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

Valley Vista Care Center of St Maries

820 Elm Street, St Maries, ID 83861 · Non profit - Corporation · 74 certified beds · (208) 245-4576 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (208) 245-4576 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citations on record (F0600, F0610) — most recent Dec 20233 actual-harm citations$43,843 in federal fines
Insights

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

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
Worth asking about
  • it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0610) — most recent Dec 2023
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • it has 3 actual-harm citations
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (17) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $43,843 in federal fines (most recent 2023-12-04)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
  • nursing-staff turnover (61%) runs well above the national median (45%)

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
115 S Crosby St · (509) 284-2423 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
Grocery
105 E College Ave · (208) 245-5504 · Call to confirm hours
Park
222 S 7th St · (208) 245-1134 · 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 2 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 1 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 4 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 improved from 1 to 2 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 rating2★
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 increased23.6%15.6%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight7.6%5.2%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder8.3%1.2%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection2.9%2.0%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms7.4%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 injury2.8%3.0%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened12.3%16.1%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication12.7%16.3%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine96.1%96.2%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers3.7%3.2%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control19.7%22.1%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table33.1%20.1%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication8.3%1.8%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine62.9%86.5%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission13.2%17.7%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit14.4%12.3%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.761.171.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days3.631.661.80worse

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.

52.3% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 32 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

52.3%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.4%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
58.1%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.21U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.19hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.01hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.01hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 58.1% 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 43 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 0.21 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 25% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 3% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF52.3%CMS range 39.6–65.551.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.4%CMS range 6.1–13.910.7%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 discharge58.1%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 discharge53.5%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 discharge32.6%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 identified98.2%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge100.0%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 worsened1.8%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.1%CMS range 2.9–11.57.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.981.02Oct 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

0.59
RN hours/ resident / day
0.69
LPN hours/ resident / day
3.09
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.37
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.52
RN hoursweekends
61.0%
Total nursing turnover
50.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 74 beds and averages 48.7 residents a day — about 66% occupied, or roughly 25 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.37 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.59 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.09 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 3.69 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.64 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.61 to 0.52 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 61% 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

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-05-08)
0
at the previous standard inspection (2024-12-05)

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.

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

  • Actual harm · G2023-12-04 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on policy review, record review, review of the State Survey Agency's Long-Term Care Reporting Portal, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents' rights were protected to be free from abuse and neglect. This was true for 6 of 16 residents (Residents #5, #24, #36, #299, #300, and #349) reviewed for abuse and neglect. This failure placed all residents at risk of ongoing abuse and neglect, and potential physical and psychosocial harm. Findings include: 1. A facility reported incident investigation, initiated 7/9/23, documented CNA #4 and CNA #5 did not empty Resident #5's catheter bag during the 7/8/23 night shift. As a result, the staff on the following day shift found her catheter bag was backed up to her bladder with more than 3000 milliliters (mls) of urine. During the facility's investigation, the staff assigned to Resident #5's unit were interviewed: CNA #4, a facility CNA, stated she did not provide cares for Resident #5 during the 7/8/23 night shift since Resident #5 had previously refused to allow CNA #4 to provide her cares. CNA #4…

    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
  • Actual harm · G2023-12-04 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on policy review, record review, review of the State Survey Agency's Long-Term Care Reporting Portal, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure allegations of abuse were thoroughly investigated. This was true for 6 of 16 residents (#36, #298, #300, #348, #349, and #350) reviewed for abuse. This failure created the potential for residents to be subjected to ongoing abuse without detection and protective measures implanted by the facility. Findings include: The facility's Reducing the Threat of Abuse and Neglect policy, revised December 2022, stated an alleged abuse or neglect investigation should include the following: - Review of the incident - Interview with the person reporting the incident - Interviews with any witnesses to the incident - Interview with the resident - A review of the resident's medical record - An interview with employee(s), as needed - A review of employee's file, as needed. - Interview with staff members on all shifts having contact with the resident at the time of the incident. - Interview with the resident's roommate, family…

    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
  • Actual harm · G2023-12-04 · 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, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure resident-centered care and treatment were provided timely and bowel care administered per physician orders in accordance with professional standards of practice. This was true for 2 of 23 Residents (#25 and #352) whose records were reviewed. These failures caused harm to Resident #352 when there was a delay in treatment and subsequent decline in her health and put Resident #25 at risk of adverse effects when she did not receive bowel care as ordered. Findings include: 1. Resident #352 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple diagnoses including dementia with behavioral disturbances. Resident #352's care plan, documented she was cognitively impaired due to her dementia and staff were to provide a consistent daily routine. A nurse's note, dated 1/15/22 at 4:32 AM, documented Resident #352 was repeatedly yelling help me and having visual hallucinations. The note also documented Resident #352 had a fever of 104.1…

    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 · D2026-05-08 · tag F0628 — isolated
    Provide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
    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, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure two of two residents and their resident representatives (Resident (R) 8, and R52) reviewed for emergent hospital transfer out of a total sample of 18 residents were provided with a written bed hold policy and transfer notice. This failure had the potential to affect the resident and their resident representative (RR) by not having the knowledge of how to appeal the transfer, if desired, and had the potential to contribute to the possible denial of re-admission and loss of the resident's home following a hospitalization for residents transferred to the hospital. Findings include:1. Review of R8's admission Record, located under the Profile tab in the electronic medical record (EMR), revealed R8 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of R8's quarterly 5-day Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of [DATE], located in the EMR MDS tab, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of three out…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-05-08 · 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 facility policy, the facility failed to provide assistance with showering for two of three residents (Resident (R) 45 and R16) reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs) out of a total sample of 18. This failure increased the potential for R45 and R16 to have unmet hygiene needs.Findings include:1. During initial rounds on 05/05/26 starting at 11:00 AM an observation of R45 revealed R45 appeared to have flaky skin, and her hair appears greasy and in need of a wash.During an interview on 05/05/26 at 1:50 PM, Family Member (F) 1 stated, R45 was not getting showers. F1 stated R45 was supposed to get three showers/baths per week but she's lucky to get one. F1 stated staff were not getting R45 dressed in the mornings. F1 presented a calendar to writer that the family was documenting showers R45 received. F1 stated that R45 only received four showers total for the month of April.Review of R45's admission Record, located in the electronic medical record (EMR)…

    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 · D2026-05-08 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    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, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to discard expired medications stored in one medication room storage refrigerator of one medication room. This deficient practice resulted in outdated medications remaining available for use. Findings include:Observation of the medication storage room refrigerator with the Minimum Data Set Coordinator (MDSC) on 05/07/26 at 11:35 AM revealed the following medications were expired. -One Lispro Insulin 100 units/milliliter (ml) vial had an expiration date of 01/23/26. There was no open date on the vial. -One Lantus Insulin 100 units/ml vial had an expiration date of 01/23/26. There was no open date on the vial. -One Apidra Solostar Insulin 100 units/ml injection pen had an expiration date of 02/04/26. -Trulicity (medication used to manage blood sugar levels) 3 milligrams (mg)/0.5 ml injection pen had an expiration date of 01/16/26 (Two injection pens left in the carton of four). There was no open date on the medication carton. -Gabapentin (anticonvulsant medication for seizures and pain) 250 mg/5ml solution…

    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 · F2023-12-04 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespread
    Have a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on facility document review and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure they employed an RN as the full-time DNS. The failure to have a full-time RN/DNS placed residents at risk of inadequate care and supervision of their medical status for a census of 44 residents. Findings include: The facility's job description for the Director of Nursing Services, approved by the Administrator on 3/9/20, documented Responsible for the management of the nursing services in the long-term care facility and directs nursing activities . The essential duties and responsibilities included the following: The DNS has knowledge of the state and federal regulations in the delivery of resident care, is informed of residents' conditions, determines the facility capacity for the care of potential new admissions, maintains the Quality Assurance program, ensures medications, treatments and plans of care are provided to the residents, evaluates nursing care by making daily rounds of the facility, and ensures adequate staff are available for resident care. During an interview on…

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

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2023-12-04 · 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 ensure food items were dated and labeled and hygiene practices followed. This failure had the potential to affect 44 of 44 residents residing in the facility who consumed food prepared by the facility at risk of adverse health outcomes, including food-born illnesses. Findings include: 1. The facility's Food Storage policy, undated, stated once products were opened, a use by date label must be added. This policy was not followed. On 11/27/23 at 4:00 PM, during a kitchen inspection, 7 of 18 seasoning containers appeared cloudy and moist. 7 of the 18 opened seasoning containers did not have a use by date on the container. On 11/27/23 at 4:09 PM, The Dietary Manager stated the opened seasoning containers should have a use by date, and they did not. 2. The facility's Preventing Foodborne Illness policy, revised November 2022, stated hair caps and beard restraints were worn when cooking, preparing, or assembling food to keep hair from contacting exposed food, clean equipment, and utensils.…

    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 · F2023-12-04 · tag F0835 — failed to run the facility competently — widespread
    Administer the facility in a manner that enables it to use its resources effectively and efficiently.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on interview and document review, it was determined the facility's administration failed to ensure a full-time DNS was on staff. This failure had the potential to affect the care of the 44 residents in the facility and the assistance and care needed to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. Findings include: During an interview on 11/29/23 at 10:10 AM, the Administrator stated there was no full-time RN designated to be the DNS working full-time at the facility and involved in resident care. The Administrator admitted knowledge of the need for a full-time DNS. The personnel file of the Interim DNS did not include a signed form of her job description. During an interview on 12/01/23 at 11:00 AM, the Interim DNS stated she was not in the facility on a full-time basis and had other job duties on the facility campus. The Interim DNS also stated she was not involved in resident care planning and in the provision of nursing services in the facility on a daily basis.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2023-12-04 · tag F0851 — widespread
    Electronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on staff interview and document review, it was determined the facility failed to report accurate Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) information for the facility as required for a census of 44 residents. Findings include: The facility's PBJ report, for 7/1/23 through 9/30/23, documented a full time RN functioned as the DNS in the facility. During an interview on 11/29/23 at 10:10 AM, the Administrator confirmed the facility did not employ a full time RN to serve as the DNS, as reported in the PBJ report. During an interview on 11/30/23 at 10:55 AM, the facility's Corporate Human Resources Representative confirmed the facility replaced the previous DNS with the Interim DNS on 5/8/23. Additionally, she confirmed the Interim DNS's employee file did not include an accepted and signed DNS job description defining job duties. During an interview on 12/1/23 at 11:00 AM, the Interim DNS stated she was not in the facility on a full-time basis and had other job duties on the facility campus, specifically in the assisted living facility, which was in another building. The Interim DNS also stated…

    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.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2023-12-04 · tag F0943 — widespread
    Give their staff education on dementia care, and what abuse, neglect, and exploitation are; and how to report abuse, neglect, and exploitation.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on record review, policy review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure employees were trained on abuse. This was true for 43 of 79 employees whose records were reviewed for abuse training. This failure had the potential to place all residents in the facility for unidentified or continued abuse if an employee was unable to identify and report abuse. Findings include: The facility's Reducing the Threat of Abuse and Neglect policy, revised December 2022, stated the facility would implement and maintain an effective training program on abuse prohibition. This policy was not followed. During a review of employee abuse training, it was identified 43 of 79 employees did not complete training for abuse and neglect. On 12/1/23 at 10:32 AM, the Resident Care Coordinator stated 43 of 79 employees did not complete training for abuse and neglect.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-12-04 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — pattern
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    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 review of the State Agency's Long Term Care Reporting Portal, record review, incident reports, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure allegations of resident abuse were reported to the State Survey Agency within 2 to 24 hours. This affected 2 of 5 residents (#7 and #8) who were reviewed for abuse, and for additional unidentified residents referenced in 2 incident reports. This failure created the potential for residents to be subjected to ongoing abuse without detection and protective measures implemented by the facility. Findings include: The facility's policy, Reducing the Threat of Abuse and Neglect, revised 12/21/23, stated allegations of abuse were to be reported to the State Survey Agency Long Term Care reporting Portal within 2-24 hours of the event, and report the results of an investigation within 5 working days from the date of the incident. Resident #4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including dementia with agitation, depression,…

    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 · D2023-12-04 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
    Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
    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 resident's representative and physician were immediately notified when the resident had a significant change in condition. This was true for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #352) reviewed for notification of change in condition. This deficient practice placed Resident #352 at risk for lack of advocacy and support from their representative, and deterioration of her health status. Findings include: The facility's Change in a Resident's Condition or Status policy, revised February 2021, stated the facility will promptly notify the resident, his or her attending physician and the resident representative of changes in the resident's medical/mental condition. This policy was not followed. Resident #352 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including dementia with behavioral disturbances. A nurse's note, dated 1/15/22 at 4:32 AM, documented Resident #352 was repeatedly yelling help me and having visual…

    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 · D2023-12-04 · 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, policy review, and resident staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure a Level I Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) was completed when the resident had a clinical diagnosis of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). This was true for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #16) whose PASRR record was reviewed. This deficient practice had the potential to cause harm if residents' specialized services for mental health needs were not provided due to a lack of updated screening. Findings include: The Medicaid (government entity that provides health coverage to Americans) long term care PASRR website accessed on 12/14/23, documented the following: PASRR is a federal requirement for Medicaid-certified nursing facilities to help ensure that individuals are not inappropriately placed in nursing homes for long term care. The PASRR procedures include: - Evaluate all applicants for serious mental illness (SMI) and intellectual disability (ID). - Offer all applicants the most…

    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 · D2023-12-04 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, policy review and resident and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents' care plans were revised to reflect current needs and interventions. This was true for 1 of 23 residents (Resident # 26) whose care plans were reviewed. This deficiency placed residents at risk of adverse outcomes if care and services were not provided due to care plans not being revised as residents ' needs changed. Findings include: The facility's Care Plan policy, revised March 2022, documented the comprehensive, person-centered care plan described the services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. The facility's Change in a Resident's Condition or Status policy, revised February 2021, documented the interdisciplinary team reviewed and updateded the care plan when there was a significant change in the resident's condition, when the desired outcome was not met, when the 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-12-04 · 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 resident and staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to assess, monitor, and identify potential triggers for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #16) reviewed for trauma-informed care. This failure created the potential for . Findings include: The facility's policy Trauma-Informed and Culturally Competent Care Level III, revised 8/2022, stated the purpose of the policy was to guide staff in providing care that was culturally competent and trauma-informed in accordance with professional standards of practice, and to address the needs of trauma survivors by minimizing triggers and/or re-traumatization. The policy further defined Trauma results from an event, series of events, or set of circumstances that was experienced by an individual as physically or emotionally harmful or life threatening and that has lasting adverse effects on the individual's functioning and mental, physical, social, emotional, or spiritual well-being. The policy defined…

    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 · D2023-12-04 · 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 policy review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure infection control and prevention practices were maintained to provide a safe and sanitary environment when providing wound care. This was true for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #2) observed during wound care. This failure put Resident #2 at risk for infection due to cross contamination and potential exposure to bacteria and other pathogens. Findings include: The facility's Dressings, Dry/Clean policy, revised September 2013, documented after a soiled dressing was removed, to pull the soiled glove used over the dressing and discard. If gauze was used to clean the wound, use clean gauze for each cleansing stroke. The policy stated staff were to initial the clean dressing and label it with the date and time the dressing was changed. This policy was not followed. Resident #2 was admitted [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including an open wound of the abdominal wall. On 11/28/23 at 12:09 PM, LPN #1 was observed…

    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
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

$43,843 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $43,843 — penalty dated 2023-12-04

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

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
VALLEY VISTA CARE CORPORATIONOrganizationDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 10/01/1979
COWIN, WILLIAMIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 08/03/2016
GOODALL, TOMIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/30/2021
HAYES, DONNAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/30/2021
MCDANIEL, JEANNEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 10/01/2012
MCGREAL, HEIDIIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 10/26/1998
POWELL, SABRINAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/30/2024
RYAN, DOUGIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/30/2020
SPOONER, CLAUDIAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/30/2013
WILKS, KASEYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/15/1999
WOODIN, CHERIIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 06/30/2018
LLOYD, CHARLESIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 06/17/2019

CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 12 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.

$6.6M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-34.1%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$532K
Related-party expense6% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 80%Medicare 3%Other / private 17%

About 80% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $532K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent 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 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

$498per resident / day
operating cost
$15,154per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$372per 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 135075. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-05-08, 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