No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

The Center At Cordera

9208 Grand Cordera Pkwy, Colorado Springs, CO 80924 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 80 certified beds · (719) 522-2000 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (719) 522-2000 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
2 actual-harm citations$8,600 in federal fines
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
Worth asking about
  • it has 2 actual-harm citations
  • 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 $8,600 in federal fines (most recent 2024-08-29)
  • nursing-staff turnover (68%) 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.

5/5
CMS overall
5 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
9320 Grand Cordera Pkwy · (719) 387-7800 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
Walgreens0.9 mi
4470 Royal Pine Dr · (719) 445-4160 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
9225 N Union Blvd · (719) 522-2200 · Call to confirm hours
Park
9295 Happy Meadows Trl · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
8630 Scarborough Dr · (719) 597-4402

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 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 5 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 4 to 3 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.

Overall rating3★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased8.1%13.4%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight14.7%4.7%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder13.3%0.6%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection2.7%1.4%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms34.2%8.8%6.5%check this — see note marked dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury0.0%3.4%3.3%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication13.5%11.5%18.9%better
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers10.9%3.4%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control30.9%21.2%21.2%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.2%1.6%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine96.6%75.6%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission19.1%20.3%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit12.6%12.1%12.0%typical

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

† This value is several times the typical-state benchmark. It can be real, or it can be a coding artifact in what the facility submitted. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

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.

70.5% 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 393 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

70.5%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
8.8%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
72.2%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.99U.S. median 0.30
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.55hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.38hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.06hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 72.2% 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 248 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 0.99 therapist hours per resident per day in 2025Q4 — more than 97% of the 13,714 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 46% 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 14% — 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF70.5%CMS range 66.2–74.451.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF8.8%CMS range 6.5–11.410.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge72.2%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge73.4%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge66.1%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified99.7%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this 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 discharge94.1%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization5.1%CMS range 2.9–8.17.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.141.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

1.01
RN hours/ resident / day
1.21
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.59
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.80
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.77
RN hoursweekends
68.0%
Total nursing turnover
71.4%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 80 beds and averages 71.3 residents a day — about 89% occupied, or roughly 9 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. 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 4.80 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.01 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.59 is at or above 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 4.37 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.23 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.35 to 0.97 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 68% is well above 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

2 ↓
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-07-28)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2024-08-29)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 6 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Actual harm · Gcited before2024-08-29 · 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 interviews, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for two (#30 and #5) of six residents reviewed for falls out of 28 sample residents. Resident #30, who was severely cognitively impaired and had a history of falls, was admitted to the facility on [DATE] after a fall at home which resulted in a left hip fracture requiring surgical repair. Upon the resident's admission, the facility initiated a fall care plan with generalized interventions that were implemented for all residents, including an intervention to ensure the resident's call light was within reach and a Call, don't fall sign was to be posted in the resident's room. -However, the facility failed to appropriately assess Resident #30's ability to use her call light and understand what the Call, don't fall sign was for due to her severe cognitive impairments. The facility did not implement person-centered fall interventions that were specific to Resident #30…

    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 · G2024-08-29 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolated
    Provide 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 provide effective pain management in accordance with professional standards for one (#1) of one resident out of 27 sample residents. Resident #1 was admitted on [DATE] with a diagnosis of intracerebral hemorrhage (stroke), type 2 diabetes, muscle weakness and adult failure to thrive. According to the 7/31/24 nursing comprehensive admission assessment for skin, Resident #1 had no skin issues. He often refused repositioning and to get out of bed due to pain. On 8/12/24 he developed pressure ulcers on his buttocks and coccyx. Additional medication was not ordered for wound care and all he was receiving for pain was Tylenol four times per day and a Lidocaine patch. On 8/27/24 Resident #1 was observed to be in severe pain during wound care of his buttocks and coccyx wounds. The facility's failure to provide effective pain management contributed to the resident suffering prolonged pain from his wounds and other areas on his body. Findings…

    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 · Dcited before2026-07-28 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    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 staff provided respiratory care consistent with professional standards of practice for one (#40) of two residents reviewed for respiratory services out of 29 sample residents.Specifically, the facility failed to ensure there was a physician's order in place for Resident #40's bilevel positive airway pressure (BIPAP) machine and routine maintenance of the BiPAP.Findings include:I. Professional referenceAccording to Nursing Skills, Open Resources for Nursing (Open RN); Ernstmeyer K, [NAME] E, editors. Eau [NAME] (WI): [NAME] Valley Technical College; published 2021, accessed on 7/29/26 from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK593208/, Devices such as high flow oxymasks, CPAP (continuous positive airway pressure), BiPAP (bilevel positive airway pressure), or mechanical ventilation may be initiated by the respiratory therapist or provider to deliver higher amounts of inspired oxygen. (Chapter 11) Manage oxygen therapy and equipment:…

    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 · D2026-07-28 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure 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, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure proper storage of medications for two of two medication storage rooms and one of three medication carts.Specifically, the facility failed to:-Ensure expired medications were disposed of; -Ensure medications were contained in the original packaging; and,-Ensure the controlled medication box was permanently affixed in the medication storage room refrigerator.Findings include:I. Professional referenceAccording to the United States (U.S.) Food and Drug Administration guidelines, dated 10/31/24, retrieved on 7/29/26 at 9:00 a.m. from https://www.fda.gov/drugs/safe-disposal-medicines/dont-be-tempted-use-expired-medicines, In 1979, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration began requiring an expiration date on prescription and over-the counter medicines. The expiration date is a critical part of deciding if the product is safe to use and will work as intended. The expiration date can be found printed on the label or stamped onto the bottle or carton. It is important to know and stick to the expiration date on…

    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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2026-04-14 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — widespread
    Ensure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
    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 one of five nursing members were able to demonstrate skills and techniques necessary to care for residents' needs.Specifically, the facility failed to ensure licensed practice nurse (LPN) #1 was licensed in Colorado while working active shifts at the facility. Findings include:Record review and interviews confirmed the facility corrected the deficient practice prior to the onsite investigation from [DATE], resulting in the deficiency being cited as past noncompliance with a correction date of [DATE]. I. Facility correctionA. Immediate actionThe human resources manager, while completing license verification checks on [DATE], identified LPN #1's expired multi-license nursing license. Upon notification of LPN #1 no longer having a multistate license, LPN #1 was notified and placed on suspension. LPN #1's employment status was terminated. The executive director and human resources manager spoke with LPN #1 and she said she would notify both her…

    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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-02-05 · 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, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure respiratory care was provided in accordance with professional standards for four residents (#8, #2, #9 and #5) of eight out of 12 sample residents.Specifically, the facility failed to ensure oxygen was administered according to physician's orders for Resident #8, #2, #9 and #5. Findings include: I. Professional Reference According to Nursing Skills, Open Resources for Nursing (Open RN); Ernstmeyer K, [NAME] E, editors. Eau [NAME] (WI): [NAME] Valley Technical College; published 2021, accessed on 2/18/26 from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK593208/ Oxygen is considered a medication and, therefore, requires a prescription and continuous monitoring by the nurse to ensure its safe and effective use. (Chapter 11) For patients with chronic respiratory conditions, such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), the target range for SpO2 is often lower at 88% to 92%. (Chapter 11) Oxygen is a medication and should not be…

    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 · E2025-07-23 · tag F0554 — pattern
    Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
    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 self-administration of medications was clinically appropriate for three (#3, #8 and #13) of three residents out of 21 sample residents.Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure Resident #3, Resident #8 and Resident #13 were assessed for the appropriateness and safety of self-administration of medications;-Ensure there was a physician order for self-administration of medications; and,-Ensure there was a physician order for medications at the bedside for Resident #8 and Resident #13.Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Self-administration of Medications policy, dated [DATE], was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on [DATE] at 2:09 p.m. It read in pertinent part, “The nursing staff will assess each resident’s mental and physical abilities to determine whether self-administering medications is clinically appropriate for the resident. If the team determines that a resident cannot safely…

    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 · D2025-07-23 · tag F0559 — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to share a room with spouse or roommate of choice and receive written notice before a change is made.
    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 written notice of room changes for two (#14 and #19) of five residents reviewed for notifications out of 21 sample residents.Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Resident #14 and Resident #19 received written notice of a room change. Findings include: I. Resident #14A. Resident status Resident #14, age [AGE], was admitted on [DATE]. According to the July 2025 computerized physician orders (CPO), diagnoses included aftercare following surgery on the circulatory system, type 2 diabetes with diabetic kidney complication, end stage renal disease, dissection of the ascending aorta (tear in the lining of the aorta), encephalopathy (altered brain function or structure), dysphagia (difficulty swallowing) and muscle weakness.B. Record reviewThe progress note, dated 6/5/25, revealed a message was left for the resident's son, requesting a callback. The resident's friend was contacted to discuss a room change. The resident's friend mentioned that…

    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 · D2025-07-23 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
    Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
    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 services provided to residents met professional standards of quality for two (#10 and #8 ) of one resident out of 21 sample residents.Specifically, the facility failed to ensure physician's orders for pain medications included parameters for when to administer specific pain medications for Resident #10 and Resident #8.Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Analgesia policy and procedure, dated 2/1/18, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 7/23/25 at 12:24 p.m. The policy read in pertinent part, “Nurses must follow pain parameters and enter pain scales for pain medicines. If a resident wants one pain pill and they rate their pain 7-10 and the order reads to give two for pain of 6-10, it must be charted that it was per resident request. Nurse management must be notified so it can be care planned.” II. Resident #10 A. Resident status Resident #10, age [AGE], was admitted on [DATE]. According to the…

    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 · Dcited before2025-07-23 · 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 interviews, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision during the use of assistive devices to keep residents free from safety hazards for three (#20, #21, and #5) of the six residents out of 21 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Resident #20, Resident #21, and Resident #5's foot pedals were in place on their wheelchairs when staff were transporting the residents.Findings include: I. Resident #20 A. Resident status Resident #20, age greater than 65, was admitted on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. According to the July 2025 computerized physician orders (CPO), diagnoses included displaced intertrochanteric fracture of the right femur, subsequent encounter for closed fracture with routine healing, history of falls, difficulty walking, muscle weakness, and a need for assistance with personal care. The 7/10/25 minimum data set (MDS) assessment revealed the resident was cognitively intact with a brief interview for mental status (BIMS)…

    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 · D2025-07-23 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
    Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
    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 with a feeding tube received appropriate treatment and services for two (#8 and #3) of the four residents reviewed with a feeding tube out of 23 sample residents.Specifically, the facility failed to ensure:-Resident #8's physician's orders were complete and accurate, with the correct route, and orders were followed; and,-Resident #3 received adequate hydration per the registered dietitian's (RD) recommendations. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Administering Medications Through an Enteral Tube policy, revised on 3/19/24, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 7/23/25 at 9:44 a.m. It read in pertinent part, “If at any time the patient cannot tolerate the feeding, place the feeding on hold and notify the provider. “Tablets that must be crushed before administration through an enteral tube require a specific order related to crushing. “When the last of the medication begins to drain…

    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 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 establish a sanitary environment to help prevent the transmission of communicable diseases and infections on one of five hallways. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure the housekeeping staff completed proper hand hygiene when cleaning resident rooms and followed the appropriate guidelines for disinfectant solution; and, -Ensure the nursing staff followed enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) appropriately during resident care. Findings include: I. Failure to ensure housekeeping completed proper hand hygiene and followed appropriate disinfectant guidelines when cleaning resident rooms A. Professional reference The Center for Disease Control (CDC) (February 2024) Clinical Safety: Hand Hygiene for Healthcare Workers, was retrieved on 9/4/24 from https://www.cdc.gov/clean-hands/hcp/clinical-safety/index.html. It read in pertinent part, Recommendations to clean your hands include immediately before touching a patient, before performing…

    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
Show the remaining 6 citations
  • Potential for harm · F2023-04-25 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    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 staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure food was stored, prepared, and served under sanitary conditions in one kitchen. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure: -Appropriate hand hygiene by food service staff; -Foods of modified consistency were reheated to safe temperatures following the use of a multi-step preparation process; and, Cutting boards were free from deep scratches and stains. Findings include: I. Improper hand hygiene A. Professional references According to the Colorado Retail Food Establishment Rules and Regulations (effective 1/1/19) pg. 46-47, Food employees shall clean their hands and exposed portions of their arms immediately before engaging in food preparation including working with exposed food, clean equipment and utensils, and unwrapped single-service items and: Before handling or putting on single use gloves for working with food, and between removing soiled gloves and putting on clean gloves. Food employees shall clean their hands and exposed portions of their arms including surrogate prosthetic devices…

    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 · F2023-04-25 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — widespread
    Make sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to provide a safe, functional and comfortable environment for residents, staff and the public. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure backflow prevention devices were installed on hoses in two maintenance closets, increasing the risk of contamination to the facility's main water supply. Findings include: I. Observation Observations of the resident living environment conducted on 4/24/23 at 3:30 p.m. revealed: The hoses on the second and third floor maintenance closets did not have a backflow prevention valve on them. The hose on the third floor was long enough to sit on the bottom of the drain pan. The hose on the second floor was approximately 25 feet long and coiled and was sitting at the bottom of the sink pan. There was visible standing water at the base of both of the sink pans. II. Staff Interview The housekeeping supervisor (HKS) was interviewed on 4/25/23 at 9:40 a.m. He said the hoses in the maintenance closet should have had a backflow prevention valve on them. He said he would install them immediately.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-04-25 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
    Honor 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 staff interviews, the facility failed to maintain a sanitary, orderly, and comfortable environment for residents in 17 of 44 resident rooms in four hallways. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure walls, and ventilation fans were cleaned and properly maintained. Findings include: I. Initial observations Observations of the resident living environment was conducted on 4/24/23 at 3:30 p.m. revealed: room [ROOM NUMBER]: The exhaust fan in the resident's restroom had a large accumulation of dust which was affecting the functionality of the fan. room [ROOM NUMBER]: The wall next to the resident's restroom had peeling and chipped sheetrock approximately four feet high by two inches wide. The exhaust fan in the resident's restroom had a large accumulation of dust which was affecting the functionality of the fan. room [ROOM NUMBER]: The wall next to the resident's restroom had chipped and peeling sheetrock approximately four two feet high by two inches wide. The exhaust fan in the…

    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 · D2023-04-25 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    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 provide the necessary treatment and services to prevent pressure injuries from occurring for one (#9) of two residents reviewed out of 28 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Resident #9's bilateral heels were offloaded while in bed. Findings include: I. Professional reference The National Pressure Injury Advisory Panel (NPUAP), Prevention and Treatment of Pressure Ulcers accessed on 4/27/23 from https://npiap.com/ read, steps to prevent the emergence of pressure ulcers in individuals identified as being at high risk include scheduled repositioning to avoid individuals being in a position that places pressure on a vulnerable area for a long period of time. II. Facility policy and procedure The Pressure Ulcer policy, revised 2/8/21, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 4/25/23 at 12:25 p.m. It read in pertinent part: The (name) will provide the necessary requirements to ensure that a patient…

    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 · Dcited before2023-04-25 · 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, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to implement interventions to reduce hazards and risks for falls for two (#198 and #197) residents out of five residents reviewed for falls out of 28 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Resident #197 and #198 were provided the interventions available to prevent repeated falls and staff were aware of person-centered interventions. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Fall Prevention Program policy, revised August 2022, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 4/24/23 at 4:06 p.m. It read in pertinent part, Any patient deemed to be high risk will have the following interventions implemented or at least considered: -Low bed (or lower our standard bed to its lowest position) -Bedside floor pads on both sides of bed. For post falls: -Determine what interventions need to be implemented to prevent further falls. Intervention will be reviewed by Interdisciplinary Team for appropriate…

    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 · D2023-04-25 · tag F0849 — isolated
    Arrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice 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 observation, record review and interviews the facility failed to maintain communication with the hospice provider, including how the communication would be documented between the facility and the provider for two (#198 and #104) of two residents reviewed for hospice care services out of five residents reviewed for hospicare care out of 28 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Demonstrate documentation of a collaboration of care between the facility and the hospice provider for Resident #198; and, -Ensure medication orders from the hospice provider were received and administered for Resident #104. Findings include: I. Resident #198 A. Resident status Resident #198, age [AGE], was admitted on [DATE]. According to the April 2023 computerized physician orders (CPO), diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and major depressive disorder. The 4/17/23 minimum data set (MDS) assessment revealed a brief interview of mental status (BIMS) was not conducted with the resident…

    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

“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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$8,600 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $8,600 — 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 VERITAS MANAGEMENT GROUP — 13 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 5 of 54.3+0.7 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 53.7+0.3 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 53.1-0.1 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 54.8+0.2 vs chain
The other 12 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.3★, 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 / managerTypeRoleSince
MURDOCK, MONTEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/01/2021
SENKOFF, ALEXANDERIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/01/2014

CMS files one row per role, so the 4 rows in the source record cover these 2 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.

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.

$8.8M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-3.1%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 0%Medicare 60%Other / private 40%

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

$603per resident / day
operating cost
$18,332per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$585per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in Colorado
$10,159/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$12,182/mo
Nursing home (private)
$6,584/mo
Assisted living

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 2026-09-01 — CMS provider number 065413. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-07-28, 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.

What to do next