Above average — CMS composite of the measures below.
The next survey window likely opens around December 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 Coventry House Inn during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Unqualified Dietary Department Supervision: The facility failed to employ a staff member with the appropriate credentials to supervise and manage the dietary department. The FSD stated she had been in the role for over a year and had only recently signed up for CDM classes, while the RD was not full time and only came to the facility a few times a month. The DON and NHA stated they were unaware the FSD was not qualified to run the dietary department.
Improper Labeling and Dating of Food Items: Surveyors found multiple unlabeled and undated food items in the kitchen refrigerator, kitchenette, and resident refrigerator, including salad, liquid eggs, ketchup, and several resident-stored foods such as Chinese food, soup, rice, fruit salad, and an open drink. The resident refrigerator also had a large ice buildup and no temperature log. The FSD and DON acknowledged the labeling and monitoring expectations, and facility policy required refrigerated foods to be dated and marked with use-by dates.
Two residents experienced excessive call light wait times, with one reporting waits of 30 minutes to an hour and feeling bad when staff did not respond promptly. Another resident, who required extensive ADL/toileting assistance and was occasionally incontinent, reported waiting over an hour, having to use a urinal because he could not wait, and soiling his pants, which he described as degrading and making him feel less of a man. CNAs and an RN also reported resident complaints about delayed call light response across shifts.
Failure to Include a Resident in Care Planning: A cognitively intact resident with a L humerus fracture and hx of falls reported feeling unsure about her stay and said she had not been told about her plan of care, next steps, or discharge. The FM also reported poor communication, while the SSD and RD acknowledged care conferences occurred but were inconsistently documented, leaving uncertainty about the resident’s progress and discharge planning.
A resident with HTN, hyperlipidemia, and an active order for Apixaban for Afib did not have a care plan focus, goals, or interventions related to the high-risk anticoagulant. The RN MDS Coordinator confirmed the med should have been care planned for side effects to watch for, but the current care plan contained no related entries.
Care Plan Did Not Reflect DNR Status: A resident with CHF and a prior stroke had a signed DNR code status form and physician documentation, but the care plan still listed the resident as FULL CODE. The RN MDS Coordinator said advance directives were handled by social services, and the SSD acknowledged the care plan should have been updated to match the resident’s DNR status but was not.
A cognitively intact female resident with a fractured upper arm and a history of falls did not receive showers as scheduled after admission. She reported going almost 2 weeks without a shower and feeling embarrassed. Records showed the first documented shower occurred 9 days after admission, with inconsistent bathing documentation on scheduled shower days. The DON confirmed the resident did not receive a shower until later and that showers were expected on the scheduled days.
Food was not consistently palatable or served at an appetizing temperature for 2 residents reviewed. One resident with DM and malnutrition said meals were terrible and sometimes not hot enough, while another resident with DM and CKD4 said the food was not to her liking and her daughter brought lunch. CNAs also reported complaints about poor choices, flavor, temperature, and overly soft vegetables.
Incomplete documentation of blood sugar checks and insulin administration was identified for a resident with DM2 and hyperglycemia. The MAR/TAR showed orders for HumaLOG before meals and accu checks AC and HS, but two evening entries were blank with no record of the BG check or insulin administration. The DON and an RN each confirmed the missing documentation and stated the entries should have been charted.
A facility failed to use EBP PPE during high-contact care for three residents. An RN and another RN did not wear gowns during wound care for a resident with a wound and multiple chronic conditions; an RN did not wear a gown while connecting IV cefazolin through a PICC for a resident with an infected prosthetic joint and abscess; and a CNA, RN, and another CNA did not wear gowns during transfer, bed mobility, dressing, and repositioning for a resident with sepsis and a sacral pressure ulcer. Orders, care plans, and room signage indicated EBP was required for wound-related care and other high-contact activities.
The facility failed to maintain food safety and sanitation standards, with dirty non-food contact surfaces and unlabeled, undated cooked foods. The dish machine's temperature was not monitored due to a damaged gauge, and internal food temperatures were not checked before serving. Opened food items in the nourishment room lacked labeling, increasing the risk of foodborne illness.
The facility failed to serve food at a palatable temperature, affecting two residents and several others from a resident meeting. A cognitively intact male and female resident reported food not being consistently hot enough. During a meal service observation, food temperatures were below expected levels, and a CNA confirmed resident complaints about food temperature.
A resident with diabetes mellitus received medication without a physician's order due to a failure in following professional standards of practice. The resident was prescribed Insulin Lispro, but a nurse administered Novolog insulin, mistakenly believing it to be the same. The DON was unaware of the presence of two types of insulin in the medication cart, and there was no order for Novolog.
A resident with stasis dermatitis experienced burning pain and potential exacerbation of their condition due to the facility's failure to coordinate care according to physician orders. The care plan lacked specific interventions for dry skin, and the resident's legs were wrapped with ace bandages that were not changed regularly. Staff interviews revealed inconsistencies in care, with no documentation of the resident's skin condition being monitored and inappropriate orders for as-needed application of wraps.
A resident on antiplatelet medication experienced multiple falls, including head trauma, but was not sent to the hospital for evaluation, contrary to standard care practices. The facility's policy relied on monitoring for neurological changes, but the Medical Director noted that such changes might go unnoticed, highlighting a deficiency in care standards.
A facility failed to ensure a physician reviewed a pharmacist's medication regimen recommendations for a resident with anxiety disorder. The pharmacist recommended reviewing the need for Hydroxyzine, a psychotropic medication prescribed PRN, as per regulatory guidelines. The process to address these recommendations was not followed, leading to a delay in the physician's review and signature, potentially causing negative medication side effects.
The facility failed to discontinue PRN psychotropic medications for two residents after 14 days or document the rationale for continued use, as required by regulations. A resident with generalized anxiety disorder was prescribed Hydroxyzine without a stop date, and another resident with unspecified anxiety disorder was prescribed Klonopin under similar circumstances. The lack of a 14-day stop date or documented justification for continued use was confirmed by the Social Services Director.
A facility failed to follow infection control standards during blood sugar assessments for three residents. An RN used the same glucometer without cleaning it between uses and did not perform hand hygiene after glove removal, contrary to facility policy. The DON confirmed the expectation for glucometer disinfection between residents.
Unqualified Dietary Department Supervision
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to employ a staff member with appropriate credentials to supervise and manage the dietary department. During a kitchen tour, the Food Service Director stated that she had been in the position for over a year and had signed up for Dietary Manager classes at the end of October, and she also stated that the Registered Dietitian was not full time and came to the facility only 2 to 3 times a month. Record review showed that the Food Service Director signed up for the Nutrition and Foodservice Professional Training Program on 10/29/2025. In a later interview, she stated that her date of hire was 9/30/2024 and that the previous NHA had told her it was fine to sign up for the Certified Dietary Manager classes at a later date. She clarified that the Nutrition and Foodservice Professional Training Program was the CDM classes. The DON and NHA stated they were unaware that the Food Service Director was not qualified to run the dietary department and said the RD comes into the facility a few times a month.
Improper Labeling and Dating of Food Items
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper labeling and dating of food stored in the kitchen refrigerator, kitchenette, and resident refrigerator. During observation, surveyors found two large bowls of salad in a kitchen reach-in refrigerator with no label or date, a slightly open container of liquid eggs on the bottom of another kitchen refrigerator with no label or date, and an opened ketchup bottle in the kitchenette with no label or date. In the resident refrigerator, surveyors observed multiple food items that were either undated, unlabeled, or both, including Chinese food, soup, rice, fruit salad, an open Minute Maid drink, a jam container with soup in it, a Styrofoam container with unidentified food, and a container with rolls. The resident refrigerator also had a large ice chunk on the top shelf, and there was no temperature log for monitoring refrigerator temperatures. During the tour, the FSD stated the foods should have been labeled and dated in both the kitchen refrigerator and resident refrigerator, and stated the resident refrigerator needed to be defrosted and should have a temperature log. The FSD also stated it was hard to monitor the resident refrigerator since anyone could put food in it. The DON stated that everyone had access to the resident refrigerator and that dietary monitors it to make sure items are labeled and dated appropriately, and also stated she thought a temperature log was on the refrigerator. Review of the facility’s Label and Dating Foods Policy and the Food Brought In By Family or Visitors Policy showed requirements for refrigerated foods to be labeled with dates and use-by dates.
Dignity and Respect Not Maintained Due to Excessive Call Light Delays
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide care and services to promote dignity and respect for two residents, resulting in long call light wait times. Resident #1 was a female with diagnoses including weakness, difficulty walking, and need for assistance with personal care. Her MDS showed a BIMS score of 12, indicating cognitive impairment. During interview, she stated it could take a half hour to an hour for staff to answer her call light and said she felt bad when that happened. Resident #17 was a male with diagnoses including weakness, difficulty walking, acquired absence of the right leg above knee, and need for assistance with personal care. His MDS showed a BIMS score of 15, indicating cognitive intactness, and he was dependent for toilet transfer and occasionally incontinent of urine and bowel. His care plan identified total assist of 2 for toileting. He reported that call light response times sometimes exceeded an hour, that he had to use a urinal because he could not wait for staff, and that he had soiled his pants while waiting, which made him feel less of a man and that it was very degrading. Multiple staff members, including CNAs and an RN, also reported hearing residents complain about long call light wait times across shifts.
Failure to Include Resident in Care Planning
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure Resident #12 participated in the development and implementation of her person-centered plan of care. Resident #12 was a cognitively intact female with diagnoses including an unspecified fracture of the upper end of the left humerus and a history of falling. Her record showed she was initially ordered non-weight bearing to the left arm, then later changed to weight bearing as tolerated. During interviews, she stated she felt very unsure about her stay, did not know what was going on, and had not spoken with anyone about her plan of care, what happens next, or about going home. Family Member UU also reported the facility did not communicate well and was unsure what happened next with Resident #12, and could not recall whether a care planning meeting had occurred. The Social Service Director stated an initial care conference was held the day after admission and that care conferences were as needed, not consistently scheduled, and should be documented, but she also acknowledged that meetings with Resident #12 had occurred without documentation in the record. The Rehab Director reported participating in one or two care conferences but could find documentation for only one, and stated there was a care conference scheduled to discuss progress and possible discharge assistance.
Failure to Care Plan High-Risk Anticoagulant Use
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop a comprehensive person-centered care plan for Resident #2, a female with diagnoses including essential hypertension and hyperlipidemia, and with an active physician order for Apixaban 5 mg by mouth twice daily for atrial fibrillation. Review of the resident’s current care plan showed no planned focus, goals, or interventions related to Apixaban use. During interview, the RN MDS Coordinator stated that Apixaban is a high-risk medication and should have been care planned for the side effects to watch out for, and after reviewing the care plan, confirmed that no care planned focus, goals, or interventions related to Apixaban were present even though there should have been.
Care Plan Did Not Reflect Resident’s DNR Status
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to review and revise a comprehensive, individualized plan of care for one resident, resulting in an inaccurate reflection of the resident’s advance directive wishes. The resident had diagnoses including chronic systolic congestive heart failure and cerebral infarction due to thrombosis of the right posterior cerebral artery. The record showed a Code Status Form in which the resident marked DO-NOT-RESUSCITATE and signed consent requesting that no person attempt resuscitation if the heart and/or breathing stopped, with physician signature also documented. However, the current care plan still identified the resident as FULL CODE with a care plan initiation date of 9/2/2025. During interview, the RN MDS Coordinator stated care planning was a team effort and the social worker was responsible for advance directives, and the Social Services Director acknowledged that the care plan showed the resident as full code despite the physician order for DNR and that the care plan should have been updated to reflect the resident’s DNR status but was not.
Missed Scheduled Showers
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure showers were provided as scheduled for a cognitively intact female resident who had been admitted with an unspecified fracture of the upper left humerus and a history of falling. The resident reported that she went almost 2 weeks without a shower when she first arrived at the facility and stated that she was embarrassed. She also reported that her shower days were Tuesday and Friday and that she preferred morning showers. Record review showed the resident filed a grievance stating she needed a shower, and the facility documented that bathing was being completed. Shower documentation for the period reviewed showed a complete bed bath on one date, partial bed baths on two dates, and showers on three dates, but the first documented shower was not until 9 days after admission. Documentation also reflected some scheduled shower days as not applicable and lacked documentation for other scheduled shower days. The DON reviewed the records and confirmed the resident did not receive a shower until 12/18/25 and that the expectation was for showers to be given on the scheduled day.
Food Not Served at Acceptable Quality or Temperature
Penalty
Summary
Food and drink were not provided in a palatable, attractive, and safe appetizing temperature for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for food palatability. Resident #1 had diagnoses including type 2 diabetes mellitus with hyperglycemia and moderate protein-calorie malnutrition, and a BIMS score of 12, indicating cognitive impairment. During interview, Resident #1 stated the food at the facility was terrible and reported that sometimes it was not hot enough when served. Resident #21 had diagnoses including type 2 diabetes mellitus with hyperglycemia and chronic kidney disease stage 4, and a BIMS score of 13, indicating cognitive intactness. Resident #21 stated the food was not too good, was not to her liking, and that her daughter was bringing her lunch. Staff interviews supported these concerns, with CNAs reporting resident complaints about poor food choices, flavor, temperature, and vegetables being cooked too soft; one CNA stated almost everybody complained about the food and described the food as disgusting with poor flavor.
Incomplete Documentation of Blood Sugar Checks and Insulin Administration
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain complete and accurate medical records for Resident #21, a female with type 2 diabetes mellitus and hyperglycemia. Review of the December 2025 MAR/TAR showed physician orders for HumaLOG 10 units subcutaneously before meals at 0730, 1130, and 1730, as well as accu checks before meals and at bedtime with instructions to hold insulin or oral hypoglycemic medication and call the MD for blood sugar less than 60, and to give insulin or oral hypoglycemic medication and call the MD for blood sugar greater than 400. The record did not contain documentation at 1730 on 12/12/25 or 12/30/25 to show that the HumaLOG was administered or that the resident’s blood sugar was checked. In interview, the DON stated she was the nurse on 12/12/25 at 1730 and reported she must have forgotten to document the blood sugar and insulin administration. RN O stated she was the nurse on 12/30/25 at 1730 and confirmed there were no entries for the blood sugar check or HumaLOG administration, stating it should have been documented but was not.
Failure to Use EBP During High-Contact Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper use of personal protective equipment for enhanced barrier precautions during high-contact care activities for three residents. For a male resident with a fractured right femur, CHF, type 2 diabetes, and a documented wound, a sign outside the room indicated enhanced barrier precautions were required for wound care. During observed wound care, an RN and another RN assisting with positioning were not wearing gowns. The resident’s order summary and care plan both indicated enhanced barrier precautions were required for wounds, and both nurses later acknowledged that gowns should have been worn. For a female resident with an infected prosthetic joint and a right lower-limb abscess, an RN was observed connecting IV cefazolin through a PICC in the upper left arm without wearing a gown. The RN stated the resident was not on enhanced barrier precautions, and no sign indicating enhanced barrier precautions was posted outside the room. However, the resident’s order summary listed enhanced barrier precautions for a wound/PICC, and the care plan directed use of appropriate PPE. For a female resident with sepsis and a sacral pressure ulcer, a sign outside the room indicated enhanced barrier precautions were to be used during high-contact care activities. A CNA was observed transferring the resident from a wheelchair to bed without a gown, and later an RN and a CNA assisted with removing pants, assessing the right leg, repositioning the resident, and adjusting linens without gowns. The RN later stated the resident had a wound but was not on enhanced barrier precautions, while the DON stated enhanced barrier precautions were to be used for wound care, IV administration, personal care, and bed mobility, with gowns and gloves worn during high-contact care activities.
Food Safety and Sanitation Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain proper food safety and sanitation standards, as observed during a kitchen/food service tour. Non-food contact surfaces, such as the floor of the walk-in cooler and the vent above the meat freezer, were found to be dirty and dusty. Additionally, cooked potentially hazardous food products, including roast beef and Spanish rice, were not labeled or dated with a prepared and discard date. The facility also did not maintain a cooling log for these foods, which is necessary to ensure proper time/temperature cooling as per the 2017 FDA Food Code. The dish machine was found to have a water-damaged temperature gauge, and there were no temperature entries recorded for December 2024, indicating that the machine's temperature was not being monitored to ensure proper sanitization. Furthermore, the internal temperatures of cooked foods were not checked before serving, as evidenced by the lack of documented food temperatures since September 2024. In the nourishment room, several opened food items were not labeled with an opened or discard date, increasing the risk of foodborne illness for residents consuming food from the kitchen.
Failure to Serve Food at Palatable Temperature
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that food products were served at a palatable temperature, affecting two of twelve sampled residents and five of six residents from a confidential resident meeting. Resident #22, a cognitively intact male, expressed concerns about the food not being consistently hot enough, even when dining in the dining room. Similarly, Resident #133, a cognitively intact female, reported that the food was consistently not hot enough. During a confidential resident meeting, one resident mentioned having to send meals back due to hot foods being served cold, and five out of six residents reported that the lunch served was barely warm. Observations during a tray line/meal service revealed that food temperatures were below the expected levels, with meatballs and gravy at 128 degrees, buttered noodles at 126 degrees, and spinach at 128 degrees. The food was plated and covered but placed on a non-heated portion of the steam table before being delivered to residents. A CNA confirmed that residents had complained about the food not being hot enough when served. These findings indicate a failure in maintaining food at a palatable temperature, leading to dissatisfaction and potential nutritional decline among residents.
Medication Administration Error for Diabetic Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adhere to professional standards of practice for medication administration for a resident with diabetes mellitus, resulting in the administration of medication without a physician's order. The resident, who had been managing her Type 1 diabetes with insulin for many years, expressed concerns about the facility's understanding of her condition. The physician's orders specified the use of Insulin Lispro via a pen-injector according to a sliding scale before meals and at bedtime. However, during a medication administration observation, a registered nurse prepared and administered 5 units of Insulin Lispro to the resident. On a subsequent day, another registered nurse prepared and administered 3 units of Novolog insulin using a syringe, mistakenly believing it to be the same as Insulin Lispro. The nurse acknowledged that the resident had both types of insulin available and intended to notify the doctor to obtain an order for Novolog. The Director of Nursing was unaware of the presence of two different types of fast-acting insulin in the medication cart and confirmed that there was no order for Novolog insulin. It was suggested that the Novolog vial might have been the resident's personal medication, inadvertently placed in the cart.
Deficiency in Coordination of Care for Resident with Stasis Dermatitis
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper coordination of care for a resident with skin conditions, specifically stasis dermatitis, resulting in burning pain and potential exacerbation of the condition. The resident's care plan included monitoring for signs of infection but lacked specific interventions for dry skin or the lower legs. Observations revealed that the resident's legs were wrapped with ace bandages, which were not changed regularly, and the application of lotion caused burning pain. The resident reported that the facility did not change the wraps regularly, and the lotion application was painful. Interviews with staff revealed inconsistencies in the care provided. A registered nurse reported that there were orders to apply Ammonium Lactate lotion twice daily, but the lotion was documented as refused or not administered in several instances. The director of nursing admitted to not knowing who applied the wraps or how long they had been in place, and there was no documentation of the resident's skin condition being monitored. The physician was not informed of the resident's legs being open and draining until questioned by the surveyor, and there was no order for the legs to be wrapped as needed for fluid drainage. The resident's initial admission from the hospital included an order for Ammonium Lactate cream to be applied as needed for dry skin. However, the facility did not have a clear plan for scheduled dressing changes or regular monitoring of the skin condition. The lack of documentation and assessment of the resident's skin condition, along with the inappropriate orders for as-needed application of wraps, contributed to the deficiency in care.
Failure to Send Resident on Antiplatelet Medication to Hospital After Falls
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain professional standards of care for a resident who was taking an antiplatelet medication, which increases the risk of bleeding, by not sending them to the hospital after sustaining head trauma from multiple falls. The resident, who had a history of coronary artery disease, experienced several falls, including an unwitnessed fall in the hallway and another fall next to their bed. Despite these incidents, the resident was not sent to the hospital for evaluation, which is the standard of care for individuals on antiplatelet medication who experience head trauma. The Director of Nursing reported that the facility's policy was to monitor for neurological abnormalities post-fall, and the decision to send the resident to the hospital was based on these assessments. However, the Medical Director indicated that the standard of care for residents on antiplatelet medication who experience head trauma is to send them to the hospital for evaluation, as minor neurological changes may go unnoticed by facility staff. The failure to adhere to this standard of care resulted in the potential for unidentified internal bleeding, which could lead to serious complications.
Failure to Address Pharmacist's Medication Review Recommendations
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a physician reviewed and responded to a registered pharmacist's monthly medication regimen review recommendations for a resident diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder. The pharmacist's clinical record review, dated 11/7/24, included a recommendation regarding the resident's use of the psychotropic medication Hydroxyzine, which was prescribed on a PRN basis. According to regulatory guidelines, PRN orders for psychotropic medications must be limited to 14 days, and a new order requires a direct examination by the attending physician. The pharmacist recommended considering the continued need for the medication and documenting any benefits experienced by the resident. The deficiency occurred because the process for addressing pharmacist medication review reports was not followed. The report was supposed to be sent via electronic mail to the DON, MDS Nurse, and the doctor, then printed and placed in the doctor book for review. However, the report for the resident was not located in a timely manner, and the physician did not review or sign it until 12/5/24, nearly a month later. This delay resulted in the pharmacist's recommendations not being addressed promptly, potentially leading to negative medication side effects for the resident.
Failure to Discontinue PRN Psychotropic Medications
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adhere to regulatory guidelines regarding the use of PRN psychotropic medications, resulting in potential unnecessary medication use for two residents. Resident #2, diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder, was prescribed Hydroxyzine 10 mg to be taken as needed for anxiety. However, the medication order did not include a 14-day stop date, which is required to prompt a review of the medication's effectiveness and continued need. A pharmacist's clinical record review highlighted this oversight, emphasizing the necessity for a direct examination by the attending physician to determine the medication's continued necessity. Similarly, Resident #134, with a diagnosis of unspecified anxiety disorder, was prescribed Klonopin 0.5 mg to be taken as needed for anxiety. This order also lacked a 14-day stop date or documented rationale for continued use beyond this period. The Social Services Director confirmed that both residents' PRN psychotropic medication orders should have been discontinued after 14 days or should have included documented justification for their continued use, as per regulatory requirements.
Infection Control Deficiency in Glucometer Use and Hand Hygiene
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adhere to infection control standards for hand hygiene and glucometer cleaning, as observed during blood sugar assessments for three residents. Registered Nurse (RN) J was seen performing blood sugar checks without cleaning the glucometer between uses and without performing hand hygiene after removing gloves. Specifically, RN J used the same glucometer for multiple residents without disinfecting it between uses, and did not perform hand hygiene after glove removal, which is against the facility's policy. During the observations, RN J was noted to have placed the uncleaned glucometer on the medication cart without a barrier sheet and proceeded to handle other items, such as a computer and insulin vial, without sanitizing his hands. The Director of Nursing confirmed that the expectation was for nurses to disinfect the glucometer between residents, which was not followed in these instances. The facility's policy on blood glucose monitoring machine cleaning, reviewed in May 2021, clearly outlines the need for cleansing and disinfecting the meter between each use and performing hand hygiene after glove removal.
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 263 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 5 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 St Joseph
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Royalton Manor, Llc | 0.3 mi | ★★★★★ | 5 | 0 |
| Corewell Health Rehabilitation & Nursing Center - | 2.5 mi | ★★★★★ | 14 | 1 |
| West Woods Of Bridgman | 9.6 mi | ★★★★★ | 53 | 1 |
| The Orchards At Niles | 17.1 mi | ★★★★★ | 20 | 0 |
| The Timbers Of Cass County | 18.5 mi | ★★★★★ | 20 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Coventry House Inn.
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.