet and meal ticket, but his care plan had no focus, goal, or interventions related to lactose intolerance. R52 had a shellfish allergy documented on the face sheet and meal ticket, but no related care planning. R59 had a fish allergy documented on the face sheet and meal ticket, but his care plan stated he had no allergies. R82 had allergies to bananas and strawberries documented on the face sheet and care plan, but there was no care planning in place for those allergies. R101 had a shellfish allergy documented on the face sheet and care plan, but there was no focus, goal, or interventions for that allergy. Resident council members and R143 also reported concerns about meal service and food adequacy. During resident council interview, residents stated they did not know who the dietician was, had tried to get the dietician invited to council without response, and wanted their diets addressed. One resident reported being served raw hamburger and four pieces of pasta, and staff said the kitchen had no substitute food available. R143 stated the food was often cold, not good, and that there was not enough food on the trays. She said she often went to bed hungry and felt sad and anxious. CNAs and an LPN also reported that residents complained of still being hungry after meals, that portion sizes were too small, and that some trays were forgotten or not delivered.
Insufficient meal portions and snacks
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure menus and meal service met residents’ nutritional needs, with multiple residents reporting that portions were too small and that they remained hungry after meals. The deficiency involved 8 of 15 sampled residents, including residents who were supposed to receive double portions but were observed receiving amounts that appeared to be only one serving. During lunch observation, one resident’s tray contained a roll, a small serving of vegetables, and a cup of chicken and dumplings that did not cover the bowl of the spoon when tested, and a dietary supervisor had to instruct a dietary aide to fill the scoop completely because the initial portion did not meet the required serving size. Residents repeatedly stated that meals were cold, bad, and insufficient. Several residents reported being hungry most of the time, going to bed hungry, feeling anxious when they were still hungry after meals, and not being offered snacks in the evenings. One resident stated he was supposed to receive double portions but still did not feel it was enough, while another said staff told him there was no more food when he asked for more. A resident who received the same meal as others stated she was hungry most of the time and did not know snacks were available. Another resident stated she kept her own snacks because she was always hungry. Staff interviews supported the residents’ reports. CNAs, LPNs, and a medication technician stated they had heard residents complain that portions were too small and that snacks were not sent up for every resident. One CNA stated residents, especially those on pureed diets, said they were hungry between meals, and another stated the kitchen did not send enough snacks for everyone. A medication technician stated she kept sandwiches and snacks from meal carts to feed residents who complained of hunger, but there were not enough for each resident. The regional dietary manager stated the cook chose the scoop for serving residents’ food, and the regional registered dietician stated she had been aware of portion size concerns before the menu company change. The DON stated residents had complained about small portions before, but she had not recently heard the complaint and noted the facility had previously held food council meetings.
Bedtime snacks not provided to all residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure each resident was provided a nourishing bedtime snack in accordance with resident needs, preferences, and requests. The facility policy titled, Between Meal and Bedtime Snacks, dated 10/01/2021, stated that the purpose of the procedure was to provide adequate nutrition, that the resident's care plan and special needs should be reviewed, and that the snack should be checked for the correct diet and consistency before serving. The policy also required documentation of the date and time the snack was served, the name and title of the person serving it, the amount eaten, and notification of the licensed nurse if the resident refused the snack and the reason and intervention taken. During the Resident Council interview, residents stated they were not getting snacks, especially since new management took over. One resident stated that snacks had previously been sent up on lunch and dinner trays, but that stopped after the change in ownership. Observations of resident refrigerators on the second and fourth floors showed only a small number of sandwiches and crackers, with some sandwiches undated or unlabeled, and later observations showed no snacks remaining on some floors while only a limited amount remained on others. Residents on multiple units reported that the facility did not offer snacks, did not offer snacks at night, or did not provide enough food at meals or snacks. Staff interviews supported the residents' reports. A CNA stated that when snacks were sent up from the kitchen, there were not enough for every resident on the floor and that she had to go to the kitchen to obtain sandwiches or chips for hungry residents. An MT stated the facility did not have enough for each resident to receive a snack. LPNs stated dietary did not send up snacks for each resident in the evenings and that the portions were not sufficient. The DON stated she expected residents to have a nourishing snack whenever they wanted, that there should be enough snacks for every resident, and that the facility was required to provide a nutritious snack at bedtime.
Food Safety, Storage, Temperature Monitoring, and Hand Hygiene Failures
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Surveyors found that the dishwashing machine logs were incomplete and inaccurate, with staff documenting temperatures in the wrong columns on a low-temperature log that was intended for chemical sanitizer use, while the facility’s own staff later stated the machine was a high-temperature dishwasher requiring final rinse temperature documentation. The kitchen records also showed gaps, including no June 2025 log provided, incomplete July entries, and missing temperature documentation for some meal periods and days. The Dietary Manager stated the facility had switched to chemical sanitization because the dishwasher was not reaching the appropriate temperature, and she could not determine how long the machine had been operating below required sanitization temperatures or whether dishes used between 07/10/2025 and 07/29/2025 had been properly sanitized. Surveyors also observed multiple expired, undated, and improperly stored food items in the kitchen and storage areas. In the walk-in freezer, expired sweet potato fries, hashbrowns, and fries were present. The spice shelf contained multiple expired seasonings and other items without dates, including basil leaves, ground cloves, ground allspice, dill weed, cinnamon, sage, chicken flavor base, burgundy kitchen wine, red wine vinegar, and an opened container of soy sauce stored unrefrigerated despite labeling to refrigerate after opening. The dry storage room contained expired thickened dairy drinks and thickened tea packets, an unlabeled liquid, an unmarked opened bag of brown sugar, rice pilaf with no dates, and diced sweet red peppers with no visible date. Staff stated that cooks, dietary aides, and others were responsible for removing expired items and dating food, while the Dietary Manager stated she and the cooks were responsible for disposing of expired food and checking inventory. Surveyors further found unlabeled and undated food items in resident refrigerators on multiple units. These included sandwiches wrapped in plastic with only one dated, an energy drink and peanut M&Ms in a shopping bag, a tied blue fabric bag in a freezer section without labeling or dating, additional undated sandwiches, and undated pizzas. Staff interviewed stated that items in resident refrigerators were required to be labeled with the resident’s name and dated, and that CNAs were responsible for checking them daily. The walk-in freezer was also observed at 7 F, which the Regional Dietary Manager stated would be out of compliance, and refrigerator and freezer temperature logs were not current, with the walk-in refrigerator log last recorded on 06/30/2025 and the reach-in freezer log last recorded on 07/22/2025. During lunch service, a dietary aide was observed wiping sweat from her face with gloves on and continuing to plate food without hand hygiene, then leaving the tray line to retrieve food and resuming plating without changing gloves. Another staff member also moved from one task to another and handled food items without washing hands. The RDM observed these actions, and staff later stated that hand hygiene and glove changes were required when leaving the tray line or switching tasks.
Failure to Provide Bed Hold Notifications for Emergency Hospital Transfers
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide a bed hold notification for 2 of 5 sampled residents, R46 and R18, when each required an emergent transfer to the hospital. The facility policy titled, Bed Hold, stated that if a transfer is an emergency, a written bed hold notice must be given to the patient or patient representative within 24 hours, and that families are provided information on the bed hold policy at admission as well as for planned or emergent transfers. For R46, the EMR showed the resident was sent to the emergency room on [DATE] and 07/11/2025, but there was no documentation in the electronic or paper chart that a bed hold notification was given to the resident or her representative, and the facility could not produce copies of the notices. R46 stated during interview that she did not recall ever being given a bed hold notice. For R18, the EMR showed an emergency room transfer on [DATE], but there was no documentation in the electronic or paper chart of a bed hold notification, and the facility was unable to produce copies of the notices. Staff interviews showed differing statements about who was responsible for issuing the notices, while the DON stated the expectation was that each resident would be given a bed hold notification before transfer to the hospital and that floor nurses were responsible for ensuring the resident or representative received the form.
Expired Treatment Supplies and Improper Medication Refrigerator Storage
Penalty
Summary
Drugs, biologicals, and treatment supplies were not stored in accordance with facility policy and accepted professional principles. During observation of the seventh-floor treatment cart, surveyors found an Unna Rite boot with zinc that expired in 05/2024, a Comprilan bandage 10 cm x 5 cm with an expiration date of 07/14/2025, and a bottle of Sodium Chloride Irrigation that expired in 07/2024. The unit manager/LPN stated there were no expired items in the cart and said the nurses were responsible for keeping treatment items current, adding that it was ultimately her responsibility and an oversight on her part. Surveyors also observed the first-floor employee medication refrigerator in a room used for new employee orientation, and the room was without a lock. Inside the refrigerator were a bottle of hot sauce stored with a bottle of flu vaccine and a bottle of Tuberculin testing. The DON stated the orientation room was used for new hires and that the flu vaccines and Tuberculin testing were stored in that refrigerator, while the Administrator stated she did not know who oversaw the medication refrigerators and said someone in nurse management should ensure items like hot sauce were not stored there.
Failure to Implement Transmission-Based Precautions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement appropriate transmission-based precautions for 3 of 49 sampled residents: R183, R184, and R70. Review of the facility’s policies showed that the Infection Control Program required isolation precaution protocols in accordance with CDC guidance, and the Infection Prevention and Control Committee was responsible for reviewing and revising isolation precaution techniques and procedures, including training on standard and transmission-based precautions and PPE use. For R183, the EMR showed an order dated 07/28/2025 for contact/droplet precautions due to COVID-19. On 07/29/2025, the resident’s door initially had a sign indicating enhanced barrier precautions, with PPE in a cart outside the room, and later the sign was changed to droplet precautions. An LPN stated R183 had COVID-19 and should be in transmission-based precautions, but she was unsure whether contact or droplet precautions were required. For R184, the EMR showed an order for enhanced barrier precautions. On 07/31/2025, a Med Tech removed the enhanced barrier precautions sign from the door and entered the room without PPE. The Med Tech stated she did not think R184 should be on transmission-based precautions and said she should have verified with the nurse. For R70, the EMR showed an order for contact isolation dated 07/04/2025, but observations on 07/29/2025 and 07/30/2025 showed enhanced barrier precautions signage and PPE outside the room before the sign was later changed to contact isolation. The IP stated residents with certain devices were placed on enhanced barrier precautions, and the DON stated staff expected an order in the EMR, care plan notation, a door sign, and PPE outside the room for residents on transmission-based precautions.
Non-Compliance with Food Safety Standards
Penalty
Summary
The facility was found to be non-compliant with professional standards for food service safety. Observations revealed multiple food items in the pantry, refrigerator, and freezer that were opened but not dated, including packages of gravy, brownie mix, pasta noodles, and a bottle of Worcestershire sauce. Additionally, a sheet pan of gelatin cake was improperly sealed, and various cheese products and bread were not dated. These findings indicate a failure to adhere to proper food labeling and storage protocols. Furthermore, the kitchen staff did not consistently wear hair restraints properly, as observed with Dishwasher 1, whose hairnet did not fully cover his hair. Interviews with the staff, including the Dietary Manager and the Director of Nursing, confirmed awareness of the requirements for labeling, dating, and wearing hairnets correctly. However, the facility failed to provide policies related to these practices when requested by the survey team, highlighting a lack of adherence to established guidelines and procedures.
Infection Control Deficiencies in PPE Usage and Laundry Handling
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain an effective infection prevention and control program, as evidenced by staff not adhering to established protocols for personal protective equipment (PPE) usage and laundry handling. Observations revealed that staff entered resident rooms marked with precaution signage without donning appropriate protective equipment. Specifically, a housekeeper entered a room with Transmission-Based/Droplet Precautions for COVID-19 without wearing an N-95 mask or face shield, using only a surgical mask and gown. This same mask was worn into other non-isolation rooms, and mop water was not changed between rooms, although mop heads were replaced. In the laundry room, there were no defined sorting areas for dirty linens, and PPE was not readily available for staff. A large floor fan was positioned inappropriately, potentially spreading contaminants from the dirty to the clean processing side. Interviews with the Laundry Supervisor and Director of Nursing revealed a lack of face protection for staff sorting dirty linens and inconsistencies in gown availability. The Laundry Supervisor admitted that staff did not always follow proper procedures for handling isolation linens, which were supposed to be placed in dissolvable bags and then in red bags for transport. Interviews with various staff, including the Infection Preventionist and Director of Nursing, highlighted a general understanding of the need for PPE and adherence to isolation protocols. However, it was noted that laundry service staff did not attend specific infection control training sessions. The Infection Preventionist emphasized the importance of wearing N-95 masks, gowns, gloves, and face shields when entering COVID-19 rooms and the need for frequent cleaning of isolation rooms. Despite these expectations, the facility's infection control practices were not consistently followed, leading to potential exposure risks.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 337 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 9 immediate-jeopardy cases — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near Louisville
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Little Sisters Of The Poor | 0.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Highlands Nursing And Rehabilitation | 0.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Nazareth Home | 1 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Kindred Hospital - Louisville | 1.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 3 | 0 |
| Treyton Oak Towers | 1.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Eastway Health & Rehabilitation.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release July 2026) and official state health department websites.