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

Creekside Transitional Care and Rehabilitation

1351 West Pine Avenue, Meridian, ID 83642 · For profit - Corporation · 139 certified beds · (208) 888-7049 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (208) 888-7049 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
1 actual-harm citation$8,278 in federal fines
Insights

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

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
Worth asking about
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (31) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $8,278 in federal fines (most recent 2025-03-24)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
  • its payroll-based staffing 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.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

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

Location & what’s nearby

Urgent care / clinic
1404 N Main St Ste 100 · (208) 789-0512 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
20 E Fairview Ave · (208) 888-4414 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
1535 W Franklin Rd · (208) 887-1205 · Call to confirm hours
Park
2235 NW 8th St · (208) 888-3579 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased4.3%15.6%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight7.8%5.2%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.2%1.2%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.5%2.0%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms3.4%15.1%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury1.8%3.0%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened14.9%16.1%16.1%typical
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication7.9%16.3%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%96.2%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.5%3.2%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control20.8%22.1%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table10.8%20.1%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.3%1.8%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.6%86.5%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission15.0%17.7%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit8.9%12.3%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.141.171.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.811.661.80better

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ 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.

57.1% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 191 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

57.1%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
75.2%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.68U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.28hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.25hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.15hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 75.2% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 105 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 0.68 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 91% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF57.1%CMS range 51.0–63.651.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.2%CMS range 6.8–12.910.7%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 discharge75.2%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge66.7%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 discharge70.5%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 identified93.1%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 setting98.3%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge96.7%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization5.8%CMS range 3.2–9.97.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.831.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.67
RN hours/ resident / day
1.01
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.04
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.73
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.32
RN hoursweekends
53.1%
Total nursing turnover
21.1%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 139 beds and averages 120.7 residents a day — about 87% occupied, or roughly 18 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 3.73 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.67 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.04 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 3.29 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.90 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.81 to 0.32 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 53% 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

11
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-06-13)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2024-06-27)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

31 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 20 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Actual harm · Gcited before2025-03-24 · 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 reviews of incident reports, medical records, hospital records, and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents' safety during mechanical lift transfers. This was true for two of two residents (#1 and #2) reviewed for accidents. This failure harmed Resident #1 when she sustained a facial contusion and fractures to her lumbar vertebrae and left leg. Findings include: 1. Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including hemiplegia (paralysis that affect only one side of the body) and hemiparesis (one-sided weakness or inability to move) following a stroke. Resident #1's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], documented she was severely cognitively impaired. A care plan intervention, initiated 1/24/25, stated Resident #1 was dependent for transfers, and instructed staff to transfer Resident #1 using a mechanical lift with two staff members assisting and providing all the effort. An incident report, dated 3/9/25, documented…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-06-13 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on observation, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure food was stored in a safe and sanitary manner. This deficient practice had the potential to affect the 129 residents who consumed food prepared by the facility. This placed residents at risk for adverse health outcomes, including food-borne illnesses. Findings include: On 6/9/25 at 8:41 AM, during a kitchen inspection, a sack of potatoes and sack of onions were observed on a wire rack. The potatoes were observed to be mushy with bulging sprouts. The onions were observed to be green, soft, and mushy. On 6/9/25 at 8:42 AM, the CDM stated the potatoes and onions were not fresh and should have been disposed of.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-06-13 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolated
    Keep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 3. Resident #183 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including urinary tract infection, constipation and depression. On 6/10/25 at 9:34 AM, the computer screen on top of the 500 Hall medication cart was observed to be open with Resident #183's medical information visible. On 6/10/25 at 9:47 AM, LPN #3 stated she did not realize she left the computer open. LPN #3 stated she should have made sure to log off from the computer before leaving her medication cart. Based on observation, record review, and resident and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents' privacy was maintained, treatment information was protected, and residents received mail and packages unopened. This was true for 3 of 24 residents (#29, #35, and #183) reviewed for privacy and confidentiality. This deficient practice placed residents at risk of embarrassment, loss of control over their personal information, diminished quality of life, and psychosocial distress. Findings include: The…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-06-13 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and resident and staff interviews, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents were provided with a safe, clean, and homelike environment. This was true for 2 of 2 residents (#37 and #82) whose shared room was observed for a homelike environment. This deficient practice created the potential for diminished quality of life and psychosocial distress for Resident #82 when his roommate, Resident #37's, living space was not kept clean. Findings include: 1. Resident #37 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including left and right below the knee amputations, diabetes, anxiety, and muscle weakness. Resident #37's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 4/9/25, documented he was severely cognitively impaired. Resident #37's care plan, initiated on 9/9/19, and revised on 12/24/24, indicated resident had potential for mood problems [related to] agitation with the intervention to document episodes of behavior including refusal…

    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 before2025-06-13 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 2. Resident #104 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including Wernicke's encephalopathy (a neurological disorder caused by a thiamine vitamin deficiency) and cognitive communication deficit. Resident #104's medical record documented on 3/14/24, he was diagnosed with delusional disorder and alcohol-induced dementia. Resident #104's Annual MDS Assessment, dated 7/18/24, documented the following: -In Section A, under A1500, Is the resident currently considered by the state level II PASRR process to have serious mental illness and/or intellectual disability or a related condition? This question was answered no. -In Section I, under I5950, Resident #104 had an active diagnosis of a psychotic disorder other than schizophrenia. On 6/13/25 at 11:43 AM, the MDS Coordinator, stated Resident #104's Annual MDS Assessment was not accurate because his diagnoses had been updated but the PASRR Level I and Level II had not been updated when he received new mental health diagnoses. Based on 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 Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-06-13 · tag F0644 — isolated
    Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure a Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) was accurately completed when new mental health diagnoses were identified for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #104), whose records were reviewed for PASRR screenings. This failure created the potential for harm if the resident required, but did not receive, specialized services for mental health while residing in the facility. Findings include: Appendix PP of the State Operations Manual, revised 8/8/24, documented any resident with newly evident or possible serious mental disorder, intellectual disability, or a related condition must be referred by the facility to the appropriate state-designated mental health or intellectual disability authority for review. Resident #104 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including Wernicke's encephalopathy (a neurological disorder caused by a thiamine vitamin deficiency) and cognitive communication deficit.…

    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 · D2025-06-13 · 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 observation, record review, and interviews, it was determined the facility failed to ensure resident's medications were administered according to professional standards of practice. This was true for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #184) whose insulin administrations were observed. This failed practice created the potential for Resident #184 to receive an incorrect dose of insulin and experienced hypoglycemia. Findings include: The Lantus Insulin Glargine website, accessed on 6/16/25, documented to always perform a safety test (prime) before each injection as follows: - Dial a test dose of two units. - Hold pen with the needle pointing up and lightly tap the insulin reservoir so the air bubbles rise to the top of the needle. This will help you get the most accurate dose. - Press the injection button all the way in and check to see that insulin comes out of the needle. The dial will automatically go back to zero after you perform the test. The Lantus website also documented when you inject the insulin to…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-13 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    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 and staff interview it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents were provided with assistance to meet their needs. This was true for 1 of 24 residents (Resident #92) who were reviewed for activities of daily living. This failed practice created the potential for embarrassment and psychosocial harm when Resident #92's toenails were not maintained. Findings include: Resident #92 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including muscle weakness and unsteadiness on her feet. On 6/9/25 at 9:46 AM, Resident # 92 stated she had asked the nurses, doctors, and CNA's to cut her toe nails but no one had helped her. She also stated her toenails have not been trimmed since she was admitted to the facility. On 6/11/25 at 11:02 AM, both of Resident #92's great toenails were noted to be long and thick and yellow. On 6/11/25 at 11:53 AM, the SDC stated Resident #92's left, and right great toenails measured ¼ of an inch long. She also stated Resident #92's toenails were…

    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 before2025-06-13 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    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 staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure professional standards of practice were followed for 1 of 15 residents (Resident #18) reviewed for bowel and bladder care. This failed practice created the potential for Resident #18 to experience discomfort when his medications were not administered according to the physician's order. Findings include: Resident #18 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including multiple sclerosis (a disease that affects the brain and spinal cord), malnutrition, and dementia. A physician's order, documented Resident #18 was to receive the following bowel medications as needed: -Miralax Powder, give 17 grams by mouth every 24 hours as needed for bowel care if no bowel movement for 3 days. -Dulcolax suppository 10 mg, insert one suppository rectally every 24 hours as needed for bowel care if no results from Miralax. -Fleets enema, insert one dose rectally every 24 hours as needed 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-13 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure the CPAP water chamber was kept clean. This was true for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #119) reviewed for respiratory care. This deficient practice created the potential for respiratory infection due to growth of bacteria in respiratory equipment. Findings include: Resident #119 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including obstructive sleep apnea (temporary cessation of breathing). Resident #119's physician's order included the following: - CPAP: Settings 10 cm at 30% oxygen. Place CPAP mask on night shift, remove CPAP mask on AM shift every day. The physician' order also directed staff to wash Resident #119's CPAP tubing and reusable filter weekly with warm soapy water and let it dry. On 6/9/25 at 9:09 AM, a CPAP machine was observed on top of Resident #119's bedside table. When asked if he used his CPAP machine, Resident #119 stated probably a week ago. On 6/12/25 at 9:32 AM, Resident…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-06-13 · tag F0699 — isolated
    Provide care or services that was trauma informed and/or culturally competent.
    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 staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to assess, monitor, and identify potential triggers for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #53) reviewed for trauma-informed care. This failure created the potential for further trauma and psychosocial harm when the residents Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD- a mental health condition that is triggered by a terrifying event) triggers were not assessed. Findings include: The CMS SOM, Appendix PP, dated 8/8/24 documented, a facility must ensure the residents who are trauma survivors receive culturally competent, trauma-informed care in accordance with professional standards of practice and accounting for residents' experiences and preferences in order to eliminate or mitigate triggers that may cause re-traumatization of the resident. Resident #53 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including PTSD, paraplegia (paralysis of the lower limbs), anxiety, and major depressive disorder. Resident #53's Annual MDS…

    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
Show the remaining 20 citations
  • Potential for harm · D2025-06-13 · 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 observation, record review, and staff interview it was determined the facility failed to ensure infection control practices were implemented for a Pure Wick (female external catheter system). This was true for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #75) who used a Pure Wick. This failure created the potential for infection when Resident #75's Pure Wick tubing and canister was not maintained in sanitary conditions. Findings include: Resident #75 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including need for assistance with personal care and pressure ulcer to left buttocks. On 6/9/25 at 2:24 PM, Resident #75 was observed sitting in her wheelchair with her Pure Wick sitting on her nightstand. The canister was observed to be full with foul smelling, dark, cloudy urine and clear tubing connected to it. The tubing with visible urine inside it was observed to be resting on the nightstand. On 6/9/25 at 2:58 PM, LPN #2 confirmed the room smelled like urine and stated the Pure Wick canister and tubing…

    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 · Fcited before2024-06-27 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, policy review and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to use appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) while working in food preparation areas. The facility failed to ensure chemical level testing supplies were available to test the quaternary (sometimes called quat - a group of chemicals used for sanitization) in the sanitation compartment of a three-compartment sink. The facility failed to ensure clean pans were air dried prior to storage. These failures increased the risk of food borne illness for the 118 residents that consumed food prepared by the facility. Findings include: 1. The facility policy titled, Sanitary Standards- Dietary Personnel, dated 12/2023, documented the dietary personnel will wear hair restraints, such as hair nets, hats, and/or beard net coverings at all times while in food preparation areas. On 6/24/24 at 8:30 AM, [NAME] #2 was observed to have a beard and mustache and did not have a covering over their facial hair while working in a food preparation area. On 6/24/24 at 8:34 AM, Dietary Aide #1 was observed to…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2024-06-27 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespread
    Dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation,policy review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure garbage was contained and disposed of properly. This failure put all residents, staff, and guests in danger of illness or harm due to the increased the risk for pests and rodents to be present on the property. Findings include: A facility policy titled Garbage and Rubbish Disposal, dated 10/2023, documented garbage will be stored to be inaccessible to vermin and the dumpsters outside must be kept closed and free of litter around the dumpster area. On 6/24/24 at 8:37 AM, two dumpsters were observed outside the facility. Dumpsters #1 and #2 had two lids each, both lids on both dumpsters were open and exposed the garbage within. The lid on the right side of dumpster #2 had bags of garbage preventing the lid from closing. [NAME] #2 was observed placing flattened cardboard into the right side of dumpster #2 then began to walk toward the facility; at this time, [NAME] #1 directed [NAME] #2 to close the dumpster and reminded them the dumpster lids must always be closed. On 6/24/24 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-06-27 · tag F0625 — pattern
    Notify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
    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, policy review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure a bed hold notice was provided to residents and/or their representatives upon transfer to the hospital. This was true for 2 of 5 residents (#81 and #99) reviewed for hospital transfers. This deficient practice created the potential for harm if residents and/or their representatives were not informed of the residents' rights to return to their former bed/room at the facility within a specified time. Findings include: The facility's Admission/Discharge/Transfer policy and procedure, revised 10/2023, documented the resident or their representatives shall be informed in writing, of their right to exercise the bed hold provision in the event of a transfer from the facility to a general acute care hospital or for a therapeutic leave. 1. Resident #81 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including dementia, diabetes, and metabolic encephalopathy (disorders where…

    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 before2024-06-27 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
    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 resident and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to honor residents' choices to have a pitcher of water on the bedside table in the resident's room. This was true for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #86) reviewed for choices. This failure created the potential for psychological harm when resident preferences were not honored. Findings include: The facility's Resident Rights policy and procedure, revised 12/2023, documented You have the right to self-determination through support of your choice, including the right to make choices about aspects of your life in the facility that significant to you. Resident #86 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including end stage renal disease and congestive heart failure (weakness of the heart leading to a buildup of fluid in the body). An annual MDS assessment, dated 6/6/24, documented Resident #86 was cognitively intact. A physician's order, dated 2/21/24, documented Resident #86 was to have…

    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 before2024-06-27 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    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 staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents' MDS assessments had correct assessment information. This was true for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #116) whose record was reviewed. This failure created the potential for residents to not have their care needs met due to inaccurate assessments. Findings include: The RAI Manual, dated 10/23 indicated .It is important to note here that information obtained should cover the same observation period as specified by the MDS items on the assessment and should be validated for accuracy (what the resident's actual status was during that observation period) by the IDT (Interdisciplinary Team) completing the assessment. As such, nursing homes are responsible for ensuring that all participants in the assessment process have the requisite knowledge to complete an accurate assessment. Resident #116 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including stroke. A quarterly MDS assessment, dated 11/6/23,…

    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 · E2019-03-01 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
    Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, resident interview, family interview, Resident Group interview, test tray evaluation, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure palatable food was served. This affected 3 of 5 residents (#25, #31, and #50) who were reviewed for dietary concerns. This failed practice created the potential to negatively affect residents' nutritional status and psychosocial well-being. Findings include: Residents and family were interviewed regarding the food. Examples include: * On 2/25/19 at 10:03 AM, Resident #31 said the food did not always taste good, the hot items were cold, the cold items were not cold, and the vegetables were mushy. * On 2/25/19 at 11:34 AM, Resident #50's daughter said she was a very picky eater and frequently complained about the food. * On 2/26/19 at 10:02 AM, during the Resident Group Interview, Resident #25 said the food did not taste good sometimes and could be cold, like the oatmeal served that morning. * On 2/28/19 at 10:28 AM, when asked about the facility's food, Resident #50 made an unpleasant face, said the food 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2019-03-01 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — pattern
    Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
    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, policy review, and resident and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents' medical records were accurately documented and documented in a timely manner after care and/or services were provided. This was true for 4 of 19 residents (#24, #31, #49 and #76) whose records were reviewed. This deficient practice created the potential for harm should inappropriate care and/or treatment be provided based on inaccurate information. Findings include: The facility's Health Information policy, dated 2016, documented: * Clinical health records are maintained in accordance with regulations and professional practice standards to provide complete and accurate information on each resident for continuity of care. * Avoid assuming the responsibilities of the other health care professionals in the facility. * The purpose of the clinical record is to document the course of the resident's plan of care and to provide a medium of communication among health care professionals…

    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 before2019-03-01 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
    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, policy review, resident interview, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident received showers as he desired and as care planned. This was true for 1 of 19 residents (Resident #24) reviewed for choices. This deficient practice had the potential for harm should a resident experience a decreased sense of well-being, lack of self-worth, and frustration when his desire to receive a shower was not accommodated. Findings include: The facility's Resident Care policy, revised 5/2007, documented showers and/or baths were provided to promote cleanliness, stimulate circulation, and assist in relaxation. The facility's policy for Monitoring of Resident Care, revised 5/2007, documented each resident would be provided with the necessary care and services to allow them to reach or maintain their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being, according to the comprehensive care plan. Residents would receive services with reasonable accommodation 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 · D2019-03-01 · tag F0645 — isolated
    PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
    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 staff interview, policy review, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure the Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) was complete and accurate for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #24) whose PASRRs were reviewed. This failure created the potential for harm if residents required, but did not receive, specialized services for mental health while residing in the facility. Findings include: The facility's policy for PASRR, revised 10/2007, documented the following: * Each resident was appropriately screened using the PASRR as specified by the state. * Based on the assessment, the facility would ensure a proper referral was made to the appropriate state agency for specialized services for residents with mental illness/mental retardation. * Social Services would contact the appropriate state agency for a referral of specialized care and services the resident may need. Resident #24 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-03-01 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, policy review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to develop and implement comprehensive resident-centered care plans that included a resident's code status. This was true for 1 of 19 residents (Resident #76) whose care plans were reviewed. This failure created the potential for residents to receive inappropriate or inadequate care and for their resuscitation code status to not be honored. Findings include: The facility's Comprehensive Care Planning policy, dated 8/2017, documented a comprehensive care plan would be developed to meet a resident's medical, nursing, mental, and psychosocial needs. Resident #76 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease. Resident #76's record documented she had a DPOA. Her POST, dated and signed by the DPOA on 11/15/18, documented her code status was a Full Code. Resident #76's physician orders, dated 11/15/18, documented her code status was a Full Code. Resident #76's care plan did…

    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 · D2019-03-01 · 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 3. Resident #14 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Resident #14's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 1/2/19, documented she was cognitively intact and required oxygen therapy. Resident #14's care plan documented she had oxygen related to congestive heart failure, initiated on 12/5/18. The care plan also documented Resident #14 received oxygen continuously at 2 LPM by nasal cannula, initiated on 12/5/18 and revised on 12/13/18. Resident #14's physician orders, dated 10/25/18, documented oxygen was ordered at 3 LPM continuously. On 2/26/19 at 9:55 AM and on 2/26/19 at 10:38 AM, Resident #14 was in the community TV area with oxygen on at 2 LPM. On 2/27/19 at 10:35 AM, CNA #1 said Resident #14's oxygen was on at 2 LPM and it should have been at 3 LPM. On 2/27/19 at 10:42 AM, LPN #1 said Resident #14's oxygen should be on at 3 LPM, and she was responsible for adjusting the oxygen. On 2/27/19 at 11:22 AM, the DON said the nurse was responsible…

    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 before2019-03-01 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    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, policy review, and resident and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure bathing and/or grooming and urinary care needs were provided consistent with residents' needs. This was true for 2 of 4 residents (#14 and #31) who were reviewed for ADL care. This failure created the potential for residents to experience skin breakdown and a negative effect to their psychosocial well-being when care was not provided as needed. Findings include: 1. The facility's Resident Care policy, dated 5/2007, directed staff to assist residents with bathing to promote cleanliness and to provide residents with the necessary care to maintain the highest practicable physical well-being. Resident #31 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including muscle weakness and difficulty in walking. Resident #31's quarterly MDS assessments, dated 10/4/18 and 1/2/19, documented she required extensive assistance of one-person with bathing and personal hygiene.…

    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 · D2019-03-01 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolated
    Provide activities to meet all resident's needs.
    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, policy review, family member interview, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure there was an ongoing activity program to meet individual and social needs for residents. This was true for 2 of 3 residents (#27 and #76) reviewed for activities. This failure created the potential for harm if residents experienced boredom and lacked meaningful engagement throughout the day. Findings include: The facility's Activity policy, dated 7/2007, documented the Activity Director was to consult with nursing staff to develop suitable activity plans, be informed of residents' changes, and for nursing to use the resident's care plan, and encourage them to participate in appropriate activities. 1. Resident #27 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including anxiety, major depression, dementia, and stroke affecting the left side. Resident #27's annual MDS assessment, dated 6/15/18, documented she was severely cognitively impaired, required…

    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 before2019-03-01 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    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, policy review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure neurological assessments were performed after a fall with trauma to the resident's head. This was true for 1 of 7 residents (Resident #56) reviewed for falls. These failures created the potential for harm should residents experience undetected changes in neurological status due to lack of appropriate assessment. Findings include: The facility's policy for Neurological Evaluation, dated 5/2007, documented the following: * All incidents that involved trauma to the head would have a comprehensive neurological assessment for a minimum of 72 hours. * The neurological evaluation would be performed by a licensed nurse. * Any resident who experienced an injury involving their head or an unobserved fall would have neurological assessments and vital signs taken at least every 8 hours for 24 hours, or per specific facility policy, or physician's order. * Comprehensive neurological assessments would be…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-03-01 · 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 observation, record review, policy review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents received appropriate care to prevent skin breakdown. This was true for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #76) reviewed for skin breakdown. This failure created the potential for harm if residents developed pressure ulcers. Findings include: The facility's Care and Treatment policy, dated 5/2007, documented a resident who enters the facility without pressure sores does not develop them and to implement appropriate resident care. Resident #76 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease, pain in both knees, and repeated falls. Resident #76's admission and quarterly MDS assessment, dated 11/22/18 and 12/19/18 respectively, documented she did not have pressure ulcers and required extensive assistance of one-person for bed mobility. Resident #76's physician orders, dated 11/15/18, documented to Bridge heels while in bed. Resident #76's care plan…

    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 · D2019-03-01 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
    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, staff interview, record review, and policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents received treatment and services to prevent decrease in Range of Motion (ROM). This was true for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #27) reviewed for treatment and services related to ROM. This failure created the potential for harm when a therapy carrot (an orthotic device used to gently open the hand) was not implemented as ordered to prevent deterioration of existing contractures of the hand. Findings include: The facility's Restorative Care Program policy, undated, documented staff were to apply devices and splints according to therapy direction. Resident #27 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including stroke affecting the left side. Resident #27's quarterly MDS assessments, dated 11/14/18 and 2/14/19, documented she had an impairment to her upper extremity, required one-to-two staff with physical assistance for all ADLs, and was severely cognitively…

    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 before2019-03-01 · 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, policy review, resident interview, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure fall prevention interventions were implemented as ordered following a fall. This was true for 1 of 7 residents (Resident #56) reviewed for falls. This failure had the potential for harm if residents sustained injuries from falling. Findings include: The facility's policy Fall Prevention, dated 5/2007, documented the following: * The facility would implement measures to decrease the incidence of additional falls and minimize the potential for injury. * If a resident experienced a fall, the care plan would be created or the existing care plan would be updated. Resident #56 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including Parkinson's disease, dementia, and repeated falls. Resident #56 received hospice services. A Fall Risk Evaluation, dated 1/16/19 at 5:35 PM, documented Resident #56 was at medium risk for falling. Resident #56's admission MDS…

    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 before2019-03-01 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, policy review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents received oxygen therapy per physician orders. This was true for 2 of 4 residents (#14 and #15) reviewed for oxygen therapy. This failure created the potential for harm if residents' respiratory needs were not met. Findings include: The facility's oxygen administration policy, revised 5/2007, documented staff were to administer oxygen therapy as ordered by the physician, reassess oxygen flowmeter for appropriate flow and document all appropriate information in the medical record. 1. Resident #15 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (low oxygen supply in body tissue). A physician order, dated 11/14/18, documented Resident #15 was to receive oxygen therapy continuously via nasal cannula at 2 LPM and staff were to monitor Resident #15 for signs and symptoms of respiratory distress. A quarterly MDS assessment,…

    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 · D2019-03-01 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on resident and staff interview, policy review, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure adequate communication was provided to a dialysis center. This was true for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #49) reviewed for dialysis. The failure created the potential for harm when the facility failed to communicate the resident's current care, access site, and vital signs to the dialysis center. Findings include: The facility's Dialysis policy, revised 5/2007, documented staff were to assess a resident's blood pressure (in the non-shunt arm) prior to being transported to the dialysis center. Resident #49 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including end stage renal disease. Resident #49's annual MDS assessment, dated 11/28/18, documented he was cognitively intact and received dialysis. Resident #49's care plan, dated 11/28/18, documented he received hemodialysis related to end stage renal disease and he had an arteriovenous (AV) fistula/graft (a surgically created…

    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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$8,278 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $8,278 — penalty dated 2025-03-24

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to THE ENSIGN GROUP — 342 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 4 of 53.2+0.8 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 52.8+0.2 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 52.7-0.7 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 54.4+0.6 vs chain
The other 341 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.2★, per CMS)
1 of 5Aspen Health And WellnessOverland Park, KS 1 of 5Bennett Hills Rehabilitation and Care CenterGooding, ID 1 of 5Broadway By The SeaLong Beach, CA 1 of 5Chatsworth Park Health Care CenterChatsworth, CA 1 of 5Clarion Wellness and Rehabilitation CenterClarion, IA 1 of 5Colonial Manor of RandolphRandolph, NE 1 of 5Durango Health And RehabilitationDurango, CO 1 of 5Fort Dodge Health and RehabilitationFort Dodge, IA 1 of 5Greater Southside Health and RehabilitationDes Moines, IA 1 of 5Hearthstone Health And RehabilitationSparks, NV 1 of 5Heritage Gardens Rehabilitation and HealthcareCarrollton, TX 1 of 5Hillcrest Health Care CenterHawarden, IA 1 of 5Lake Village Nursing And Rehabilitation CenterLewisville, TX 1 of 5Lakeside Rehabilitation and Care CenterCoeur d'Alene, ID 1 of 5Legend Oaks Healthcare And Rehabilitation - NorthAustin, TX 1 of 5Legend Oaks Healthcare And Rehabilitation - WaxahaWaxahachie, TX 1 of 5Legend Oaks Healthcare and Rehabilitation - Fort WKeller, TX 1 of 5Madera Post Acute CenterEl Monte, CA 1 of 5Medallion Post Acute RehabilitationColorado Springs, CO 1 of 5Mesquite Post Acute CareLubbock, TX 1 of 5Millbrook Healthcare and Rehabilitation CenterLancaster, TX 1 of 5Misty Willow Healthcare and Rehabilitation CenterHouston, TX 1 of 5New Orange HillsOrange, CA 1 of 5Northeast Rehabilitation and Healthcare CenterSan Antonio, TX 1 of 5Northgate PlazaIrving, TX 1 of 5Oak View Health And RehabilitationConway, SC 1 of 5Oakwood Care And RehabilitationLakewood, CO 1 of 5Omaha Nursing and Rehabilitation CenterOmaha, NE 1 of 5Onion Creek Nursing and Rehabilitation CenterAustin, TX 1 of 5Park Manor Bee CaveBee Cave, TX 1 of 5Pelican Pointe Health And Rehabilitation CenterWindsor, CO 1 of 5Premier Care Center For Palm SpringsPalm Springs, CA 1 of 5Provo Rehabilitation and NursingProvo, UT 1 of 5Rock Canyon Respiratory And Rehabilitation CenterPueblo, CO 1 of 5Rosewood Rehabilitation CenterReno, NV 1 of 5San Marcos Rehabilitation and Healthcare CenterSan Marcos, TX 1 of 5Sonterra Health CenterSan Antonio, TX 1 of 5SouthlandNorwalk, CA 1 of 5Southland Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterLufkin, TX 1 of 5Spencer Post Acute Rehabilitation CenterSpencer, IA

Showing 40 of 341; lowest-rated first.

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

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
ALLEN, DANIELIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/19/2025
BURNAM, SOONIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 05/18/2018
CLEGG, TRENTIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/19/2025
FARNSWORTH, STEPHENIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 05/18/2018
KEETCH, CHADIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2014
PORT, BARRYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 07/26/2018
ENSIGN SERVICES INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 11/01/2018
STANDARD BEARER HEALTHCARE OP, LPOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2022
THE ENSIGN GROUP INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2022
WEST PINE HEALTH HOLDINGS LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2022

CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 10 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

4 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.

$16.6M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+10.5%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.6M
Related-party expense11% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 70%Medicare 9%Other / private 21%

This home reported $1.6M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 11% 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

$397per resident / day
operating cost
$12,083per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$444per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

What families pay in ID

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 Idaho Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Idaho
$10,494/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$12,167/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,175/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 135125. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-06-13, 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