South Platte Rehabilitation And Nursing LLC
2200 Edison St, Brush, CO 80723 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 78 certified beds · (970) 842-2825 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Jan 2025
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (18) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $36,236 in federal fines (most recent 2025-10-15)
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (65%) runs well above the national median (45%)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 3 to 1 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 20.5% | 13.4% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 8.1% | 4.7% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.4% | 0.6% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.6% | 1.4% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 9.0% | 8.8% | 6.5% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.8% | 3.4% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 15.4% | 13.3% | 16.1% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 13.1% | 11.5% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.9% | 94.7% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 0.6% | 3.4% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 20.9% | 21.2% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 38.2% | 20.0% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.6% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 77.4% | 75.6% | 79.4% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.52 | 1.38 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 3.11 | 1.74 | 1.80 | worse |
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
56.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 47 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.40 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 69% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 8% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 56.9%CMS range 44.1–69.4 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.2%CMS range 6.2–15.1 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 95.7% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 4.3% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.1%CMS range 4.1–14.0 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.83 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 78 beds and averages 45.6 residents a day — about 58% occupied, or roughly 32 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.38 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.49 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.08 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.07 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.51 on weekdays — 13% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.55 to 0.35 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 65% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
18 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2025-10-15 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents received necessary respiratory care and services per professional standards of practice for one (#2) of five sample residents reviewed for respiratory care out of 12 sample residents.Resident #2, who was admitted to the facility on [DATE], had a history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD - air flow blockage) and required continuous oxygen. On [DATE] at approximately 8:30 a.m. the facility experienced a 45-minute electrical power outage and the backup generator failed to turn on. The social services director (SSD), who was also a certified nurse aide (CNA), transitioned two residents, including Resident #2, from their oxygen concentrators to their portable oxygen canisters when the power went out. On [DATE] at 10:15 p.m. Resident #2 was found unresponsive with an empty portable oxygen canister, requiring cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). The resident was transported by emergency medical services (EMS) to the hospital and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2025-01-07 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure two (#5 and #6) of two residents reviewed for abuse out of eight sample residents were kept free from physical abuse. Resident #4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included alcohol abuse and encephalopathy (brain disease that affects brain function). The resident had a mood problem related to being quick tempered, had poor coping skills and could exhibit verbally aggressive outbursts towards others when he disagreed with them. On 10/21/24, certified nurse aide (CNA) #1 witnessed Resident #4, who was coming inside from the smoking area, purposefully run his wheelchair into Resident #5, who was in the hallway in her wheelchair waiting to go outside to the smoking area. Resident #5 sustained redness to the left lower leg above the ankle and an abrasion to her right forearm where the top layer of skin had come off, in addition to right shoulder and leg pain. Resident #5, who had a diagnosis of anxiety…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · G2025-01-07 · tag F0742 — isolatedProvide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with mental disorder or psychosocial adjustment difficulty, or who has a history of trauma and/or post-traumatic stress disorder.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based upon observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that two (#4 and #5) of two residents out of eight sample residents, received the appropriate treatment and services to correct the assessed problem or to attain the highest practicable mental and psychosocial well-being. Resident #4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of alcohol abuse and encephalopathy (brain disease that affects brain function). The resident had a mood problem related to being quick tempered, had poor coping skills and could exhibit verbally aggressive outbursts towards others when he disagreed with them. The facility failed to implement effective interventions for Resident #4 and appropriately address Resident #4's abuse behaviors towards other residents. The facility failed to protect residents from continued verbal and mental abuse from Resident #4. Interviews and observations revealed Resident #4's behaviors resulted in Resident #5's increased anxiety and social isolation. The staff…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-10-15 · tag F0659 — isolatedProvide care by qualified persons according to each resident's written plan of care.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents received services from qualified individuals who had the skills, experience, knowledge and proper licensure to meet the residents' needs for one (#1) of four residents out of 12 sample residents.Specifically, the facility failed to ensure a qualified and licensed nurse received shift report, evaluated the resident condition, obtained physician's orders for Resident #1.Findings include:I. Facility policy and procedureThe Provision of Quality Care policy, revised April 2025, was provided by the director of nursing (DON) on 10/14/25 at 2:07 p.m. It read in pertinent part, Based on comprehensive assessments, the facility will ensure that residents receive treatment and care by qualified persons in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plans and the residents' choices. To ensure persons are qualified, department heads, in collaboration with facility leadership and the HR (human resource)…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-10-15 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to provide catheter care in accordance with standards of professional practice for one (#3) of three residents out of 12 sample residents.Specifically, the facility failed to ensure the urinary catheter was changed timely for Resident #3. Findings include:I. Facility policy and procedureThe Catheter Care policy, dated 4/11/25, was provided by the chief nursing officer on 10/14/25 at 11:44 a.m. It read in pertinent part, It is the policy of this facility to ensure that residents with indwelling catheters receive appropriate catheter care and maintain their dignity and privacy when indwelling catheters are in use.II. Resident #3A.Resident statusResident #3, age greater than 65, was admitted on [DATE]. According to the October 2025 computerized physician orders (CPO), the diagnoses included dementia and bladder neck distention (the bladder is enlarged due to the opening where the bladder connects to the urethra being blocked).The 9/25/25 minimum data set…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-01-07 · tag F0659 — patternProvide care by qualified persons according to each resident's written plan of care.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure resident assessments were provided by qualified persons for three (#8, #3 and #5) of eight residents out of eight sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure Resident #8 and Resident #3, who experienced unwitnessed falls, were assessed by a registered nurse (RN) before they were assisted from the floor; and, -Ensure Resident #5, who was the victim of resident-to-resident physical abuse, was assessed by a RN following the resident-to-resident altercation. Findings include: I. Failed to have a RN assess Resident #8 and Resident #3 after unwitnessed falls, prior to assisting the residents from the floor A. Facility policy and procedure The Falls - Clinical Protocol policy, revised 10/2012, was provided by the regional director of quality and compliance (RDQC) on 1/6/25 at 11:59 a.m. The policy revealed as part of the initial assessment, nursing staff would identify individuals with a history of falls and risk…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-10-08 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to a safe, clean and comfortable homelike environment on two of three hallways Specifically, the facility did not facilitate the necessary maintenance services to maintain resident rooms in a sanitary, safe and comfortable manner. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Quality of Life Homelike Environment policy, dated 12/19/16, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 10/7/24 at 2:10 p.m. It read in pertinent part, Residents are provided with a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment. The facility's designated environmental services director is responsible for developing and implementing a cleaning schedule for common areas and resident rooms to assure that each area of the facility is maintained in a safe, clean and comfortable manner. The environmental services director shall report any concerns related to maintaining the facility in a safe, clean, comfortable or homelike…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-10-08 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure medications and biologicals were properly stored and labeled in accordance with professional standards in one of two medication carts and one of two medication storage rooms. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure expired medications were removed from the medication carts and medication storage rooms. Findings include: I. Professional reference The United States Food and Drug Administration (USFDA) (2/8/21) Don't Be Tempted to Use Expired Medicines, was retrieved on 10/9/24 from https://www.fda.gov/drugs/special-features/dont-be-tempted-use-expired-medicines. It read in pertinent part, Expired medical products can be less effective or risky due to a change in chemical composition or a decrease in strength. Certain expired medications are at risk of bacterial growth and sub-potent antibiotics can fail to treat infections, leading to more serious illnesses and antibiotic resistance. Once the expiration date has passed there is no guarantee that the medicine will be safe and effective. If your medicine has…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-10-08 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections on two of three hallways. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure appropriate infection control practices were followed during wound care; and, -Ensure housekeeping staff followed appropriate hand hygiene practices when cleaning resident's rooms. Findings include: I. Professional reference According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Clinical Safety: Clean Hands for Healthcare Workers (2/27/24), retrieved on 10/9/24 from https://www.cdc.gov/clean-hands/hcp/clinical-safety,: If your task requires gloves, perform hand hygiene before donning gloves and touching the patient or the patient's surroundings. Always clean your hands after removing gloves. II. Facility policy and procedure The Hand Washing and Hand Hygiene…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-08 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to manage pain in a manner consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's goals and preferences for two (#10 and #12) of three residents reviewed for pain out of 25 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure adequate pain management for Resident #10 and Resident #12; -Ensure a pain care plan was initiated for Resident #12; and, -Ensure pain medications were reconciled upon readmission for Resident #12. Findings include: I. Facility policy -The pain management policy was requested on 10/8/24 at 10:57 a.m. but was not provided by the facility. II. Resident #10 A. Resident status Resident #10, age less than 65, was admitted on [DATE]. According to the October 2024 computerized physicians orders (CPO), diagnoses included bipolar disorder, type 2 diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD - a common lung disease causing difficulty with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2023-05-18 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food with professional standards for food service safety. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure proper refrigerator temperatures were maintained, and food was properly dated and discarded by the use by date in two out of two unit refrigerators; and, -Ensure sanitary conditions in the dish room. Findings include: I. Ensure proper refrigerator temperatures were maintained, food was properly dated and discarded by the use by date. A. Professional reference The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Food Code 2022, last reviewed 1/18/23 and retrieved on 5/23/23 from https://www.fda.gov/food/retail-food-protection/fda-food-code, read in pertinent part, Bacterial growth and/or toxin production can occur if time/temperature control for safety food remains in the temperature ' danger zone ' of 41 degrees Fahrenheit to 135 degrees Fahrenheit too long. B. Facility policy The Refrigerators and Freezers policy, revised December 2014, was provided by the nursing home…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-18 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to immediately inform the resident, consult with the resident's physician and notify, consistent with his/her authority, the resident's representative when there was a change of condition for one (#23) of two residents out of 23 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to notify the Resident #23's legal representative related to the resident's sudden excessive increase in weight and then subsequently sudden excessive weight loss. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedures The Notification of Change policy, copyright 2020, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 5/18/23 at 11:08 a.m. The policy revealed, the purpose of this policy was to ensure the facility promptly informed the resident, consulted the resident's physician; and notified, consistent with his or her authority, the resident's representative when there was a change requiring notification. If there was a significant change in the resident's physical, mental…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-05-18 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from abuse for one (#39) out of four residents reviewed for abuse out of 23 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to prevent incidents of physical abuse by Resident #31 toward Resident #39. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Elder Justice Act and Reporting Suspected Crime Against Residents policy, revised October 2017, was received from the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 5/16/23 at 12:52 p.m. It read in pertinent part: In response to allegations of abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment the facility shall ensure all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source, or misappropriations of resident property are reported in the proper time frame (24 hours). Have evidence that all alleged violations are thoroughly investigated. Prevent further potential abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment while the investigation…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 5 citations
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-18 · tag F0744 — failed to care for residents with dementia — isolatedProvide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with dementia.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident who displayed or was diagnosed with dementia, received the appropriate treatment and services to attain or maintain his or her highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for one ( #39) out of four residents reviewed for abuse out of 23 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to for Resident #39, effectively identify person-centered approaches for dementia care to prevent resident-to-resident altercations. Findings include: I. Resident census and conditions demographic The 5/15/23 Census and Condition form documented that 48 residents resided at the facility. The form further documented there were 36 residents with a dementia diagnosis and 22 residents with behavioral healthcare needs. The facility had a secure unit with 21 residents residing in it. II. Facility policy and procedure The Dementia Care policy, no revision date, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 5/17/23 at 2:01…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-18 · tag F0813 — isolatedHave a policy regarding use and storage of foods brought to residents by family and other visitors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to implement their policy regarding use and storage of foods brought to residents by family and other visitors to ensure safe and sanitary storage, handling and consumption for two residents (#25 and #23) out of 23 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure Resident #25's refrigerator temperatures were monitored for refrigerated food storage; and, -Ensure sanitary food storage for Resident #25 and Resident #23's personal refrigerators. Findings include: I. Facility policies The Food From Outside Sources policy, dated March, 2017, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 5/18/23 at 9:15 a.m. It read in pertinent part, All foods shall be stored in a resident only area; designated refrigerator (personal or group) or cabinet. Facility reserved the right to discard any foods which are not correctly dated, or questionable content or source to assure safety for all residents. Perishable food is discarded within three days from any resident refrigerator source unless the food item is…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2019-09-26 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible for two of three halls where residents lived. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure hot water temperatures were monitored and maintained at safe and comfortable levels in the east hall (secure unit) and east central hall (directly outside of the secure unit). Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure According to the Monitoring Water Temperature policy, revised June 2007, provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 9/25/19 at 6:15 p.m.: -Water temperatures were checked and recorded periodically to ensure the safety and welfare of the residents. -The maintenance supervisor (MS) collected water temperature logs monthly, investigated trends, and initiated corrective actions. -Hot water temperatures were checked and recorded at individual and common resident use areas. -Water temperature problem areas were sample checked and recorded…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-09-26 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure each resident had the right to and the facility promoted and facilitated a resident's self-determination through support of each resident's right to make choices about aspects of their life that was significant to the resident for one (#63) of 10 residents reviewed of 37 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Resident #63 received a minimum of two showers a week in accordance with resident choice. Findings include: I. Facility policies and procedures The Routine Resident Care policy, revised in September 2011, was provided by the director of nursing (DON) on 9/26/19 at 8:20 a.m. The policy revealed the facility ensured residents received the necessary assistance to maintain good grooming and personal/oral hygiene. Showers/tub baths and/or shampoos were scheduled at least twice weekly and more often as needed. The Resident Rights policy, revised in February 2017, was provided by the district director of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-09-26 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure an allegation of abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment was reported and thoroughly investigated in a timely manner for one (#63) of two residents reviewed out of 37 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Resident #63's allegation of verbal abuse by a staff member was thoroughly investigated in a timely manner after the resident had discussed and completed a concern form with the activity assistant (AA). Findings include: I. Facility policies and procedures The Abuse and Neglect Prohibition (ANP) policy, revised in August 2017, was provided by the director of nursing (DON) on 9/26/19 at 8:20 a.m. The policy revealed each resident had the right to be free from abuse, neglect and mistreatment, injuries of unknown origin, misappropriation of resident property, exploitation, corporal punishment, involuntary seclusion and any phycial or chemical restraining not required to treat the resident's mecial…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$36,236 in federal fines across 2 penalties.
- $25,273 — penalty dated 2025-10-15
- $10,963 — penalty dated 2025-01-07
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to THE CHARLY BELLO FAMILY, THE MAZE FAMILY, THE SWAIN FAMILY, & WALTER MYERS — 19 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 1 of 5 | 1.7 | -0.7 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 1.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 2.2 | -1.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 3.0 | ≈ chain avg |
The other 18 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.7★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| MAHRT, DAVID | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 09/01/2024 |
| MYERS, KATIE | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 09/01/2024 |
| MYERS, WALTER | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 09/01/2024 |
| SWAIN, HOLLY | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 09/01/2024 |
| SWAIN, JARED | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 09/01/2024 |
| COTTONWOOD HEALTHCARE LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 09/01/2024 |
| SLATTERY & HOLMAN P.C. | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/07/2026 |
| DAVIS, EDWARD | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 08/26/2025 |
| RAI, PRADEEP | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/18/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 11 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 83% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in CO
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Colorado Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 065170. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-10-08, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.