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

Pine Ridge Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center

119 Bastille Dr, Pagosa Springs, CO 81147 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 60 certified beds · (970) 731-4330 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (970) 731-4330 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0600) — cited Feb 2026Resident-funds citation (F0565)Behavioral-health or dementia-care citations — no harm found (F0744, F0758)1 actual-harm citation1 immediate-jeopardy citation CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)$19,750 in federal fines
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Feb 2026
  • it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565)
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation
  • inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (22) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $19,750 in federal fines (most recent 2026-02-12)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
  • nursing-staff turnover (56%) 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.

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 1 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
52 Village Dr · (970) 264-2104 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
211 Aspen Village Drive · (970) 731-9017 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
117 Navajo Trail Dr Ste T · (970) 731-1500 · Call to confirm hours
Park
San juan nation park · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
264 Village Dr · (702) 556-5649

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 4 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 held steady at 4 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 rating4★
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 increased7.5%13.4%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight0.0%4.7%5.4%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder1.3%0.6%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%1.4%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms31.7%8.8%6.5%check this — see note marked dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained1.1%0.1%0.1%worse
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury7.9%3.4%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened5.6%13.3%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication14.4%11.5%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine95.6%94.7%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.5%3.4%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control13.3%21.2%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table24.3%20.0%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.6%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine65.6%75.6%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission13.4%20.3%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit6.5%12.1%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.191.381.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.861.741.80typical

* 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.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

59.8% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 60 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

59.8%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.1%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
59.3%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.19U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.07hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.12hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy

Met the expected recovery: 59.3% 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 27 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 0.19 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 20% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 24% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF59.8%CMS range 48.7–70.651.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.1%CMS range 7.5–16.810.7%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 discharge59.3%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 discharge55.6%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 discharge44.4%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 identified100.0%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 settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge100.0%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 hospitalization6.9%CMS range 4.2–15.47.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.601.02Oct 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

0.51
RN hours/ resident / day
0.68
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.41
Aide hours/ resident / day
2.59
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.38
RN hoursweekends
56.3%
Total nursing turnover
66.7%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 60 beds and averages 43.6 residents a day — about 73% occupied, or roughly 16 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 2.59 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.51 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.41 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 2.33 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 2.70 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.56 to 0.38 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 56% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

8
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-02-12)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2024-01-10)

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.

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.

22 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 10 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2022-09-15 · 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 record review and interviews, the facility failed to keep residents safe from accident hazards related to elopement for two (#43 and #10) of two residents reviewed out of 25 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to keep residents safe from elopement with the potential for serious injury on two back-to-back occasions. Resident #43 had severe dementia, was at risk for and had a history of elopement, and was discovered missing from the facility on 4/3/22 at 1:00 p.m. She had left the building at 9:35 a.m. and staff were unaware she was gone until they viewed camera footage more than four hours later. She was found by a neighbor and former staff member and returned by law enforcement to the facility at 3:35 p.m. She had been found sitting on the neighbor's front porch. Resident #43 was not injured. She had been missing for more than six hours. The facility failed to immediately implement effective measures to keep residents at risk safe from elopement, causing a second resident to elope. 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Actual harm · Gcited before2026-02-12 · 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 ensure residents were free from accidents or hazards for one (#5) of six residents reviewed for accident hazards out of 32 sample residents. Resident #5 was admitted on [DATE] with a diagnosis of dementia. Resident #5 was at risk for falls related to impaired mobility and cognition. Resident #5, who had a history of falls with major injury, sustained an unwitnessed fall on 8/14/25. The facility re-educated the resident on the use of the call light. However, the resident had impaired cognition and did not always remember to use the call light. On 8/22/25 the resident sustained another unwitnessed fall. The resident sustained a laceration to her hand and a fracture of the metacarpal base to her left hand The resident was sent to the hospital and received sutures to the laceration. Upon return, the facility failed to implement person-centered fall interventions and the resident sustained four more additional falls on 10/24/25, 1/12/26,…

    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 · Fcited before2026-02-12 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
    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 prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment for two out of four units.Specifically, the facility failed to:- Use appropriate infection control practices related to hand hygiene.- Follow infection prevention practices during the wound care of Resident #2 Findings include: I. Professional reference According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) Clinical Safety: Hand Hygiene for Healthcare Workers, retrieved on 2/18/26 from https://www.cdc.gov/clean-hands/hcp/clinical-safety/index.html, It read in pertinent part, CDC provides the following recommendations for hand hygiene in healthcare settings. Know when to clean your hands: immediately before touching a patient; before performing an aseptic task such as placing an indwelling device or handling invasive medical devices; before moving from work on a soiled body site to a clean body site on 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2026-02-12 · tag F0887 — widespread
    Educate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
    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 COVID-19 vaccinations were administered for five (#10,#24, #30, #35 and #5) of five residents out of 32 sample residents.Specifically, the facility failed to offer COVID-19 vaccine to Residents #10, #24, #30, #35 and #5, who requested one when they were offered. Findings include:I. Facility policy and procedureThe Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) - Vaccination of Residents policy, revised August 2025, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 2/12/26 at 5:01 p.m. It revealed in pertinent part, The COVID-19 vaccine may be offered and provided directly by the LTC facility or indirectly, such as through an arrangement with a pharmacy partner, local health department, or other appropriate health entity. COVID-19 vaccine education, documentation, and reporting are overseen by the infection preventionist and coordinated by their designee. Vaccines are administered in accordance with CDC, ACIP, FDA, and manufacturer…

    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 before2026-02-12 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure two (#10 and #31) of eight residents out of 32 sample residents were free from abuse.Specifically, the facility failed to protect Resident #10 and Resident #31 from physical abuse toward each other. Findings include:I. Facility policy and procedureThe Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation and Misappropriation Prevention Program policy, revised April 2021, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) 2/9/26 at 1:33 p.m. It read in pertinent part, The resident abuse, neglect and exploitation prevention program consists of a facility-wide commitment and resource allocation to support the following objectives: Protect residents from abuse, neglect, exploitation or misappropriation of property by anyone including, but not necessarily limited to: facility staff; other residents; consultants; volunteers; staff from other agencies; family members; legal representatives; friends; visitors; and/or any other individual. Identify 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-02-12 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    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 report an alleged violation to the state survey and certification agency in accordance with state law for one (#49) of eight residents reviewed for an injury of unknown source out of 32 sample residents.Specifically, the facility failed to report Resident #49's death which resulted from an injury of unknown source, to the state oversight office, when the resident was found on the floor, unresponsive, with her head and neck lying on a trash can, with a coroner's finding of preliminary cause of death to be positional asphyxiation (suffocation). Findings include:I. Facility policy and procedure The Abuse Investigation and Reporting Policy, revised [DATE], was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on [DATE] at 12:37 p.m. It read in pertinent part, All alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment, including injuries of an unknown source and misappropriation of property will be reported by the facility administrator…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-12 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to fully investigate and document an investigation for one (#49) of eight residents reviewed out of 32 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to conduct and document a thorough investigation of Resident #49's death which resulted from an injury of unknown source, when the resident was found on the floor, unresponsive, with her head and neck lying on a trash can, with a coroner's finding of preliminary cause of death to be asphyxiation (suffocation). Findings include:I. Facility policy and procedureThe Abuse Investigation and Reporting Policy, revised [DATE], was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on [DATE] at 12:37 p.m. It read in pertinent part, If an incident or suspected incident of resident abuse, mistreatment, neglect or injury of unknown source is reported, the administrator will assign the investigation to an appropriate individual. The administrator will provide any supporting documents relative to the alleged incident…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-02-12 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolated
    Ensure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
    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 behavioral health care and services to attain and maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being one (#15) of six residents reviewed for unnecessary medications out of 32 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to discontinue or reevaluate a physician's order for Resident #16's as needed (PRN) lorazepam (an antianxiety medication) after 14 days. Findings include:I. Facility policy and procedureThe Psychotropic Medication Use policy, revised February 2025, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 2/12/26 at 5:01 p.m. It revealed in pertinent part, Psychotropic medications are not prescribed or administered on a PRN basis unless the medication is necessary to treat a diagnosed specific condition that is documented in the clinical record. Psychotropic medications may be used on a PRN basis in certain situations, for example: while the dose is being adjusted; to…

    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 · Dcited before2026-02-12 · 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 one of two medication storage carts.Specifically, the facility failed to:-Date residents' insulin pens and inhaler with the date they were opened; -Label a nasal spray with the resident's name;-Ensure a medication was not at the resident's bedside without an order; and,-Discard medications that have expired. Findings include:I. Professional referencesAccording to the manufacturer, Sanofi-Aventis, How to Use Your Lantus SoloStar Pen, August 2022, retrieved on 2/16/26 from https://www.lantus.com/dam/jcr:817aed9c-a677-4cd6-a6b3-d93d8ba629a/lantus-solostar-pen-guide.pdf After 28 days, throw your opened Lantus pen away-even if it still has insulin in it.According to the manufacturer, GlaxoSmithKline, Patient Information Advair Diskus (fluticasone propionate and salmeterol inhalation powder), June 2023, retrieved on 2/16/26 from https://gskpro.com/content/dam/global/hcpportal/en_US/Prescribing_Inforamtion/Advair_Diskus/pdf/ADVAIR-DISKUS-PI-PIL-IFU.PDF#nameddest=PIL 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-01-10 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — pattern
    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 observation, record review and interviews the facility failed to ensure four (#11, #12, #21 and #46) out of 18 sample residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure blood pressure medication was ordered with administration parameters for Residents #11, #12, #21 and #46. Findings include: I. Professional reference According to Khashayar, F., [NAME], J. (2022). Beta Blockers. Stat Pearls. National Library of Medicine. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK532906 retrieved on 1/19/24. Beta receptors are found all over the body and induce a broad range of physiologic effects. The blockade of these receptors with beta-blocker medications can lead to many adverse effects. Bradycardia (low heart rate) and hypotension (low blood pressure) are two adverse effects that may commonly occur. The patient's heart rate and blood pressure require monitoring while using beta-blockers. According to [NAME], R.G., [NAME], R.J. (2022).…

    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 · Ecited before2024-01-10 · 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 and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure the dietary department followed safe practices to prevent the potential contamination of food and spread of food-borne illness. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure reheated food reached the appropriate temperature; and, -Ensure beard nets were worn in the kitchen. Findings include: I. Reheated food A. Professional reference The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (2019) The Colorado Retail Food Establishment Rules and Regulations, retrieved from: https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/sites/default/files/DEHS_RetailFd_6CCR10102_RFFC_EffJan2019.pdf. Reheated in a microwave oven for hot holding shall be reheated so that all parts of the food reach a temperature of at least 165 degrees Fahrenheit and the food is rotated or stirred, covered, and allowed to stand covered for 2 minutes after reheating. (Retrieved 1/10/24) B. Observations Cook #1 was asked on 1/7/24 at 11:52 a.m. to reheat soup that was brought by the family. The cook placed the soup in the microwave for less than two minutes. He…

    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 · D2024-01-10 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
    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 two (#44 and #16) of seven residents reviewed for unnecessary medications out of 18 sample residents were free from unnecessary medications. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure Resident # 44 was assessed by the interdisciplinary team (IDT) prior to implementation of a psychotropic medication treatment and appropriate non-pharmacological interventions were initiated; -Ensure Resident #16's psychoactive medication, an antidepressant, was not increased without evidence and documentation of change of behaviors or attempts of non-pharmacological interventions, and, -Resident # 16's hours of sleep were documented for hypnotic medication use. Findings include: I. Facility policy The Psychotropic Medication Use policy, revised July 2022, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 1/10/24 at 8:02 a.m. and read in parts: Residents who have not used psychotropic medications are not prescribed or given these medications unless 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
Show the remaining 10 citations
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-10 · 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 and interviews the facility failed to ensure one of one medication refrigerators stored narcotic medications in accordance with accepted professional standards and that only licensed staff had access to resident-prescribed medications. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure controlled medications were in a locked storage container that was permanently secured to the refrigerator. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Storage of Medications policy and procedure, revised February 2023, was provided by the director of nursing (DON) on 1/9/24 at 1:00 p.m. It read in pertinent part, Controlled substances (listed as Schedule 11-V of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1976) and other drugs subject to abuse are separately locked in permanently affixed compartments, except when using single unit package drug distribution systems in which the quantity stored is minimal and a missing dose can be readily detected. II. Observations On 1/8/24 at 10:33 a.m. the medication refrigerator was observed with registered nurse (RN) #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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2022-09-15 · 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 prepare, distribute and serve food in a sanitary manner in one of one kitchen. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Prevent potential cross contamination during meal preparation; -Demonstrate appropriate use of gloves during the meal service; -Ensure cold food items were stored and served at proper temperature to prevent potential food-borne illnesses; and, -Ensure food surfaces were properly sanitized. Findings include: I. Professional reference The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) https://www.cdc.gov/handwashing/handwashing-kitchen.html, dated 7/18/22, retrieved on 9/19/22, read in pertinent part: Handwashing is one of the most important things you can do to prevent food poisoning when preparing food for yourself or loved ones. Your hands can spread germs in the kitchen. Some of these germs, like salmonella, can make you very sick. Washing your hands frequently with soap and water is an easy way to prevent germs from spreading around your kitchen and to other foods. According 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2022-09-15 · 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 develop and implement effective quality assurance/process improvement (QAPI) action plans to identify and address quality deficiencies regarding resident rights and resident care. Specifically, the facility failed to correct recurring deficiencies related to abuse, investigations, accident hazards, and infection control. Findings include: I. Record review Cross-reference F600 abuse: the facility failed to protect residents' rights to be free from abuse by staff and other residents. Cross-reference F610 investigations: the facility failed to investigate allegations of abuse and protect residents from further abuse during and after the investigations. Cross-reference F689 accident hazards regarding elopement: the facility failed to ensure residents were safe from elopement at immediate jeopardy level, with potential for serious injury or death. Cross-reference F880 infection control: the facility failed to maintain an effective infection control program to prevent the potential spread of infection. The above deficiencies…

    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 · E2022-09-15 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to take timely action to follow up on grievances of the resident council group. Specifically, residents who regularly participated in resident council said facility staff did not take action on their grievances involving: -Residents who did not receive adequate staff supervision and dignified treatment, and repeatedly set off alarms and wandered into other residents' rooms; and, -Food quality and palatability, snacks and dining room concerns/choices. Residents said nothing ever gets done in resident council, and the concerns they brought forward were unresolved and ongoing. Residents further stated the concerns they discussed in resident council were not documented in the minutes. Findings include: I. Facility policies The undated Resident Council policy, provided by the facility on 9/15/22, included the following: All residents had the right to a quality of life supportive of independent expression, decision making and independence of action. Staff and residents would work together to attempt to resolve any issues/problems…

    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 · Ecited before2022-09-15 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — pattern
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure residents were free of abuse for six (#17, #45, #26, #28, #41 and #16) of eight out of 25 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure: -Residents #17 and #45 were free from verbal abuse from staff; -Repeated resident-to-resident physical abuse incidents by Resident #16 directed toward other residents including Residents #26, #28 and Resident #41; and, -Physical abuse by Resident #22 against Resident #16 on two occasions. Cross-reference F610: failure to investigate an allegation of abuse. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Resident Safety policy, no date of inception or revision, provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 9/14/22 at 5:50 p.m. documented in part, it was the policy of the facility to maintain a work and living environment that was professional and free from threat and/or occurrence of harassment, abuse, (verbal, mental, or sexual), neglect, corporal punishment, involuntary seclusion…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has plan of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2022-09-15 · tag F0744 — failed to care for residents with dementia — pattern
    Provide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with dementia.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to effectively address the treatment and service needs of three (#16, #39 and #22) of five residents reviewed for dementia care of 25 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Provide dementia care and services to ensure Resident #39 was provided an appropriate level of meal assistance while promoting a dignified meal experience. -Provide dementia care and services to provide for resident needs and address repeated incidents of resident-to-resident aggression and abuse for Resident #16; and, -Provide dementia care and services for Resident #22. Findings include: I. Facility policy The Dementia-Clinical Care policy, March 2015, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 9/19/22 via email. The policy read in pertinent part: For individuals with confirmed dementia, the IDT (interdisciplinary team) will identify a resident-centered care plan to maximize remaining function and quality of life. The facility will strive…

    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 · Ecited before2022-09-15 · 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 ensure proper infection control practices for one of one dining rooms and one of one laundry rooms. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure: -Residents were offered hand hygiene prior to meals; and, -Proper personal protective equipment (PPE) was utilized in the laundry room. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedures The Infection Control policy, no date of inception or revision, provided by the infection and control preventionist (IP) on [DATE] at 12:00 p.m. read, there was an active facility wide infection control program with effective measure to control and prevent infections acquired or brought in the facility from the community or other health care facilities. There was a practical system for reporting, evaluating, and maintaining records of infections among residents, including assignment of responsibility for ongoing collection and analysis of data and required follow up. II. Hand hygiene A. Observations Dinner meal…

    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 before2022-09-15 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to investigate allegations of abuse for two (#17 and #45) out of 25 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to investigate abuse allegations against a staff member brought forward by Resident #17 and Resident #45. Cross-reference F600 for abuse. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Resident Safety policy, no date of inception or revision, provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 9/14/22 at 5:50 p.m. documented in part, it was the policy of the facility to maintain a work and living environment that was professional and free from threat and/or occurrence of harassment, abuse, (verbal, mental, or sexual), neglect, corporal punishment, involuntary seclusion and misappropriation of property. Making reasonable efforts to provide a safe environment for the residents was one of the most basic and essential duties of the facility. Employees have a unique position of trust with vulnerable residents. Having access to private information, being in a physically intrusive position and having…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-09-15 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    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 develop a comprehensive care plan for four (#14, #18, #24 and #39) of 12 out of 25 sample residents for services that were to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Develop a comprehensive, person-centered care plan to effectively address multiple falls and psychotropic medications for Resident #39; -Continue to provide updated care planned fall interventions for Resident #14 after his multiple falls; -Develop a comprehensive, person-centered care plan to effectively address multiple falls and weight loss for Resident #18; and, -Develop a person-centered care plan for multiple falls, restorative services and activities needs for Resident #24. Findings include: I. Facility policy and procedure The Resident Care Planning and admission policy, undated, was provided by the minimum data set coordinator (MDSC) on 9/15/22 at 6:11 p.m. 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 before2022-09-15 · 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 one of one medication storage rooms and one of two medication storage carts. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure proper date of opening for a multi use tuberculin vial and an insulin pen. Findings include: I. Manufacturer instructions Manufacturer instructions for Aplisol (tuberculin) solution retrieved 9/21/2022 from https://www.fda.gov/files/vaccines%2C%20blood%20%26%20biologics/published/Package-Insert---Aplisol.pdf, showed vials in use more than 30 days should be discarded due to possible oxidation and degradation which may affect potency. Manufacturer instructions for Lantus insulin pens retrieved 9/21/2022 from https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2019/021081s072lbl.pdf, showed pens should be discarded 28 days after opening. II. Facility policy and procedure The Storage of medications policy, revised April 2007, provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 9/19/2022 at 2:00 p.m. read the facility shall store all drugs 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.

    Pharmacy Service 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

$19,750 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $19,750 — penalty dated 2026-02-12

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 CENTENNIAL HEALTHCARE — 8 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 3 of 52.4+0.6 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 52.4+0.6 vs chain
Staffing 1 of 51.6-0.6 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 54.5+0.5 vs chain
The other 7 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.4★, 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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
CENTENNIAL I TBD HOLDCO LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 09/01/2022
CENTENNIAL MN TR IOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 09/01/2022
CAPITAL FINANCE LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 09/01/2022
GOTTLIEB, REFOELIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2022
GOTTS CONSULTING COLORADO LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 09/01/2022
COCHRAN, DAWNIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/23/2025
TURPEN, MARKIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2024
CENTENNIAL MS TRUST IOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2022
CENTENNIAL YF TRUST IOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2022

CMS files one row per role, so the 15 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

6 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.

$5.6M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+10.8%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$800K
Related-party expense16% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 65%Medicare 5%Other / private 30%

This home reported $800K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 16% 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.

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

$281per resident / day
operating cost
$8,529per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$314per 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 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 065366. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-12, 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