Not rated by CMS — ratings are suppressed for new or low-volume facilities.
Past the typical resurvey interval — a standard survey could occur at any time
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of June 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Edgewood Manor Of Lucasville I during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
The facility failed to implement enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) for 11 residents identified as having a higher risk of infections. Observations revealed no rooms with EBP signage, and staff interviews confirmed a lack of awareness and training on EBP. The Infection Preventionist admitted to waiting for corporate instructions to proceed with implementation, despite the facility's policy requiring EBP for residents with wounds or indwelling medical devices.
The facility failed to ensure that pharmacy recommendations were addressed by the physician in a timely manner for four residents, affecting the management of their medications. Interviews confirmed that the facility's policy required pharmacy recommendations to be addressed within 30 days, which was not adhered to.
The facility failed to implement necessary interventions to prevent skin breakdown for a resident with spina bifida and dementia. Despite physician's orders for palm shields and Prevalon boots, the resident was repeatedly observed without these devices, and staff were unsure about their necessity.
The facility failed to timely assess, treat, and report increased pain for a resident with a history of chronic pain and other medical conditions. Despite the resident's care plan indicating the need for immediate response to pain complaints, staff did not adhere to these guidelines, resulting in inadequate pain management. Observations and interviews revealed that the resident frequently cried out in pain, but staff did not assess the pain level, offer non-pharmacological interventions, or notify the physician.
The facility failed to ensure appropriate indications for prescribing antibiotics to three residents, as required by antibiotic stewardship protocols. Antibiotics were administered without conducting necessary diagnostic tests such as urinalysis and culture and sensitivity, despite residents exhibiting symptoms of UTIs.
Failure to Implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) for residents when appropriate, affecting 11 residents identified as having a higher risk of infections. Observations over several days revealed that there were no rooms with signage indicating residents were on EBP. The residents identified included those with indwelling Foley catheters, dialysis ports, draining wounds, ostomies, and enteral feeding tubes. Interviews with various staff members, including a State Tested Nursing Assistant (STNA), Activity Director (AD), Infection Preventionist (IP), and Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), confirmed that they were either unaware of EBP or had not received any education on them. The IP admitted to knowing about EBP but was waiting for instructions from the corporate office to proceed with implementation. The facility's policy on Enhanced Barrier Precautions stated that all staff would receive training on EBP, high-risk activities, and common organisms requiring EBP. The policy also required orders for EBP for residents with wounds or indwelling medical devices, even if they were not known to be infected or colonized with a multi-drug resistant organism (MDRO). Despite this policy, the facility had not implemented EBP, and staff were not provided with the necessary training or resources, such as gowns and gloves, to follow these precautions. This lack of implementation and education potentially affected all residents residing in the facility, which had a census of 90 at the time of the survey.
Failure to Address Pharmacy Recommendations Timely
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that pharmacy recommendations were addressed by the physician in a timely manner for four residents. Resident #43 had a pharmacy recommendation for a gradual dose reduction of Lexapro, which was reviewed by the physician 35 days after the recommendation was made. Resident #78 had a pharmacy recommendation for a gradual dose reduction of melatonin, which was reviewed 48 days after the recommendation was made. Resident #77 had a pharmacy recommendation for a gradual dose reduction of Gabapentin, which was reviewed over 30 days after the recommendation was made. Resident #32 had a pharmacy recommendation to reevaluate the medicinal need of Dexilant, which was reviewed over 30 days after the recommendation was made. Interviews with the Regional Director of Clinical Operations confirmed that the facility's policy required pharmacy recommendations to be addressed by the physician no later than 30 days after they were made. The facility's failure to adhere to this policy affected the timely management of medications for the residents involved, all of whom had various medical conditions including end-stage renal disease, hypertension, psychosis, dementia, insomnia, protein-calorie malnutrition, Parkinson's disease, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, traumatic compartment syndrome, emphysema, anemia, metabolic encephalopathy, fracture of the right femur, chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder, depression, and anxiety.
Failure to Implement Pressure Ulcer Prevention Interventions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that interventions to prevent skin breakdown were implemented as appropriate for Resident #45, who had diagnoses including spina bifida, dementia with behavioral disturbance, and contractures of the left and right hand. The resident had physician's orders for the application of bilateral palm shields with finger separators and Prevalon boots to the bilateral lower extremities. However, during multiple observations, the resident was found without these prescribed devices in place. The palm shields were found stored in the resident's drawer instead of being used as ordered, and staff were unsure about the necessity of the Prevalon boots. The care plan for Resident #45 indicated the need for these interventions to prevent skin breakdown and potential injury. Despite this, the resident was repeatedly observed without the required palm shields and Prevalon boots. Interviews with staff confirmed the non-compliance with the physician's orders, indicating a failure to follow the care plan and implement necessary preventive measures. This deficiency was identified through medical record reviews, observations, and staff interviews, highlighting a lapse in the facility's adherence to its own policies and procedures for pressure ulcer prevention.
Failure to Timely Assess, Treat, and Report Increased Pain
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to timely assess, treat, and report increased pain for Resident #65, who had a history of severe protein calorie malnutrition, bipolar disorder, chronic pain, peripheral vascular disease, carpal tunnel syndrome, polyneuropathy, PTSD, and a history of substance abuse. Despite the resident's care plan indicating the need for immediate response to pain complaints and regular evaluation of pain interventions, the facility did not adhere to these guidelines. The resident's pain was not adequately managed, and there was a lack of documentation and communication with the physician regarding the resident's increasing pain levels. Observations and interviews revealed that Resident #65 frequently cried out in pain and was visibly distressed. On multiple occasions, staff did not assess the resident's pain level, offer non-pharmacological interventions, or notify the physician about the resident's pain. For instance, on 05/05/24, the resident was observed crying in the common area, and the STNA did not inform the nurse. Similarly, on 05/06/24, the resident was seen crying out in pain, but the LPN did not address the resident or assess her pain. The facility's policy on pain assessment and management, which required comprehensive pain assessments and timely interventions, was not followed. The nursing progress notes lacked documentation of increased pain, physician notifications, and non-pharmacological interventions. Interviews with staff confirmed that the resident's pain had increased over the past few months, but appropriate actions were not taken to manage the pain effectively. The failure to adhere to the facility's pain management policy resulted in inadequate pain control for Resident #65.
Failure to Ensure Appropriate Indications for Antibiotic Use
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure appropriate indications for prescribing antibiotic medications to residents, affecting three residents reviewed for antibiotic stewardship. Resident #28 was prescribed Bactrim for a urinary tract infection (UTI) without a urinalysis or culture and sensitivity test, despite exhibiting symptoms such as new or worsening incontinence and increased urgency. The infection preventionist confirmed that the resident did not meet surveillance criteria and should have had further diagnostic testing before receiving the antibiotic. Similarly, Resident #62 was prescribed Macrobid for a UTI based on symptoms of confusion and acute dysuria without any diagnostic testing. The infection preventionist also confirmed that this resident did not meet surveillance criteria and required a urinalysis and culture and sensitivity test before antibiotic administration. Resident #50 was prescribed Bactrim for a UTI based on symptoms of acute dysuria and increased urgency, with a positive dip test for nitrates. However, no urinalysis or culture and sensitivity test was conducted to ensure the correct medication was administered. The infection preventionist confirmed that this resident, like the others, did not meet surveillance criteria and should have undergone further diagnostic testing. These actions indicate a failure by the facility to ensure appropriate indications for antibiotic use, as required by antibiotic stewardship protocols.
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 6 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — 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 Lucasville
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Edgewood Manor Of Lucasville Ii | 0.8 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Rest Haven Nursing Home | 6.2 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Ayden Healthcare Of Rosemount Pavilion | 8.9 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| The Pavilion At Piketon | 9.4 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Piketon Nursing Center | 10.4 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Edgewood Manor Of Lucasville I.
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 August 2026) and official state health department websites.