Monticello Nursing & Rehab Center

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

37.8% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 55 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 68.6% 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 35 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: not reported. This home filed no therapist hours at all in its payroll data for this quarter. That is a gap in what it reported, and we do not read it as an absence of therapy — the homes that file nothing here include ones that discharged hundreds of Medicare rehab patients in the very same period, who plainly received therapy from someone. Because we cannot tell a home that under-reports from one that genuinely provides little, this home is left out of the comparison above rather than scored at zero. Ask it directly how many therapist hours a rehab resident gets, and on which days.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 75 beds and averages 47.1 residents a day — about 63% occupied, or roughly 28 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.17 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.70 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.15 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 2.22 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.56 on weekdays — 38% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.86 to 0.31 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 50% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

21 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 11 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · D2026-06-24 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolated
  Ensure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
  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, resident, and staff interviews the facility failed to keep a resident free from physical restraints during a period of behaviors. A staff member used her body to force a resident to ambulate to her room for 1 out of 1 residents reviewed with behaviors (Resident #1). The facility reported a census of 43 residents. Findings include:Resident #1's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13, indicating intact cognition. The MDS showed Resident #1 rejected care on one to three days during the observation period, and these behaviors worsened compared to previous evaluations. Resident #1 didn't require assistance with toilet transfers, sit-to-stand transfers, and walking. Active diagnoses for Resident #1 included hypertension (high blood pressure), arthritis (joint inflammation), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (COPD; long-term lung disease). Review of Resident #1's care plan initiated 5/21/26 revealed…

  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 no plan of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-06-24 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolated
  Prevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
  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, staff interview and policy interview the facility administered a antipsychotic medication without a physician's order for 1 out of 1 residents reviewed with agitation and behaviors (Resident #1). The facility reported a census of 43 residents. Findings include:Resident #1's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13, indicating intact cognition. The MDS Assessment showed Resident #1 exhibited behavioral symptoms including rejection of care on 1 to 3 days during the observation period, which worsened compared to prior assessments. The MDS Assessment indicated Resident #1 maintained independence with toilet transfer, sit to stand transfer, and ambulation (walking). The MDS Assessment listed diagnoses of hypertension (high blood pressure), arthritis (joint inflammation), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD; chronic lung disease). The MDS Assessment indicated Resident #1 hadn't received antipsychotic…

  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 no plan of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-25 · 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 clinical record review, staff and resident interviews, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure a resident remained free from verbal mistreatment by staff for one of three residents reviewed (Resident #1). The facility reported a census of 51 residents. The facility corrected the deficient practice per past noncompliance through the following actions: -An all-staff meeting was held on 3/1/2026. Abuse training completed and abuse policy signed by all attendees.-Two additional all-staff meetings were held on 3/2/2026. All attendees completed abuse training and signed the abuse policy. -All alert and oriented residents were interviewed regarding their safety. -Incident review by Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) meeting on 3/10/2026.Findings include:Resident #1 admitted to the facility on [DATE] and passed away on 3/10/2026 with hospice services in place. The MDS (Minimum Data Set) dated 1/8/2026 revealed the resident had severe cognitive impairment, had physical, verbal 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 · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-25 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, clinical record review, and staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to ensure adequate supervision was provided for a resident with a history of falls for one of three residents reviewed (Resident #2). The facility reported a census of 51 residents.The facility corrected the deficient practice per past noncompliance through the following actions: -Staff education initiated on 3/10/2026 regarding importance of proper rounding and resident monitoring. Education continued on 3/11/2026, and ongoing until all Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) and nurses have completed and signed the education form. -Alert and oriented residents were interviewed regarding their safety and well-being. -Incident was added to the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) agenda. Findings include:The MDS (Minimum Data Set) an assessment tool dated 3/5/2026 revealed Resident #2 had diagnoses including Alzheimer's Disease, Hypertension, Traumatic Brain Injury and Seizure Disorder. The resident transferred from one surface to another and ambulated without assistance,…

  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
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-11-12 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — pattern
  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 staff and resident interviews the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent resident to resident behaviors (Resident # 2, Resident #4, Resident #6, Resident #8, Resident #9). The facility identified a census of 48 residents. Findings include:1.) The Minimum Data Set(MDS) assessment tool, dated 8/21/25, listed diagnoses for Resident #2 which included anemia, hypertension (high blood pressure), arthritis and Non-Alzheimer's Dementia, anxiety and post traumatic stress disorder. The MDS stated the resident was independent for transferring and listed the resident's Brief Interview for Mental Status(BIMS) score as 6 out of 15, which indicated severe cognitive impairment. An incident report from 10/27/25 at 7:00 PM revealed Resident #4 found lying in the hall outside her room and Resident #2 walking away yelling profanities at her. Resident #4 stated this lady attacked me and started yelling at me and I yelled back. Review of Resident #4's Progress Note 10/27/25…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-11-12 · 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

  Based on observation, record review, resident and staff interviews the facility failed to prevent a resident to resident altercation, involving Resident #1 and Resident #2, for 1 out of 2 incidents reviewed. The facility identified a census of 48 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set(MDS) assessment tool, dated 8/21/25, listed diagnoses for Resident # 2 which included anemia, hypertension (high blood pressure), arthritis and Non-Alzheimer's Dementia, anxiety and post traumatic stress disorder. The MDS stated the resident was independent for transferring and listed the resident's Brief Interview for Mental Status(BIMS) score as 6 out of 15, indicating severe cognitive impairment. The Minimum Data Set(MDS) assessment tool, dated 8/8/25, listed diagnoses for Resident #1 which included hypertension, renal insuffieciency and diabetes. The MDS revealed the resident's Brief Interview for Mental Status(BIMS) score was15 out of 15, which indicated no cognitive impairment. An incident report dated 6/27/25 at 5:15 PM revealed Resident #2 elbowed another resident in the stomach. No…

  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 · D2024-11-04 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to protect a resident's dignity by failing to ensure the indwelling urinary drainage bag was kept in a dignity bag for one of three residents reviewed with an indwelling catheter (Resident #11). The facility reported a census of 50 residents. Findings Include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] identified Resident #11 as severely cognitively impaired with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 4 out of 15 and had the following diagnoses: Cerebral Infarction and Compression of the Brain. The MDS identified Resident #11 was dependent on staff for toileting, showers, lower body dressing, and putting on/taking off footwear and had an indwelling urinary catheter. Observations of the resident revealed the Foley catheter bag hanging off the bed frame without a dignity bag and visible to anyone walking by or into the room at the following times: a. On 10/29/24 at 10:11 AM, while the resident was lying in bed b. On 10/29/24 at…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-11-04 · tag F0582 — isolated
  Give residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on staff interview, clinical record review, and review of Centers for Medicare/Medicaid Services document, Form CMS-20052, the facility failed to provide proper notification to residents and/or resident representatives of the right to appeal decision for discharge from Medicare Part A for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for discharge from Medicare Part A with benefit days remaining (Residents #18, #303, and #304). The facility reported a census of 50 residents. Findings include: 1. Review of facility completed document titled, Beneficiary Notice- Residents discharged Within the Last Six Months, revealed Resident #18 had discharged from Medicare Part A and stayed in facility, on 8/23/24 with remaining Medicare benefit days and again discharged from a second Medicare Part A covered stay on 9/30/24 to home or lesser care, with remaining Medicare benefit days. On 8/21/24 at 3:32 PM, a Nursing Progress Note, informed that a Care Conference was held with Resident #18 and resident's spouse, in which both were notified that Resident #18 would be discharged from therapy on 8/23/24. Review of…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-04 · 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 clinical record review, resident, and staff interviews the facility failed to account for the resident's location when a resident chose to smoke per Care Plan for one of two residents reviewed (Resident #29). The facility reported a census of 50 residents. Findings include: Resident #29's Minimum Data set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 out of 15, indicating intact cognition. The MDS documented diagnoses of cancer, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia. The Care Plan initiated on 9/26/2023 identified Resident #29 currently using tobacco. An intervention recorded on the Care Plan indicated Resident #29 was to sign out on the Leave of Absence form when leaving the facility to smoke and sign back in upon return. The Release of Responsibility for Leave of Absence form was located on a ledge by the facility main entrance. The Release of Responsibility for Leave of Absence form revealed the name of the resident and facility were to be completed 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-04 · 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 clinical record review, resident, family, and staff interviews the facility failed to complete the facility Smoking Assessment to assess for resident's capabilities and deficits to safely smoke for 2 of 2 residents reviewed (Residents #1 and #29). The facility reported a census of 50 residents. Findings include: 1. Resident #1's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 11 out of 15 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS documented diagnoses of non-traumatic brain dysfunction, coronary artery disease, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and cerebrovascular accident. The admission Nursing Assessment completed on 3/07/2024 at 4:34 PM by Staff A, Registered Nurse (RN) documented Resident #1 as a current smoker. A Care Plan focus area initiated on 06/10/24 identified Resident #1 as currently using tobacco. Facility interventions include assessing Resident #1's capabilities and deficits quarterly to determine if supervision was…

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

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

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 18 rows in the source record cover these 7 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

3 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in IA