VS

Home > Nursing Homes USA > HAZARD HEALTH & REHABILITATION CENTER

HAZARD HEALTH & REHABILITATION CENTER

Details Rankings Comparisons Alternatives Related
Compare with other Nursing Homes USA
 Compare
HAZARD HEALTH & REHABILITATION CENTER VS
All other Nursing Homes USA
General
Percent of short-stay residents with Pressure ulcers that are new or worsened 75.2 % 
City HAZARD   vs 0% Nursing Homes USA have HAZARD
State attribute explanation KY   vs 1.8% Nursing Homes USA have KY
Street 390 PARK AVENUE, P O BOX 1329  
Zip Code 41702  
Phone 6064392306  
Overall Star Rating
(2.11 lower than average)
vs
3.11

Health Inspections Star Rating
(1.83 lower than average)
vs
2.83

Nurse Staffing Star Rating
(1.17 lower than average)
vs
3.17

Quality Measures Star Rating
(2.31 lower than average)
vs
3.31

RN Only Star Rating
(2.17 lower than average)
vs
3.17

Number of Certified Beds
200  (91.06 higher than average)
vs
108.94

Total Number of Residents
193  (101.75 higher than average)
vs
91.25

Percent of Occupied Beds
97 % (13.35 % higher than average)
vs
83.65 %

Health Survey Date 10/20/2011  
Fire Survey Date 10/20/2011  
Sprinkler Status Fully Sprinklered  vs 90.2% Nursing Homes USA have Fully Sprinklered
Program Participation Medicare And Medicaid  vs 91.5% Nursing Homes USA have Medicare and Medicaid
Type of Ownership For Profit - Corporation  vs 56.7% Nursing Homes USA have For profit - Corporation
Located Within a Hospital? No  vs 93.6% Nursing Homes USA don't have Located Within a Hospital?
Multi Nursing Home Ownership? Yes  vs 54.9% Nursing Homes USA have Multi Nursing Home Ownership?
Resident and Family Councils RESIDENT   vs 66% Nursing Homes USA have RESIDENT
Continuing Care Retirement Community? No  vs 90.9% Nursing Homes USA don't have Continuing Care Retirement Community?
Quality Indicator Survey? No  vs 68.7% Nursing Homes USA don't have Quality Indicator Survey?
Special Focus Facility? No  vs 99% Nursing Homes USA don't have Special Focus Facility?
Civil Money Penalty Count
(57.16 lower than average)
vs
58.16

Total Enforcement Actions Count
(55.31 lower than average)
vs
56.31

# of deficiencies
(0.48 lower than average)
vs
7.48

Staff Information
Number of Residents
193  (101.62 higher than average)
vs
91.38

Number of RN Hours Per Resident Per Day
0.33  (0.44 lower than average)
vs
0.77

Number of LPN/LVN Hours Per Resident Per Day
0.86  (0.02 higher than average)
vs
0.84

Total Number of Licensed Staff Hours Per Resident Per Day
1.19  (0.4 lower than average)
vs
1.59

Number of CNA Hours Per Resident Per Day
0.09  (5.4 lower than average)
vs
5.49

Number Therapy Hours Per Resident Per Day
0.09  (0.01 lower than average)
vs
0.10

Environmental Deficiencies
Deficiency #1 Scope: Few
level Of Harm: 3
deficiency: Make Sure That The Nursing Home Area Is Free From Accident Hazards And Risks And Provides Supervision To Prevent Avoidable Accidents.
survey Date: 05/12/2009
date Of Correction: 06/05/2009 

Mistreatment Deficiencies
Deficiency #1 Scope: Few
level Of Harm: 4
deficiency: 1) Hire Only People With No Legal History Of Abusing, Neglecting Or Mistreating Residents; Or 2) Report And Investigate Any Acts Or Reports Of Abuse, Neglect Or Mistreatment Of Residents.
survey Date: 06/01/2010
date Of Correction: 06/02/2010 

Deficiency #2 Scope: Few
level Of Harm: 4
deficiency: Write And Use Policies That Forbid Mistreatment, Neglect And Abuse Of Residents And Theft Of Residents' Property.
survey Date: 06/01/2010
date Of Correction: 06/02/2010 

Quality Care Deficiencies
Deficiency #1 Scope: Few
level Of Harm: 4
deficiency: Provide Medically-related Social Services To Help Each Resident Achieve The Highest Possible Quality Of Life.
survey Date: 06/01/2010
date Of Correction: 06/02/2010 

Resident Assessment Deficiencies
Deficiency #1 Scope: Few
level Of Harm: 4
deficiency: Conduct Initial And Periodic Assessments Of Each Resident's Functional Capacity.
survey Date: 06/01/2010
date Of Correction: 06/02/2010 

Administration Deficiencies
Deficiency #1 Scope: Few
level Of Harm: 4
deficiency: Set Up An Ongoing Quality Assessment And Assurance Group To Review Quality Deficiencies Quarterly, And Develop Corrective Plans Of Action.
survey Date: 06/01/2010
date Of Correction: 06/02/2010 

Deficiency #2 Scope: Few
level Of Harm: 4
deficiency: Be Administered In An Acceptable Way That Maintains The Well-being Of Each Resident .
survey Date: 06/01/2010
date Of Correction: 06/02/2010 

Quality Measures Q1
Percent of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication
34.6 % (9.51 % higher than average)
vs
25.09 %

Percent of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased
3.3 % (29.65 % lower than average)
vs
32.95 %

Percent of long-stay residents who self-report moderate to severe pain
28.5 % (11.84 % higher than average)
vs
16.66 %

Percent of long-stay high-risk residents with pressure ulcers
11.1 % (1.48 % lower than average)
vs
12.58 %

Percent of long-stay residents who lose too much weight
5.7 % (6.13 % lower than average)
vs
11.83 %

Percent of long-stay low-risk residents who lose control of their bowels or bladder
25.8 % (18.74 % lower than average)
vs
44.54 %

Percent of long-stay residents who have had a catheter inserted and left in their bladder
4.9 % (10.73 % lower than average)
vs
15.63 %

Percent of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection
3.4 % (10.06 % lower than average)
vs
13.46 %

Percent of long-stay residents who have depressive symptoms 16.3:1 % 
Percent of long-stay residents who were physically restrained
3.9 % (39.78 % lower than average)
vs
43.68 %

Percent of short-stay residents assessed and given, appropriately, the seasonal influenza vaccine
88.9 % (4.26 % higher than average)
vs
84.64 %

Percent of short-stay residents with Pressure ulcers that are new or worsened
84.4 % (0.46 % higher than average)
vs
83.94 %

Percent of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication
3.9 % (42 % lower than average)
vs
45.90 %

Percent of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury
5.1 % (10.42 % lower than average)
vs
15.52 %

Quality Measures Q3
Percent of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication
34.3 % (8.91 % higher than average)
vs
25.39 %

Percent of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased
5.4 % (18.3 % lower than average)
vs
23.70 %

Percent of long-stay residents who self-report moderate to severe pain
32 % (17.9 % higher than average)
vs
14.10 %

Percent of long-stay high-risk residents with pressure ulcers 13.9 / 15.3 % 
Percent of long-stay residents who lose too much weight
5.3 % (3.2 % lower than average)
vs
8.50 %

Percent of long-stay low-risk residents who lose control of their bowels or bladder
28.6 % (14.78 % lower than average)
vs
43.38 %

Percent of long-stay residents who have had a catheter inserted and left in their bladder
7 % (3.65 % lower than average)
vs
10.65 %

Percent of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection
5.1 % (4.48 % lower than average)
vs
9.58 %

Percent of long-stay residents who have depressive symptoms
13.7 % (6.16 % lower than average)
vs
19.86 %

Percent of long-stay residents who were physically restrained
3.9 % (34.63 % lower than average)
vs
38.53 %

Percent of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury
6.2 % (4.53 % lower than average)
vs
10.73 %

Percent of short-stay residents who self-report moderate to severe pain
54.8 % (30.04 % higher than average)
vs
24.76 %

Percent of short-stay residents assessed and given, appropriately, the seasonal influenza vaccine
86.4 % (4.96 % higher than average)
vs
81.44 %

Percent of short-stay residents with Pressure ulcers that are new or worsened
83.9 % (9.15 % higher than average)
vs
74.75 %

Percent of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication 12.6:1 % 


Scroll To Top

saved