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

Grand River Health Care Center

701 E 5th St, Rifle, CO 81650 · Non profit - Corporation · 57 certified beds · (970) 625-1514 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
1 immediate-jeopardy citation$22,171 in federal fines
Insights

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

In its favor
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
Worth asking about
  • inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
  • the CMS record shows $22,171 in federal fines (most recent 2026-01-30)
  • its payroll-based staffing score sits well above its independent inspection score
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)

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 2 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 5 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's staffing rating runs 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the staffing score rests on the facility's own payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
501 Airport Rd · (970) 625-1100 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1000 Airport Rd · (970) 625-8931 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
107 W 4th St · (970) 665-9252 · Call to confirm hours
Park
300 E 5th St, Rifle, CO 81650 · (970) 665-6480 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
337 White River Ave · (970) 625-0207

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 2 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 3 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 5 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 increased12.4%13.4%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight3.0%4.7%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder1.7%0.6%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection9.5%1.4%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%8.8%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury7.6%3.4%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened14.8%13.3%16.1%typical
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication15.6%11.5%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%94.7%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers0.6%3.4%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control25.2%21.2%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table11.1%20.0%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication4.3%1.6%1.4%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.021.381.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.561.741.80worse

* 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.

§ 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.

41.1% 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 35 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

41.1%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
64.0%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.50U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.27hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.18hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 64.0% 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 25 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 0.50 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 81% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 2% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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 SNF41.1%CMS range 30.5–52.951.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.2%CMS range 6.5–18.410.7%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 discharge64.0%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 discharge56.0%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 discharge60.0%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 identified90.6%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 dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay12.5%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 hospitalization6.3%CMS range 3.1–13.17.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.821.02Oct 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

1.14
RN hours/ resident / day
0.70
LPN hours/ resident / day
3.02
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.85
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.80
RN hoursweekends
40.0%
Total nursing turnover
53.3%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 57 beds and averages 52.8 residents a day — about 93% occupied, or roughly 4 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 4.85 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.14 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.02 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 4.21 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.11 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.28 to 0.80 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 40% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

5
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-01-30)
6
at the previous standard inspection (2024-02-08)

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.

11 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2026-01-30 · 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 (#6) of four residents reviewed for accidents out of 28 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure swallowing precautions were implemented for Resident #6, who had a diagnosis of dysphagia (difficulty swallowing). Resident #6 was identified as being at risk for choking upon admission. On 9/16/25, the resident experienced a choking episode in the dining room. The Heimlich Maneuver was not needed; however, the nurse had to reposition the resident forward and to the side in order for him to successfully expel chunks of food with liquid from his throat.On 9/29/25 Resident #6 experienced another choking episode after drinking water. The speech pathologist recommended for the resident to use straws for all liquids, taking only small sips at a time, and for staff to continue monitoring Resident #6 during meals.On 11/18/25 Resident #6 experienced another choking…

    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 · E2026-01-30 · tag F0730 — pattern
    Observe each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to complete a performance review of every nurse aide at least once every 12 months, and provide regular in-service education based on the outcome of these reviews.Specifically, the facility failed to complete a performance review of certified nurse aide (CNA) at least once every 12 months.Findings include:I. Facility Policy and ProcedureThe policy and procedure for annual performance evaluations was requested from the nursing home administrator (NHA) and the director of nursing (DON) on 1/15/26 at 12:37 p.m. On 1/20/26 at 10:46 a.m., the ADON said the facility did not have an applicable policy and procedure for annual performance evaluations As of 1/21/26, no additional policy and procedure documents had been provided by the facility.II. Annual performance reviews for CNA #4, CNA #5, CNA #6, CNA #7 and CNA #8The annual performance reviews for CNA #4, CNA #5, CNA #6, CNA #7 and CNA #8 wererequested from the NHA on 1/13/26 at 6:09 p.m. -However, the facility was unable to provide documentation of annual performance reviews for…

    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 · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-01-30 · tag F0572 — isolated
    Give residents a notice of rights, rules, services and charges.
    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 ongoing communication to residents about their rights; and failed to inform the resident both orally and in writing in a language that the resident understands of his or her rights and all rules and regulations governing resident conduct and responsibilities during the stay in the facility for one (#50) of three residents reviewed out of 28 sample residents.Specifically, the facility failed to provide Resident #50 with a written copy of the facility's room change/move policy and procedure upon the resident's request.Findings include:I. Facility policy and procedureThe Patient Rights and Responsibilities policy and procedure, reviewed 6/4/25, was provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 1/15/26 at 5:19 p.m. It read in pertinent part, The statement of patient rights shall include, but is not limited to, the patient's right to: Receive information in a manner that he/she understands. Communications with the patient shall be effective…

    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 · D2026-01-30 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolated
    Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
    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 that residents were free from significant medication errors for one (#10) of five residents reviewed for medication errors out of 28 sample residents.Specifically, the facility failed to:-Ensure that Resident #10 received warfarin (an anticoagulant medication), a medication with a narrow therapeutic index (a medication where the difference between an effective dose and a toxic dose is very small); and,-Determine how the significant medication error occurred and provide education to nursing staff in order to prevent future occurrences. Findings include:I. Professional referenceAccording to [NAME], P.A., [NAME], A.G et.al, Fundamentals of Nursing, 10th ed., (2023). Elsevier, St. Louis, Missouri, pp. 606-607, Take appropriate actions to ensure the patient receives medication as prescribed. To prevent medication errors, follow the seven rights of medication administration consistently every time you administer medications:1. The right medication2.…

    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 before2026-01-30 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment.Specifically, the facility failed to:-Ensure Resident #3's wound care supplies were not taken into Resident #33's bathroom during Resident #33's wound care dressing change; and,-Ensure registered nurse (RN) #3 followed enhanced barrier precautions (EBP), including wearing a protective gown when providing wound care for Resident #33. Findings include:I. Professional referenceAccording to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) Implementation of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Use in Nursing Homes to Prevent Spread of Multidrug-resistant Organisms (MDROs), retrieved on 1/20/26 from https://www.cdc.gov/long-term-care-facilities/hcp/prevent-mdro/PPE.html. It read in pertinent part,Enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) are an infection control intervention designed to reduce transmission of resistant organisms that employs targeted gown and glove use during high contact resident care activities.…

    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 · E2024-02-08 · 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 observation, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in a sanitary manner for two out of four kitchens. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure: -Staff used adequate hand hygiene while serving meals and touched ready-to-eat food appropriately; and, -Residents were offered and encouraged hand hygiene prior to meals. Findings include I. Professional reference The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (2019) The Colorado Retail Food Establishment Rules and Regulations, retrieved 12/27/23 from: https://drive.google.com/file/d/18-uo0wlxj9xvOoT6Ai4x6ZMYIiuu2v1G/view, revealed in pertinent part, Food employees shall clean their hands and exposed portions of their arms, including surrogate prosthetic devices for hands or arms for at least 20 seconds, using a cleaning compound in a handwashing sink. II. Facility policy A. The Food Preparation and Service policy, revised 10/2/23, provided by the dietary manager (DM) on 2/8/24 at 3:00 p.m. read in pertinent: Food service staff, including nursing services…

    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 · D2024-02-08 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    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 and revise comprehensive care plans for each resident that included the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care for one (#10) of four residents out of 30 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Update and personalize care plans for Resident #10 who was at high risk for falls; -Update Resident #10's dementia care plan documenting interventions; -Initiate a care plan for Resident #10's refusals to wear oxygen; -Personalize Resident #10's behavioral care plan with interventions to deter his verbal aggression; and, -Personalize Resident #10's care plan for his refusals of care. Findings include: I. Resident status Resident #10, age over 65, was admitted on [DATE]. According to the February 2024 computerized physician order (CPO) diagnoses included injury of the brachial plexus (nerves in the shoulder), chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (not enough oxygen in the tissues of the body), heart failure,…

    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 before2024-02-08 · 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 observation, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for one (#27) of four residents reviewed for accident hazards out of 30 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure timely, effective and properly communicated interventions were in place to prevent skin injuries and the recurrence of skin injuries to Resident #27. Findings include: I. Facility policy The Assisted lift Program policy, reviewed 1/30/23, was provided by the assistant director of nursing (ADON) on 2/7/24 at 2:39 p.m. The policy read in part: (The facility) wants to ensure that its (residents) are cared for safely, while maintaining a safe work environment for its employees. All patients and residents will be assessed with regard to the need for assistance with transfer activities, mobility or repositioning in accordance with (the facility) procedures and requirements. The patients/residents care plan will be established through the use…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-02-08 · tag F0742 — isolated
    Provide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with mental disorder or psychosocial adjustment difficulty, or who has a history of trauma and/or post-traumatic stress disorder.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident who upon admission displayed or was diagnosed with a mental disorder or psychosocial adjustment difficulty, received appropriate treatment and services to correct an assessed problem and/or to attain the highest practicable mental and psychosocial well-being for one (#50) of four residents reviewed out of 30 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Initiated therapy as recommended by preadmission screening and resident review (PASRR) Level II until four weeks later and after Resident #50 was experiencing mental health concerns: -Identify the Resident #50 triggers and past trauma to minimize being retraumatized; and, -Allow Resident #50 to have the bed of her preference due to a past traumatizing experience to minimize her trouble sleeping and night terrors. Findings include: I. Facility policy The Behavioral Health Care process and procedure, undated, provided by the nursing home administrator (NHA) on 2/8/24 at 1:06…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-02-08 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
    Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
    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 it was free of a medication error rate of five percent (%) or greater. Specifically, the facility medication administration observation error rate was 7.32% or three errors out of 41 opportunities. Findings include: I. Professional reference According to [NAME], P.A., [NAME], A.G., et.al., Fundamentals of Nursing, 10 ed. (2020), E.[NAME], St. Louis Missouri, pp. 606-607, retrieved on 2/12/24, Take appropriate actions to ensure the patient receives medication as prescribed and within the times prescribed and in the appropriate environment Professional Standards such as nursing scope and standards of practice apply to the activity of medication administration. To prevent medication errors, follow the seven rights of medication administration consistently every time you administer medications. Many medication errors can be linked in some way to an inconsistency in adhering to these seven rights: the right medication, the right dose,…

    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 before2024-02-08 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    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 and interviews, the facility failed to maintain an infection control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment to help prevent the development and transmission of diseases and infection for one out of three units at the facility. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure housekeeping staff: -Following the proper cleaning techniques for cleaning resident rooms and disinfecting high frequency touched areas (remote controls, light switches, door handles and drawer pulls); -Performed hand hygiene when appropriate; -Cleaning the toilet bowl appropriately; -Cleaned a resident's room from cleaner areas to dirtier areas to avoid spreading dirt and microorganisms; and, -Adhered to disinfectant cleaning guidelines. Finding include: I Professional reference Assadian O, Harbarth S, Vos M, et al. Practical recommendations for routine cleaning and disinfection procedures in healthcare institutions: a narrative review. The Journal of Hospital Infection. 2021…

    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

“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

$22,171 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $22,171 — penalty dated 2026-01-30

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.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
GRAND RIVER HOSPITAL DISTRICTOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 01/01/1966
ELLIS, TODDIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 02/27/2023
MENDIZABAL, RAQUELIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 06/01/2019
RICKSTREW, JAYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 02/27/2023
WILL, PERRYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 02/27/2023
PAGET, CHAVIENIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; ADP OF THE SNFsince 11/01/2024
COOMBS, JAMESIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 05/01/2006

CMS files one row per role, so the 12 rows in the source record cover these 7 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

1 organizational owner 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.

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 065381. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-30, 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