Arma Operator, LLC
605 E Melvin Street, Arma, KS 66712 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 45 certified beds · (620) 347-4103 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Jun 2025
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- inspectors recorded 2 serious findings as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (16) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $30,419 in federal fines (most recent 2026-04-07)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
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
| Overall quality measures | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 1 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 fell from 4 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.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 9.9% | 17.9% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 1.6% | 4.9% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 2.5% | 1.6% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 10.0% | 2.9% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 5.8% | 6.5% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 1.4% | 4.3% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 21.4% | 16.2% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 17.1% | 23.2% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 95.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.4% | 4.4% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 29.7% | 22.6% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 8.2% | 18.1% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.9% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 73.8% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 26.9% | 22.4% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 21.9% | 11.5% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.27 | 1.80 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.96 | 2.13 | 1.80 | typical |
‡ 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.
53.4% 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 43 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 31.7% 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 41 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 0.33 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 56% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 5% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 53.4%CMS range 40.6–66.2 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.1%CMS range 7.0–16.4 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no 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 discharge | 31.7% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 19.5% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 26.8% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 setting | not 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 discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 5.9% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 8.5%CMS range 4.6–14.8 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.28 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS 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
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 45 beds and averages 42.9 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 2 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.54 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.72 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.25 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.26 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.65 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.71 to 0.75 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 41% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
16 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2025-06-04 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect 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 The facility reported a census of 39 residents with five residents sampled for abuse and neglect. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure Resident (R)1 remained free from neglect. On [DATE] Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) M and CNA N attempted to transfer R1 from a shower chair to R1's wheelchair without using the full-body mechanical lift as required in R1's Care Plan. R1 could not bear weight so CNA M and CNA N lowered R1 to the floor. The staff attempted to lift R1 off the floor without using the mechanical lift but were unsuccessful, so they obtained the full-body mechanical lift, and both CNA staff lifted R1 into her wheelchair. CNA M and CNA N did not report the incident to Licensed Nurse (LN) G and only reported R1 bent her leg during a transfer and complained of pain. In the early morning hours of [DATE], CNA O and CNA M reported to LN H that R1 complained of leg pain. LN H assessed R1's left knee, which was slightly larger than the right. X-ray results showed R1 had a distal…
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.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2026-04-07 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure an environment free from accident hazards for Resident (R) 1, who required staff assistance and a Hoyer (total body mechanical lift) lift for safe transfers. On 01/20/26, R1 slid through the opening in the toileting lift sheet while one staff member manned the lift, and when the other staff member took their hands off the resident and the lift sheet, R1 fell to the floor. R1 sustained an abrasion to her head, pain, and a negative psychosocial outcome as she was afraid and anxious during lift transfers after the incident. Findings included:- The Electronic Medical Record (EMR) for R1 documented diagnoses of polyosteoarthritis (a chronic, degenerative disease affecting five or more joints simultaneously, characterized by cartilage breakdown, joint pain, stiffness, and potential deformity), generalized anxiety disorder (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty, and irrational fear), major depressive…
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.
- Potential for harm · F2024-12-23 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY The facility reported a census of 40 residents. Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to prepare, store, and serve food in a sanitary manner for the residents of the facility. Findings included: - On 12/17/24 at 12:55 PM, during the initial tour of the facility with Dietary Staff BB the following areas of concern were identified: 1. A squeeze type bottle of ranch salad dressing had an open date of 10/11/24. 2. A squeeze type bottle of Italian salad dressing had an open date of 10/04/24. 3. A one-gallon container of pickle relish had an open date of 06/04/24. 4. An open package of turkey lunch meat had an open date of 12/03/24. Dietary Staff BB stated all the above items were beyond their safe use date, which varied from seven days for the lunch meat and would consult with consulting staff GG to determine the safe use period for the salad dressings and pickle relish. The following opened items lacked open dates: 1. A one-gallon container of pickle slices. 2. A one-gallon container…
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.
- Potential for harm · F2023-03-21 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespreadDispose of garbage and refuse properly.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
The facility reported a census of 41 residents. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain and/or dispose of garbage and refuse properly in a sanitary condition to prevent the harborage and feeding of pests. Findings included: - On 03/14/23 at 08:45 AM, during a tour of the kitchen areas with Dietary Staff (DS) BB, revealed six dumpster containers from the backside of the kitchen. The observation included two dumpster lids open with trash bags exposed out the top and with one missing lid. Trash and debris surrounded the outside ground level of the dumpster units. On 03/14/23 at 8:45 AM, DS BB verified the above findings. She reported the entire facility used the dumpsters and should close the lids to contain the trash and refuse. Dietary Staff BB stated the missing lid had been missing for a while and a new one on order. She agreed the open lids should have been closed. The facility lacked a policy for containment of the garbage and refuse. The facility failed to maintain and/or dispose of facility garbage and refuse properly in a sanitary…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-03-21 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — patternHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
The facility reported a census of 41 residents. Based on interview and record review the facility failed to file grievance reports and follow up with resident concerns voiced during the resident council meetings. Findings included: - Review of the resident council notes revealed the following concerns: 1. On 08/15/22, the residents had concerns that the call lights were not getting answered in a timely fashion, wished the food was warmer and the veggies were not burnt. 2. On 09/19/22, the residents had concerns that 90 percent of the meals were cold, the Certified Medication Aides (CMA) would forget pills and the Certified Nurse's Aides (CNAs) on the east hall were not being courteous to each other. 3. On 10/17/22, the residents had concerns that they went twice down to play BINGO, and nobody showed up. 4. On 11/21/22, the residents had concerns of a chair that needed repaired and that the staff needed to make sure the dishes were clean and none of them chipped. 5. On 12/20/22, the residents had concerns that the staff were taking too long to answer call lights. 6. On 01/23/23, 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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-03-21 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — patternRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY The facility reported a census of 41 residents, with 17 sampled for review. Based on interview and record review the facility failed to thoroughly investigate allegations when they failed to conduct resident interviews specifically related to the allegations of the self-investigations for two residents R6 and R23 on three occurrences of resident to resident altercation/abuse, and for two residents, R31 and R28 when the facility investigated resident to resident altercation/sexual abuse. Findings included: - The Medical Diagnosis tab for R6 included diagnoses of Alzheimer's Disease (a progressive mental deterioration characterized by confusion and memory failure), metabolic encephalopathy (a chemical imbalance of the blood that affects the brain that can lead to personality changes), and anxiety disorder (feelings of worry, anxiety, or fear that are strong enough to interfere with one's daily activities). The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE] assessed R6 with a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS)…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-03-21 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
- On 03/16/23 at 08:14 AM, observation of medication pass by Certified Medication Aide (CMA) LL revealed she removed the cap off of a bottle of eye drops and placed it on an unsanitary towel on top of the medication cart. The towel contained brown colored spots on it. CMA LL administered the eye drops to R16 then replaced the cap on the bottle of eye drops without sanitizing it first. On 03/16/23 at 08:24 AM, during observation of medication pass, CMA LL used a digital wrist blood pressure cuff on R23 without sanitizing it first and prior observation revealed she used it on another resident prior to that. CMA LL failed to sanitize the blood pressure cuff after use on R23. On 03/16/23 at 08:29 AM, CMA LL stated she does not sanitize the blood pressure cuff between resident uses, had done that when there was an outbreak of COVID-19 (highly contagious respiratory disease) but she did not do that now. On 03/20/23 at 01:37 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated the cap of the eye drop container should not be placed on top of the soiled towel on the med cart and it further explained it was not…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-21 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
The facility reported a census of 41 residents with seventeen selected for review. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure accommodation of needs were met for two or the residents, Resident (R)17 and R13 by failure to have their call light in reach so they could alert staff of any needs. Findings included: - The Quarterly Minimum Data Set dated 12/22/22 for R17 assessed her having absence of spoken words, required assistance with Activities of Daily Livings, and had limitation to her range of motion to one side of her upper extremities. On 03/14/23 at 04:19 PM, observed R17 sitting in the recliner in her room and the call light cord was across the bed with the call light button out of the resident's reach. A sign that read Call don't fall was posted on the door of her room. R17 pointed to her bed and when asked if she wanted to lay down, she shook her head up and down indicating yes. The surveyor alerted the staff to R17's request. R17 was using a facial tissue to wipe her mouth with her left hand. On 03/14/23 at 04:50 PM, Licensed Nurse…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-21 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY The facility reported a census of 41 with 17 selected for review including three reviewed for hospitalization. Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide notification to the Ombudsman office for Resident (R)12 and R6 following transfers to the hospital. Findings included: - The Progress Note dated 12/30/22 at 10:45 AM, revealed the facility transferred R12 to the emergency room for evaluation. The Progress Note dated 12/30/22 at 03:30 PM, revealed R12 admitted to the hospital. The electronic medical record lacked documentation of notification to the Ombudsman office. On 03/21/23 at 12:08 PM, Social Service Staff X stated she emails the Ombudsman at the end of every month and forgot to send an email. Social Service Staff X stated an email was to be sent monthly and it had not been sent since August or September that she sent the notification to the Ombudsman office. On 03/21/23 at 12:12 PM, Administrative Staff A stated she expected the Ombudsman office to receive notification monthly of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-21 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide 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 The facility reported a census of 41 residents with 17 selected for review including three residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL's). Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide appropriate hygiene and grooming cares to Resident (R)33. Findings included: - The Medical Diagnosis tab for R33 included diagnoses of dementia (progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, confusion) and diabetes mellitus (when the body cannot use glucose, not enough insulin made or the body cannot respond to the insulin). The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] assessed R33 with loss of short- and long-term memory and with severely impaired decision-making ability. He required extensive assistance of two or more with personal hygiene and bathing. The Annual MDS dated 12/25/22 for R33 revealed no changes to his memory, decision making skills, personal hygiene, or bathing assistance. The Activities of Daily Living Care Area Assessment was not triggered for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-03-21 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 The facility reported a census of 41 residents, with six residents sampled for accidents. Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to identify contributing causes of one Resident (R24) of the six sampled residents, with multiple injuries of unknown origin (skin tears and bruise) and failed to implement appropriate immediate interventions to prevent further repeated skin injuries for this resident. Finding included: - Review of Resident (R)24's, Physician Orders, dated 03/01/23, revealed diagnoses which included, non-displaced inter-trochanteric fracture of left femur (broken upper left leg), dementia (progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, confusion), iron deficiency anemia (condition without enough healthy red blood cells to carry adequate oxygen to body tissues), and hypothyroidism(condition characterized by decreased activity of the thyroid gland). The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], documented, the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS)…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-03-21 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY The facility reported a census of 41 residents with 17 selected for review including two reviewed for urinary catheter (insertion of a catheter into the bladder to drain the urine into a collection bag) or urinary tract infection (UTI). Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure Resident (R)18's urinary catheter tubing was appropriately secured to prevent urethral trauma in case of tugging on the catheter tubing. Findings included: - The Medial Diagnosis tab for R18 included a diagnoses of neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder, benign prostate hypertrophy (BPH - non-cancerous enlargement of the prostate which can lead to interference with urine flow, urinary frequency and urinary tract infections), and the need for assistance with personal care. The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] assessed R18 with a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. R18 required extensive assistance of one staff for toilet use and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2021-08-26 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure 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
The facility reported a census of 41 residents. Based on interview and observation, the facility failed to appropriately label and store drugs for five residents; when two insulin medications lacked open dates for Resident (R ) 31 and 147; two eye drops lacked opened dates for R30 and R19; and two expired medications remained in the medication carts for R15 and R21. Findings included: - On 08/24/21 at 02:24 PM, inspection of the Certified Medication Aide (CMA) medication cart with CMA R revealed the following: One opened bottle of flonase nasal spray, with pharmacy labeled for Resident (R)15, with an expiration date of 05/15/20. One open bottle of pataday eye drops, with pharmacy labeled for R19, which lacked an opened date. One opened bottle of latanoprost eye drops, with pharmacy labeled for R30, which lacked an open date. Furthermore, on 08/24/21 at 04:58 PM, inspection of the west nurses' medication cart, with Licensed Nurse (LN) H, revealed the following: One open aspartamine insulin pen, ready for use, with pharmacy labeled for R147, which lacked an open date. LN H stated she…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2021-08-26 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop 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 The facility reported a census of 41 residents. The sample contained 12 residents. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to review and revise the care plan for two sampled residents including, Resident (R)6, related to interventions following falls to prevent further accidents and R31, related to care and services for a urinary catheter to prevent urinary tract infections and/or urethral trauma. Findings included: - The signed Physician Order Sheet (POS), dated 07/16/21, documented R6's diagnoses included anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty and irrational fear), depressive disorder (abnormal emotional state characterized by exaggerated feelings of sadness, worthlessness, emptiness and hopelessness), and unspecified dementia (progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, confusion). A significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented the resident as unable to complete the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS).…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-08-26 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 The facility reported a census of 41 residents with 12 selected for review including two reviewed for falls. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow interventions on the care plan for Resident (R)35 to prevent further falls and failed to follow interventions on the care plan for R6 and implement new interventions following falls to prevent further falls. Findings included: - The Order Summary Report, dated 07/16/21, for Resident (R)35 included diagnoses of muscle weakness, abnormalities of gait and mobility, unsteadiness on feet, and Alzheimer's disease (progressive mental deterioration characterized by confusion and memory failure). The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], assessed R35 with short and long term memory impairment and severely impaired decision making. She required extensive assistance of one staff for bed mobility, walking in and out of the room, locomotion on and off the unit, and toilet use. R35 required extensive assistance of two or more staff…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-08-26 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY The facility reported a census of 41 residents. The sample contained 12 residents, with one selected for review of urinary catheters. Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to appropriately manage the catheter of one of one resident, to prevent urinary tract infections and or urethral trauma to Resident (R) 31. Findings included: - The signed Physician Order Sheet (POS), dated 07/12/21, documented R31's diagnoses included benign prostatic hyperplasia (non-cancerous enlargement of the prostate which can lead to interference with urine flow, urinary frequency and urinary tract infections), and unspecified dementia (progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, confusion). An annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R31's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was 15, which indicated he was cognitively intact. He did not have a urinary catheter. The Urinary Incontinence and Indwelling Catheter Care Area Assessment documented resident was always…
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.
“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.
- 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.
Fines & penalties
$30,419 in federal fines across 2 penalties.
- $16,350 — penalty dated 2026-04-07
- $14,069 — penalty dated 2025-06-04
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.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to MISSION HEALTH COMMUNITIES — 30 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 4 of 5 | 2.8 | +1.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 2.9 | +1.1 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.9 | +0.1 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 2 of 5 | 2.9 | -0.9 vs chain |
The other 29 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.8★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| KANSAS OPERATOR LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 02/25/2015 |
| BARRES, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/26/2015 |
| T AND C CAPITAL ASSETS, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/26/2015 |
| WINDWARD HEALTH PARTNERS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/26/2015 |
| CRINO, BRYAN | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/26/2015 |
| FEUER, SCOTT | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/26/2015 |
| LINDEMAN, STUART | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/26/2015 |
| PASSERO, JOSEPH | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/26/2015 |
| MISSION HEALTH COMMUNITIES, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 02/26/2015 |
| YOAKUM, JAMIE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 01/16/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 11 rows in the source record cover these 10 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
5 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $280K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in KS
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 Kansas Medicaid page.
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 175353. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-12-23, 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.