Heritage Park Care Center

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

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.

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.

62.3% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 140 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 93.8% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 64 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.75 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 93% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 90 beds and averages 40.2 residents a day — about 45% occupied, or roughly 50 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 3.66 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.89 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.02 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 3.20 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.85 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.02 to 0.56 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 44% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

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 more than at the previous inspection — worsening. 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.

This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.

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.

28 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 16 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2024-08-29 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
  Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
  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 observation, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure one (#24) of three residents reviewed for weight loss out of 28 sample residents received the care and services necessary to meet their nutrition and hydration needs and to maintain their highest level of physical well-being. Resident #24 was admitted on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), prediabetes and chronic kidney disease stage 3. On 7/16/24 the resident weighed 197 pounds (lbs) and on 8/29/24 the resident weighed 185 lbs. The resident lost 5.1% (10 lbs) of her body weight in 29 days. While nutritional interventions were initiated when a significant weight loss was identified on 7/12/24 (2 cal MedPass supplement), observations revealed the facility failed to promote the resident's nutritional status by encouraging, and providing meals and snacks, documenting her intake of meals accurately and monitoring weekly weights. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Weight…

  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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Actual harm · Gcited before2023-02-09 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure 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 staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible for one (#39) of four residents reviewed for accident hazards out of 26 sample residents. The facility failed to ensure appropriate and effective measures were in place to prevent Resident #39 from repeated falls. Resident #39 fell out of bed on 9/7/22 and again on 1/17/23. Both falls for Resident #39 resulted in a hematoma and lacerations to her head after she hit her head on the bed frame. Resident #39 had to go to the hospital for an evaluation and sutures after the fall on 1/17/23. The review of the fall identified the resident's call light was on just before the 1/17/23 fall but the alarm to the call light did not immediately sound to notify staff. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Fall Management policy, reviewed 9/29/22, the policy read and pertinent part: The facility will assess the resident upon admission/readmission,…

  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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2024-08-29 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — widespread
  Set up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure an effective quality assurance program to identify and address facility compliance concerns was implemented, in order to facilitate improvement in the lives of nursing home residents, through continuous attention to quality of care. Specifically, the quality assurance performance improvement (QAPI) program committee failed to identify and address multiple concerns related to quality of care. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) Plan, revised 1/18/24, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 8/26/24 at 1:00 p.m. It read in pertinent part, The QAPI Program is to utilize an ongoing, data-driven, proactive approach to advance the quality of life and quality of care for all residents at the facility. All facility associates, families and residents will be encouraged to be involved in identifying opportunities for improvement, partake in QAPI teams, imbed QAPI activities in all core processes and provide ongoing feedback. The facility…

  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.

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-08-29 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — pattern
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  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 residents had the right to a dignified existence for three (#6, #27 and #4) of three residents out of 28 sample residents reviewed. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Provide Resident #6 and Resident #27 with a dignified dining experience; -Provide Resident #4 with privacy and dignity while he used his urinal in his room; and, -Ensure residents were not discussed by staff in areas where the conversations could be overheard by others. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Dignity policy and procedure, dated 5/16/19, was provided by regional director of clinical services (RDCS) #2 on 8/29/24 at 2:10 pm. It revealed in pertinent part, Each resident has the right to be treated with dignity and respect. Interactions and activities with residents by staff, temporary agency staff, or volunteers must focus on maintaining and enhancing the resident's self-esteem, self-worth, and incorporating the resident's goals,…

  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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-08-29 · tag F0655 — pattern
  Create and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
  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 four (#241, #242, #36, and #239) of five residents out of 28 sample residents had a completed baseline care plan within 48 hours of admission. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that Resident #241, Resident #242, Resident #36 and Resident #239 had baseline care plans completed within 48 hours of admission and/or baseline care plans which addressed all of the minimum requirements, including initial goals based on admission orders, physician orders, dietary orders, therapy services, social services, preadmission screening and resident review (PASARR) recommendation, if applicable. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Baseline Care Plan policy, revised 8/11/23, was provided by the regional director of clinical services (RDCS) #1 on 8/29/24 at approximatly 2:00 p.m. It revealed in pertinent part, A baseline care plan will be developed for every resident within 48 hours of admission to provide an initial set 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-08-29 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — pattern
  Provide 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 observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that three (#16, #14 and #17) of three residents out of 28 sample residents received necessary respiratory care. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure portable oxygen tanks were refilled timely for Residents #16, #14, and #17; -Ensure oxygen tubing was changed routinely and dated; and, -Ensure staff were using the appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) while filling residents' oxygen tanks. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Oxygen Administration policy and procedure, revised on 2/27/24, was received from the regional vice president (RVP) on 8/29/24 at 6:50 p.m. It read in pertinent part, To assure that oxygen is administered and stored safely within the healthcare centers or in an outside storage area. Change oxygen supplies weekly and when visibly soiled. Equipment should be labeled with resident name and dated when setup or changed out. Cryogenic (relating to or involving very low…

  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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-08-29 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
  Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
  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 consistently serve food that was palatable in taste, texture, appearance and temperature. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure food was palatable and served at the appropriate temperature. Findings include: I. Resident interviews Resident #12 was interviewed on 8/26/24 at 10:44 a.m. Resident #12 said she ate her meals in the dining room and had received cold food several times. She said she did not eat meat and the vegetables were overcooked or undercooked and the food was bland. Resident #30 was interviewed on 8/26/24 at 2:00 p.m. Resident #30 said she ate her meals in her room and her food was often served at a lukewarm temperature or cold. She said her food was edible but never arrived in her room hot. Resident #1 was interviewed on 8/26/24 at 2:48 p.m. Resident #1 said she ate her meals in her room and received cold food on her room tray. II. Resident group interview The resident group was interviewed on 8/28/24 at 2:07 p.m. with Resident #23, Resident #30, Resident #31, Resident #26, Resident #1,…

  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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-08-29 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure 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, record review and interviews, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in a sanitary manner in the main kitchen. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure a dietary aide's (DA) medication was not stored in the walk-in refrigerator; -Ensure appropriate hand hygiene was performed for staff and residents during meal service; and, -Ensure dietary staff removed their jewelry before serving meals. Findings include: I. Failure to ensure staff medications were not stored in the walk-in refrigerator A. Professional reference The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (2024) The Colorado Retail Food Establishment Rules and Regulations, was retrieved on 9/6/24 from https://drive.google.com/file/d/18-uo0wlxj9xvOoT6Ai4x6ZMYIiuu2v1G/view, revealed in pertinent part, Medicines belonging to employees that require refrigeration and are stored in a food refrigerator shall be stored in a package or container and kept inside a covered, leakproof container that is identified as a container for the storage of medicines. B. Observations 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-08-29 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide 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, record review and interviews, the facility failed to maintain an infection control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment to help prevent the possible development and transmission of infectious diseases. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure housekeeping staff cleaned high touch areas in residents' rooms; and, -Ensure staff followed appropriate hand hygiene practices. Findings include: I. Housekeeping failures A. Professional reference The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Environment Cleaning Procedures, (3/19/24) was retrieved on 9/5/24 from https://www.cdc.gov/healthcare-associated-infections/hcp/cleaning-global/appendix-c.html. It read in pertinent part, High-Touch Surfaces: The identification of high-touch surfaces and items in each patient care area is a necessary prerequisite to the development of cleaning procedures, as these will often differ by room, ward and facility. Common high-touch surfaces include: bed rails, IV…

  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.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-29 · tag F0645 — isolated
  PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
  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 conduct a preadmission screening resident review (PASRR) for two (#20 and #10) of two residents reviewed for PASRR out of 28 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to submit a new PASRR Level I after Resident #20 and Resident #10 were admitted to the facility with a provisional PASRR and remained in the facility for more than 30 days. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) policy, revised [DATE], was provided by the regional director of clinical services (RDCS) #1 on [DATE] at 2:10 p.m. It read in pertinent part, Ensure the Level I PASRR screening has been completed on potential admissions prior to admission. A negative Level I screen permits admission to proceed and ends the PASRR process unless a possible serious mental disorder or intellectual disability arises later. A record of the pre-screening should be retained in the resident's medical record. A positive Level I…

  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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-08-29 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  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 one (#24) of two residents reviewed for assistance with activities of daily living (ADL) out of 28 sample residents received appropriate treatment and services to maintain or improve his or her abilities. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Resident #24 was repositioned timely Findings include: I. Resident #24 A. Resident status Resident #24, age greater than 65, was admitted on [DATE]. According to the August 2024 computerized physician orders (CPO), diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), prediabetes and chronic kidney disease stage 3. According to the 8/5/24 minimum data set (MDS)assessment the resident had severe cognitive impairments with a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score of four out of 15. Resident #24 required substantial to maximum assistance with mobility and transfers. B. Observations During a continuous observation on 8/28/24, beginning at 8:47 a.m. and ending at…

  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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-08-29 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  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 (#37 and #1) of two residents out of 28 sample residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Resident #37 and Resident #1 received quality care when the residents' physicians did not respond timely after both residents experienced a change of condition. Findings include: I. Professional reference [NAME], P.A., [NAME], A.G., Fundamentals of Nursing, 10 ed. (2020), Elsevier, St. Louis Missouri, pp. 1115, read in pertinent part: Effective communication and teamwork are essential for the delivery of high-quality, safe patient care. To avoid communication failures that can lead to unanticipated adverse events in patients, nurses must speak up when they have concerns and take the necessary steps to communicate assertively and collaboratively with the healthcare team. II. Facility policy and procedure The Changes in Resident's Condition or…

  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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“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.

Fines & penalties

$25,990 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $25,990 — penalty dated 2024-08-29

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 LIFE CARE CENTERS OF AMERICA — 194 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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 24 rows in the source record cover these 16 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

3 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.

This home reported $1.7M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 18% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. 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