Idaho State Veterans Home - Post Falls

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.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.26 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 36% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 12% 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 64 beds and averages 60.6 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 3 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.27 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.39 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.49 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.73 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.50 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.58 to 0.95 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 70% is well above 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 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.

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.

19 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 7 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2025-11-11 · 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, staff interview and record reviews, it was determined the facility failed to prevent the worsening of a pressure ulcer. This was true for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for pressure ulcer. This deficient practice caused harm to Resident #1 when his pressure ulcer to his right heel deteriorated and became infected. Findings include:The State Operations Manual (SOM) Appendix PP stated a resident with pressure ulcers receives necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, prevent infection and prevent new ulcers from developing.Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple diagnoses including dementia, heart failure and diabetes and chronic kidney disease.Resident #1's record documented the following:1.Pressure Ulcer to Right Heel:A Weekly Pressure Ulcer Record documented the following:-7/24/25: Unstageable DTI measured 3.7 cm x 5.5 cm, intact, wound bed not visible, area with bruised appearance, Cleanse…

  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
• Actual harm · Gcited before2025-08-01 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record reviews, interviews, facility investigation, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure one of four residents (Resident (R) 4) was free from neglect when staff failed to provide timely and competent care in response to complaints of pain and decreased urinary output of 20 sample residents. As a result, R4, who had a neurogenic bladder and an indwelling catheter, experienced severe pain, and improper placement of an indwelling catheter. Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled, Freedom From Resident Abuse, Neglect, Mistreatment & Exploitation, dated 06/24 documented, Each resident at the [Facility Name], Idaho State Veterans Homes (ISVHs) has the right to be free from verbal, sexual, physical, and mental abuse; neglect; exploitation; mistreatment including injuries of unknown source; misappropriation of resident property; involuntary seclusion, and crime against a resident.NEGLECT means failure of the facility, its employees or service providers to provide goods and services…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-11-11 · tag F0687 — failed to care for feet properly — isolated
  Provide appropriate foot care.
  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, interviews, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure resident was seen by a podiatry as ordered by the physician. This was true for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #1) reviewed for foot care. This deficient practice created the potential for Resident #1 to experience ongoing thickening of his toenails or other complications due to lack of foot care. Findings include:Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple diagnoses including dementia, heart failure and diabetes.A nursing progress notes, dated 7/31/25 documented Resident #2's health care coordinator would be looking for a podiatrist for a referral to be seen for diabetic foot care.A nursing progress note dated 8/15/25 documented Resident needs a referral from his primary care to see the selected podiatrist for nail care. Form waiting for processing and signature.A physician assistant's progress notes, dated 8/22/25 documented the physician assistant agreed for Resident #1 to be seen by a…

  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 · F2025-08-01 · tag F0882 — widespread
  Designate a qualified infection preventionist to be responsible for the infection prevent and control program in the nursing home.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to designate one or more qualified individuals as Infection Preventionists (IPs) who are responsible for the Infection Prevention and Control Program (IPCP) and who physically work onsite at the facility at least part-time. Failure to designate one or more qualified onsite IPs to oversee the implementation and monitoring of infection prevention practices has the potential to result in the inadequate identification, prevention, and control of infections within the facility, placing all 58 residents at increased risk for the transmission of communicable diseases and healthcare-associated infections.Findings include:Review of the facility's undated [Name of Facility] Employee Listing revealed the facility did not have a designated IP who worked on-site at least part-time.During an interview on 08/01/25 at 9:21 AM, the IP who worked at the facility stated that she worked remotely and assisted the facility with its infection control and prevention program and did not spend any time on-site at the facility. She said that she had…

  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 · E2025-08-01 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
  Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure expired medications were not available for use in one of one medication room reviewed for medication storage and labeling. Failure to ensure expired medications were not available for use had the potential to result in residents receiving expired medications, which may be ineffective or harmful, leading to adverse drug reactions, diminished therapeutic outcomes, and increased risk of complications or hospitalization.Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled, Pharmacy Services, last reviewed on 02/25, revealed that the Pharmacist shall be responsible for reviewing all medications in the facility for expiration dates. Removal of discontinued or expired drugs from use as indicated at least every thirty (30) days.Review of the facility's policy titled, Floor Stock Medication, last reviewed on 02/25, revealed certain medications shall be available within the facility for occasional use where the pharmacy source was not immediately available. The Pharmacist will be responsible for the…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-08-01 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure food temperatures were palatable for two out of 20 sample residents (Resident (R) 9 and R43) reviewed for palatability. This created the potential for meal dissatisfaction, decreased intake, and weight loss.Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled, Dining/Meal Service, dated 2023, revealed Food will be at the proper temperature. to meet each individual's needs and desires.1. Review of R9's admission Record (Face Sheet) located under the Profile tab in the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed R9 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 06/17/25, located under the MDS tab in the EMR, revealed R9 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15 which indicated R9 was cognitively intact.During an interview on 07/28/25 at 12:05 PM, R9 stated that the food arrived from the kitchen lukewarm at best, or…

  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 · D2025-08-01 · tag F0554 — isolated
  Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to honor one of one resident's (Resident (R) 43's) right to self-administer medications when clinically appropriate of 20 sample residents. Specifically, the facility did not conduct a comprehensive assessment of R43's ability to safely self-administer medications and failed to include all prescribed medications in the evaluation. When R43 did not take medications immediately upon staff offering, the medications were withheld, rather than allowing R43 to take them independently and without feeling rushed. This failure compromised R43's dignity and right to participate in decisions regarding their care. Findings include:Review of R43's admission Record (Face Sheet) located under the Profile tab in the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed the facility initially admitted R43 on 05/31/24. R43's pertinent diagnoses included depression and intervertebral disc degeneration.Review of R43's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 06/30/25 revealed R43 had a Brief Interview for Mental…

  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 · D2025-08-01 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolated
  Ensure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure one of one resident reviewed for restraints (Resident (R) 2) was free of restraints of 20 sample residents. The therapy department failed to assess R2's wheelchair with seat belts in accordance with a physician's order, the facility failed to attempt less restrictive measures prior to restraint use, failed to assess and identify the belts as restraints, and failed to implement a plan to release the restraint having the potential for the resident to be at risk for negative outcomes (skin deterioration, discomfort, decreased quality of life etc.).Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled, Physical Restraint Use/Evaluation, dated 02/25 revealed the purpose was, To ensure this facility utilizes physical restraints only when alternative interventions to protect the resident's safety have been exhausted, or when the resident has been determined to have the presence of a specific medical symptom that requires…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-01 · 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, interview, record review, and procedure review, the facility failed to provide assistance with baths and shaving for one of one sample residents (Resident (R) 2) requiring substantial assistance from staff, reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs) of 20 sample residents. This created the potential for discomfort and/or feeling unkempt. Findings include: Review of the facility's undated procedure titled, Nursing Procedure Manual Bathing Procedure, revealed This facility will provide quality resident grooming and hygiene to include bathing/showering of residents at a minimum of once weekly and/or resident preference . Bathing/showering of a resident will be recorded on the specific resident in POC [Point of Care]. If a resident refuses a bath/shower, then the CNA [Certified Nursing Assistant] will document the ADL's [activities of daily living] bathing task in POC as resident refused. The CNA is responsible for the grooming and hygiene of the resident during the bathing/showering…

  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 · D2025-08-01 · 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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a restorative nursing program recommended by physical therapy was implemented for one of two residents (Resident (R) 2) reviewed for range of motion of 20 sample residents. This created the potential that R2 would experience a decline in his abilities to perform activities of daily living (ADLs). Findings include: Review of R2's undated admission Record in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the Profile tab revealed R2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included history of cerebral infarction (ischemic stroke when blood flow to the brain is disrupted), paraplegia (paralysis of the legs and lower body), dementia, above the knee amputation, and Parkinson's disease. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 06/08/25 in the EMR under the MDS tab revealed R2 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of four out of 15 which indicated R2 was severely…

  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 · D2025-08-01 · 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, interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure fall interventions were in place for one out of three residents (Resident (R) 2) reviewed for falls of 20 sample residents. Fall interventions such as mats on the floor, bed alarm, low bed, and a wedge were not consistently in place when R2 was in bed. This created the potential for significant injury from falls.Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled, Interdisciplinary Team, dated 02/25, revealed the purpose was, To provide a process to assess and review results of findings and investigation of resident and employee incidences; determine appropriate interventions to decrease/eliminate incidence(s). A multi-disciplinary workgroup shall be established. The workgroup shall meet on regularly scheduled intervals to review Incident Report(s). The purpose of the workgroup is to further investigate incidents, as necessary, and to determine further interventions and plans to decrease/eliminate the potential…

  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 · D2025-08-01 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff followed Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBPs) for one of four residents (Resident (R) 8) reviewed for Transmission-Based Precautions of 20 sample residents. Failure to follow EBPs increases the potential for cross-contamination and transmission of infections to both staff and residents.Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Enhanced Barrier Precautions last reviewed on 03/24, revealed It is the procedure of this facility to implement enhanced barrier precautions for the prevention of transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms [MDROs]. Enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) refer to an infection control intervention designed to reduce transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms that employs targeted gown, and gloves use during high contact resident care activities. An order for enhanced barrier precautions will be obtained for residents with any of the following: i. Wounds (e.g., chronic wounds such as pressure ulcers, diabetic foot ulcers, unhealed surgical…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Fines & penalties

$36,855 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

• $17,342 — penalty dated 2025-11-11
• $19,513 — penalty dated 2025-08-01

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

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 4 rows in the source record cover these 3 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.

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.

A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. 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, FY2024). 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