Good Samaritan - Villisca

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.

35.2% 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 28 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.15 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 12% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 6% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 46 beds and averages 34.4 residents a day — about 75% occupied, or roughly 12 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 3.43 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.73 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.95 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 2.81 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.68 on weekdays — 24% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.92 to 0.26 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 32% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are 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.

18 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 7 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2024-09-24 · 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 record review, facility investigative file review, surveillance footage, resident and staff interview and policy review the facility failed to ensure 1 of 3 resident (Resident #1) was free from abuse. The facility reported a census of 37 residents. Findings include: According to the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment tool, with a reference date of 7/2/24, documented Resident #1 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 11. A BIMS score of 11 suggested moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS documented Resident #1 displayed no physical, verbal or other behavioral symptoms during the review period. The MDS indicated he had bilateral upper and lower extremity impairment on both sides and utilized a wheelchair. The MDS documented the following diagnoses for Resident #1: hypertension, renal failure, obstructive uropathy, stroke, hemiplegia, depression, and spinal stenosis. The Care Plan focus area with a revision date of 7/26/2023 documented Resident #1 had an activities of daily living (ADLs) self-care performance deficit related to impaired mobility. 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · E2026-01-29 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — pattern
  Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to safely secure controlled substances for 13 of 13 residents reviewed. An observation of the medication administration revealed the staff failed to store controlled substances under extra security. The facility reported a census of 34 residents. Findings include: On 1/27/26 at 7:32 AM observed Staff A, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), prepare medications for Resident #33. She pulled the clonazepam (anti-anxiety medication) out of the same drawer as the scheduled medication. When asked why they didn't have the controlled substance under a double lock, she replied she didn't know. She added they had the as needed (PRN) controlled substances under a double lock. On 1/27/26 at 7:44 AM the observation of the narcotic drawer revealed the facility had the PRN lorazepam's and clonazepam's double locked, but not the scheduled ones. The review of the Medication Review Reports (MRR) printed on 1/28/26 at 10:25 AM revealed 4 residents received clonazepam scheduled (Residents #21, #27, #30, and #33). According to the United…

  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 · Ecited before2026-01-29 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview and policy review the facility failed to ensure safe food storage. In an initial observation of the kitchen, observed the opened food packages without dates when opened. The facility reported a census of 34 residents. Findings include: The initial observation of the kitchen completed on 1/26/26 at 10:00 AM, revealed the following food items without an opened date: A bag of shredded cheeseA bag of cauliflowerA crock pot of cheese.On 1/27/26 at 3:00 PM, the Dietary Manager said they expected the staff to date the food items at the time they open them. They explained unopened items in the refrigerator would be good for 7 days but opened items were good for no longer than 3 days. The described the crock pot of cheese as from a staff party over the weekend and not used by residents. A facility policy titled: Date Marking, dated 4/4/25, instructed to date time/temperature control foods items with the received date. When they opened the food but kept it in storage, the employees would clearly label the date/time when they opened the container.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-29 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
  Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, record review, and policy review the facility failed to follow physicians' orders for blood pressure parameters. In addition, the facility failed to retake blood pressure measurements for readings outside of normal range for 1 of 1 resident reviewed (Resident #38). The facility reported a census of 34 residents.Findings include:Resident #38's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] listed an admission date of 12/13/25. The MDS identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, indicating intact cognition. The MDS included diagnoses of hypertension (high blood pressure higher than 130/80), respiratory (lungs) failure, disorder of electrolyte and fluid balance. The Care Plan Focus initiated 12/13/25 reflected Resident #38 had hypertension. The Interventions directed the staff to monitor her for disorientation (a form of confusion), lethargy (extreme tiredness), difficulty breathing. Resident #38's Blood Pressure Exceptions Report printed 1/28/26 listed the following low…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-01-29 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview and policy review the facility failed to serve the therapeutic menu as ordered for 3 of 34 reviewed residents reviewed (Residents #25, #23, and #20). The facility reported a census of 34 residents. Findings include: 1. Resident #25's Medication Review Report (MRR) printed 1/28/26 included diagnoses of muscle weakness, dementia, psychotic disturbance, and anxiety. The MRR included a diet order dated 1/27/26 of a regular diet with regular texture, thin consistency, and ground meat. 2. Resident #23's MRR printed 1/28/26 included diagnoses of kidney disease, malnutrition, and vitamin deficiency. The MRR included a diet order dated 1/27/26 of a no added salt (NAS) diet with soft and bite-sized texture with a mildly thick consistency.3. Resident #20's MRR printed 1/28/26 included diagnoses of hypertension (blood pressure higher than 130/80), vascular dementia (forgetfulness caused by changes in the brain), anxiety and muscle weakness. The MRR included a diet order dated 2/21/25 of a regular texture diet. On 1/27/26 at 12:00 PM, observed the lunch service.…

  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 · Dcited before2025-10-16 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
  Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on Electronic Health Record (EHR) review, staff interviews, and policy review the facility failed to provide needed services in accordance with professional standards by receiving physician's orders to start physical therapy (PT) and occupational therapy (OT) and failed to start the orders for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #2). The facility reported a census of 37 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] for Resident #2 documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 3 indicating severe cognitive impairment. The MDS documented right below the knee amputation with right lower extremity prosthetic.Review of Resident #2's EHR document dated 8/4/25 titled, admission Orders to Nursing Home documented physician's orders for physical therapy and occupational therapy with rehab potential as fair. Review of document dated 9/3/25 titled, Physical Therapy PT Evaluation and Plan of Treatment documented certification period was 9/3/25 through 11/25/25. The document further explained…

  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 · D2025-10-16 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on Electronic Health Record review, Medication Administration Records - Treatment Administration Records (MAR-TAR) and staff interviews the facility failed to receive necessary treatment to prevent developing avoidable pressure ulcers for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #5). The facility reported a census of 37 residents.Finding include:The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] for Resident #5 documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3 indicating severe cognitive impairment. The MDS documented diagnosis of two stage 2 pressure ulcers.Review of Resident #5's MAR-TAR documented a physician's order for daily wound data every day shift for wound observation. Right sacral region dressing change. Cleanse with soap and water, skin prep, med honey, cover with 2x3 or 4x4 proximal border foam dressing once a day for skin treatment started 5/9/25. Weekly skin observation one time a day every Thursday for skin observation.Review Resident #5's EHR's titled, Wound Data Collection from 5/5/25 -…

  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 before2025-09-03 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
  Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on clinical document review, observation, resident interview, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to provide a professional standard of quality by not following physician orders for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #2). The facility reported a census of 37 residents. Findings include:Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #2 dated 6/10/25 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating intact cognition. The MDS further revealed diagnoses of quadriplegia, seizure disorder, anxiety, and respiratory failure.Review of the Electronic Healthcare Record (EHR) page titled, Physician's Orders revealed an order for the lower extremities to be 1. washed with soap and water, 2. irrigate with normal saline, 3. apply skin prep to periwound, 4. apply nickel thick medicated cream, 5. Saline moistened fluffed gauze, 6. Cover with dry gauze, 7. Secure with rolled gauze and tape every day and evening shift for wound care with a start date of 7/21/25. The page further revealed an order for compression socks on in the morning and off in…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-03 · 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 clinical record review, observation, staff interviews and policy review the facility failed to protect a resident from a possible accident and injury by not following the prevention of fall interventions for 1 of 3 residents (#5). The facility failed to protect the resident with the completion of 3 movements using a dependent non-weight bearing mechanical lift with only 1 staff present. The facility reported a census of 37 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #5 dated 8/19/25 identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3/15 indicating severe cognitive impairment The document revealed the resident required total staff assistance for toileting hygiene and significant/maximal staff assistance for lower body dressing, sit to stand, chair/bed-to-chair transfer and toilet transfers. The document provided the resident was dependent for manual wheelchair mobility. The document provided the resident's diagnoses included cerebrovascular accident, Non-Alzheimer's Dementia and coronary artery disease. Resident #5's Care Plan printed…

  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 · D2024-12-05 · 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, resident and family interviews, staff interviews and record review the facility failed to treat each resident with respect and dignity during care for 1 of 1 resident reviewed. Resident #8 reported that a staff member refused to put him to bed until he went to the bathroom, then she tried to pry his hand off of the mechanical lift. The facility reported a census of 42 residents. Findings include: According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], Resident #8 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. He had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 (intact cognitive ability.) Resident #8 did not exhibit verbal or physical behavioral symptoms toward others nor did he reject care from staff. The resident required substantial assistance with toileting, lower body dressing, showers, sit to stand, and toilet transfers. His diagnoses included; lymphedema, muscle weakness, need for assistance with personal care, depression and chronic pain. The Care Plan for Resident #8, updated 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-12-05 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to provide a resident and family with adequate notification of financial responsibility when Medicare Part A services were scheduled to be discontinued for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #32). The facility reported a census of 42 residents. Findings include: According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], Resident #32 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 1 (severe cognitive deficit.) He had diagnoses that included; cancer, anemia, renal insufficiency and Cerebrovascular Accident (CVA). The Care Plan updated on 2/8/24, showed that Resident #32 had self-care performance deficits related to acute transverse myelitis in demyelinating disease of the central nervous system. He required one staff assistance with ambulation, toileting and transfers. According to the census tab in the electronic record, on 9/16/24 Resident #32 qualified for Medicare A services and on 9/24/24, he was self pay.…

  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

“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.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to GOOD SAMARITAN SOCIETY — 92 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 27 rows in the source record cover these 23 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.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

This home reported $655K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 19% 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

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