Operating-name rollups
Chain Rollup
grade mix per operator — percentile means across peer groups are a blunt signal, the mix is the comparable statisticChains matching
2,858
with ≥ 2 facilities
| Chain | Facilities ↑ | Grade mix | % D/F | Mean pctl | States | Settings | Beds | Low evid. |
|---|
| THE H.E.L.P. GROUP - PROJECT SIX | 4 |
| 0.0% | 45.2 | 1 | icf iid | 24 | 0 |
| THE LAKES HOME CARE INC | 4 |
| 0.0% | 21.2 | 1 | home health | — | 0 |
| THE MEDICAL TEAM INC | 4 |
| 25.0% | 70.6 | 3 | hospice | — | 0 |
| THE SEASONS ON TEZEL, LLC | 4 |
| 25.0% | 46.8 | 1 | alf | — | 0 |
| THE UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT HEALTH NETWORK INC | 4 |
| 25.0% | 47.1 | 2 | home health,snf | 383 | 0 |
| THEMA HEALTH INC | 4 |
| 25.0% | 71.4 | 1 | home health,hospice | — | 0 |
| TRACY & BECKY RICHARDSON FAMILY LP | 4 |
| 0.0% | 41.1 | 1 | hospice | — | 0 |
| TRANSITIONAL LEARNING CENTER AT GALVESTON | 4 |
| 0.0% | 19.1 | 1 | alf | — | 0 |
| Tri-Borough Home Care, Ltd. | 4 |
| 0.0% | 0.0 | 1 | home health | — | 1 |
| TRINTIY MANAGEMENT INC | 4 |
| 0.0% | 31.7 | 1 | snf | 350 | 0 |
| TRUSTED HOME CARE AGENCY LLC | 4 |
| 0.0% | 34.5 | 1 | home health | — | 0 |
| TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA | 4 |
| 0.0% | 60.0 | 2 | home health,hospice | — | 0 |
| TUTERA INVESTMENTS LLC | 4 |
| 50.0% | 73.3 | 4 | snf | 378 | 0 |
| UMH NY Corp. | 4 |
| 0.0% | 58.0 | 1 | alf,home health | — | 0 |
| UNITED CARE HOMES | 4 |
| 0.0% | 26.5 | 1 | icf iid | 24 | 0 |
| UNITED CARE PROVIDER, INC. | 4 |
| 25.0% | 73.7 | 1 | icf iid | 24 | 0 |
| UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST HOMES | 4 |
| 0.0% | 4.9 | 1 | snf | 375 | 0 |
| VAL VERDE COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT | 4 |
| 25.0% | 69.3 | 1 | snf | 0 | 0 |
| VILLA ESPERANZA SERVICES | 4 |
| 0.0% | 41.5 | 1 | icf iid | 24 | 0 |
| VIRGINIA BAPTIST HOMES INC | 4 |
| 0.0% | 22.4 | 1 | snf | 227 | 0 |
| VIVIE | 4 |
| 0.0% | 43.5 | 1 | home health,hospice,snf | 120 | 0 |
| VNA INC | 4 |
| 25.0% | 64.0 | 3 | home health | — | 0 |
| VNACARE | 4 |
| 0.0% | 49.2 | 1 | hospice | — | 0 |
| WACHUSETT VENTURES LLC | 4 |
| 0.0% | 40.0 | 1 | snf | 380 | 0 |
| WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF VETE | 4 |
| 0.0% | 49.8 | 1 | snf | 517 | 0 |
| WASHINGTON STATE INVESTMENT BOARD | 4 |
| 0.0% | 48.3 | 4 | home health,hospice | — | 0 |
| WELLSKY CORPORATION | 4 |
| 50.0% | 68.3 | 2 | snf | 530 | 0 |
| WESTERN HOME SERVICES INC | 4 |
| 50.0% | 72.9 | 1 | snf | 219 | 0 |
| WESTMINSTER SENIOR SERVICES INC | 4 |
| 0.0% | 24.7 | 1 | home health | — | 0 |
| WHITE LAKE HEALTHCARE LLC | 4 |
| 50.0% | 87.2 | 1 | snf | 402 | 0 |
| XCH LLC | 4 |
| 0.0% | 52.9 | 1 | snf | 350 | 0 |
| YALE NEW HAVEN HEALTH SERVICES CORPORATION | 4 |
| 0.0% | 62.6 | 1 | home health,hospice,snf | 114 | 0 |
| YYAM HOLDINGS LLC | 4 |
| 0.0% | 54.8 | 1 | snf | 368 | 0 |
| ZJM ENTERPRISES INCORPORATED | 4 |
| 0.0% | 52.2 | 1 | alf | — | 0 |
| ZUHA HOMES, INC. | 4 |
| 0.0% | 45.9 | 1 | icf iid | 24 | 0 |
| A&T Healthcare, Llc | 5 |
| 0.0% | 27.7 | 1 | home health | — | 0 |
| AHF MANAGEMENT CORP | 5 |
| 0.0% | 44.0 | 2 | snf | 393 | 0 |
| ALLURE CARE MANAGEMENT LLC | 5 |
| 0.0% | 44.7 | 1 | snf | 1,246 | 0 |
| ALPHA SNF MA LLC | 5 |
| 80.0% | 84.9 | 1 | snf | 436 | 0 |
| ALVIN POWERS RESIDUARY TRUST FBO JEFFREY POWERS | 5 |
| 0.0% | 31.3 | 1 | snf | 832 | 0 |
| Arcadia Management, Inc. | 5 |
| 0.0% | 74.3 | 1 | alf | — | 0 |
| ARCHDIOCESE OF MIAMI INC | 5 |
| 0.0% | 57.7 | 1 | home health,snf | 633 | 0 |
| ASCENTRIA CARE ALLIANCE INC | 5 |
| 0.0% | 22.6 | 2 | snf | 678 | 0 |
| ASP FL LLC | 5 |
| 40.0% | 80.3 | 1 | snf | 650 | 0 |
| ASSISTED HOME RECOVERY, INC. | 5 |
| 0.0% | 34.7 | 1 | home health | — | 0 |
| AT HOME INFUSION SERVICES LLC | 5 |
| 100.0% | 98.5 | 1 | home health | — | 0 |
| AUGUSTNC HOLDCO LLC | 5 |
| 20.0% | 57.0 | 1 | snf | 513 | 0 |
| BALL HEALTHCARE SERVICE INC | 5 |
| 0.0% | 14.1 | 1 | snf | 513 | 0 |
| BANE CARE MANAGEMENT LLC | 5 |
| 0.0% | 27.5 | 1 | snf | 677 | 0 |
| BANNER HEALTH | 5 |
| 0.0% | 52.1 | 2 | home health,hospice | — | 0 |
Grades are peer-group percentiles, so the grade mix is the comparable statistic. mean_percentile_position averages percentile positions across peer groups and should be read as a rough central tendency, not a score.