Anderson County Hospital Ltcu
421 S Maple Street, Garnett, KS 66032 · Non profit - Corporation · 36 certified beds · (785) 204-4016 Medicaid only — no Medicare
On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
- 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
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) | 5 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 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 | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 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 4 to 5 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 | 17.8% | 17.9% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 0.0% | 4.9% | 5.4% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 1.6% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.7% | 2.9% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.9% | 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 | 1.7% | 4.3% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 9.1% | 16.2% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 24.5% | 23.2% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 96.0% | 95.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 0.0% | 4.4% | 4.7% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 19.1% | 22.6% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 22.3% | 18.1% | 17.1% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.98 | 1.80 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.84 | 2.13 | 1.80 | typical |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ 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.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 36 beds and averages 30.0 residents a day — about 83% occupied, or roughly 6 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.94 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.01 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.53 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 3.21 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.23 on weekdays — 24% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.12 to 0.73 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 45% 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 more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
16 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-02-13 · 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
The facility reported a census of 25 residents. The sample included one resident reviewed for elopement. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent the elopement (when a cognitively impaired resident leaves the facility without the knowledge or supervision of staff) of cognitively impaired Resident (R)1, who had a history of falls. On 01/30/24, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) M heard the facility doorbell ring and used her access badge to let the visitor out of the facility but failed to ensure only the visitor exited. R1 followed the visitor out and exited the facility unsupervised on 01/30/24 at 10:26 AM. R1 ambulated with her walker on the sidewalk on the west side of the parking lot for approximately 100 feet, then across the parking lot for approximately 147 feet, and then toward the north side of the building for approximately 164 feet before CNA N saw R1 ambulating outside the facility, unattended. Two staff brought R1 back to the facility with a wheelchair. The facility failed to assess R1 for an elopement…
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 before2024-01-23 · 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 identified a census of 23 residents. The sample included three residents identified as at risk for falls. Based on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident (R)1 received adequate supervision and assistance to prevent a serious injury accident. On 11/14/23 at approximately 08:14 AM during an assisted transfer, staff failed to ensure R1's wheelchair brakes were locked. R1 slid to the floor, complained of right hip pain, and was transferred to a local hospital for evaluation and treatment. An x-ray revealed R1 sustained a proximal right femur (long bone in the leg and closer to the hip joint) fracture. R1 was subsequently transferred to a metropolitan hospital for an orthopedic (medical specialty specializing in bones) consult and surgical repair of the hip fracture. R1 sustained post-surgical complications and ultimately returned to the facility on [DATE]. This deficient practice also placed R1 at risk for increased pain, decreased mobility, and impaired…
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 · E2025-02-13 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — patternProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
The facility identified a census of 27 residents. The sample included 12 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to provide direct, interactive activities based on resident preferences for the residents on weekends. This deficient practice placed the affected residents at risk for decreased psychosocial well-being, boredom, and isolation. Findings Included: - A review of the facility's Activity Calendars for December 2024, January 2025, and February 2025 was completed. The calendars revealed religious services provided at 09:00 AM and 03:15 PM for Saturdays but lacked staff-led activities. The calendars revealed a devotional group was held at 09:00 AM on Sundays. The calendar revealed the residents were provided music and coloring pages on Sundays but lacked staff-led activity groups. The council reported the weekends were sometimes slow without activities. On 02/11/25 at 10:30 AM, the facility provided manicures for the residents. On 02/12/25 at 11:40 AM, the facility's Resident Counsel reported that staff-led activities rarely occurred…
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 · Ecited before2025-02-13 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure 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
The facility had a census of 27 residents. The sample included 12 residents, with two reviewed for accidents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to secure 15 pressurized medical oxygen tanks in a safe, locked area, and out of reach of the nine cognitively impaired independently mobile residents. This deficient practice placed the residents at risk for preventable accidents and injuries. Findings Included: - On 02/11/25 at 07:20 AM, an inspection of the facility's oxygen storage room revealed that the door was not secured. An inspection of the room revealed 15 full supplemental oxygen cylinders in the storage rack. The door closed and locked upon exit. On 02/13/25 at 08:22 AM the facility identified it had nine cognitively impaired independently mobile residents. On 02/13/25 at 12:01 PM, Certified Nurse's Aide (CNA) M stated the room was to be locked at all times due to the oxygen tanks. She stated the door had an electronic lock and staff were to ensure the door was fully closed and locked upon exiting the room. On 02/13/25 at 12:30 PM,…
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 · E2025-02-13 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — patternEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
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 identified a census of 27 residents. The sample included 12 residents, with five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the Consultant Pharmacist (CP) recommendations were acknowledged and/or acted upon for Resident (R) 2, R20, and R25. The facility failed to ensure the CP identified and reported the non-approved indication for R10's antipsychotic (a class of medications used to treat major mental conditions that cause a break from reality) medication. These deficient practices placed the residents at risk for unnecessary medication use and physical complications. Findings included: - R2's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) from the Diagnosis tab documented diagnoses of dementia (a progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory), depression (a mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest and confusion), and short-term memory loss. The Significant Change Minimum Data…
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 · E2025-02-13 · 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
The facility identified a census of 27 residents. The facility identified four residents on Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP - infection control interventions designed to reduce transmission of resistant organisms that employ targeted gown and glove use during high contact care). Based on record reviews, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to implement adequate hand hygiene. This deficient practice placed the residents at risk for infectious diseases. Findings included: - On 02/11/25 at 08:33 AM, Certified Nurse Aide (CMA) R failed to perform hand hygiene and donned a pair of gloves, CMA R removed R10's hearing aids from the medication cart. CMA R changed the battery in one hearing aid. CMA R placed R10's hearing aids in each ear at the dining room table. CMA R doffed her gloves and failed to perform hand hygiene. CMA R pushed R10 into an area across from the dining room. CMA R failed to perform hand hygiene and donned a pair of gloves from her uniform pocket. CMA R then administered R10's inhalation medication by assisting R10 with one puff into each nostril. CMA R…
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 · D2025-02-13 · 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 identified a census of 27 residents. The sample included 12 residents, with two residents sampled for discharge. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide a written notice of transfer as soon as practicable to Resident (R) 13 and their representative. This deficient practice had the risk of miscommunication between the facility and resident/family and possible missed opportunities for healthcare service for R13. Findings Included: - The electronic medical record (EMR) for R13 documented diagnoses of congestive heart failure (CHF - a condition with low heart output and the body becomes congested with fluid), hypertension (high blood pressure), confusion, adult failure to thrive (includes not doing well, feeling poorly, weight loss, and poor self-care that could be seen in elderly individuals), weakness, hyperkalemia (greater than normal amount of potassium in the blood), hypokalemia (low level of potassium in the blood), and dementia (a progressive mental…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-13 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY The facility identified a census of 27 residents. The sample included 12 residents with two residents sampled for discharge. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide a bed hold with the required information to Resident (R) 13 or their family representative when R13 transferred to the hospital. This deficient practice placed R13 at risk for impaired ability to return to the facility or his same room. Finding include: - The electronic medical record (EMR) for R13 documented a diagnoses of congestive heart failure (CHF - a condition with low heart output and the body becomes congested with fluid), hypertension (high blood pressure), confusion, adult failure to thrive (includes not doing well, feeling poorly, weight loss, poor self-care that could be seen in elderly individuals), weakness, hyperkalemia (greater than normal amount of potassium in the blood), hypokalemia (low level of potassium in the blood), and dementia (a progressive mental disorder characterized by failing…
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 · D2025-02-13 · tag F0744 — failed to care for residents with dementia — isolatedProvide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with dementia.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
The facility identified a census of 27 residents. The sample included 12 residents, with one reviewed for dementia (a progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, and confusion) care. Based on interviews, record reviews, and observations, the facility failed to provide dementia-related care services for Resident (R) 10 to promote the resident's highest practicable level of well-being. This deficient practice placed R10 at risk for decreased quality of life, isolation, and impaired dignity. Findings Included: - The Medical Diagnosis section within R10's Electronic Medical Records (EMR) included diagnoses of Parkinson's Disease (a slowly progressive neurologic disorder characterized by resting tremors, rolling of the fingers, masklike faces, shuffling gait, muscle rigidity, and weakness), generalized weakness, dementia, chronic heart failure, hypertension (high blood pressure), and osteoarthritis (degenerative changes to one or many joints characterized by swelling and pain) in both knees. R10's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated 12/06/24 documented a Brief…
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 · D2025-02-13 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
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 identified a census of 27 residents. The sample included 12 residents, with five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a gradual dose reduction (GDR) was attempted or documented as contraindicated by the physician with a supporting rationale for risk versus benefit for Resident (R) 20 and R25's antipsychotic (a class of medications used to treat major mental conditions that cause a break from reality) medication. The facility also failed to ensure R10's antipsychotic medication had a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) approved indication or the required risk versus benefit physician documentation. These deficient practices placed these residents at risk for unnecessary medications and adverse side effects. Findings included: - R20's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) from the Diagnosis tab documented diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease (progressive mental deterioration characterized by confusion and memory…
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 · D2025-02-13 · tag F0849 — isolatedArrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
The facility identified a census of 27 residents. The sample included 12 residents, with two residents reviewed for hospice. Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a coordinated plan of care, which coordinated care and services provided by the facility with the care and services provided by hospice, was developed and available for Resident (R) 22. This placed the resident at risk for inappropriate end-of-life care. Finding Included: - R22's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) from the Diagnosis tab documented diagnoses of assistance with personal needs, urinary retention, diabetes mellitus (when the body cannot use glucose, not enough insulin is made, or the body cannot respond to the insulin), sinus tachycardia(normal rhythm, heart beating too fast), dysphagia (swallowing difficulty), and anemia (an inadequate number of healthy red blood cells to carry adequate oxygen to body tissues). The Significant Change in Status Minimum Data Set (MDS) for R22 dated 11/26/24 recorded a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, which indicated…
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 · E2021-09-21 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
The facility reported a census of 20 residents and identified 12 of those residents with controlled medications stored in the medication cart. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to perform an accurate system for the count of the number of controlled medications (medications that can cause physical and mental dependence) in the medication cart, increasing the risk for diversion of the medications. Findings included: - On 09/16/21 at 03:50 PM, the record used for the shift to shift count of controlled medications lacked a place for the staff to document the number of controlled medications in the medication cart. On 09/16/21 at 03:52 PM, Licensed Nurse (LN) G stated that all controlled medications were stored in the medication cart and a count was done with the off going/on coming staff that was taking over the medication cart. During the count process the staff counted the number of pills in the cards or amount of liquid in a bottle. LN G stated that the number of controlled medications in the cart were not counted during the count process. On 09/16/21 at 04:11…
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 · E2021-09-21 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — patternDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
The facility reported a census of 20 residents with 12 selected for review, including five residents reviewed for influenza vaccinations. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide consent forms to allow the resident or the resident's representative the opportunity to refuse the influenza immunization for the five residents, Resident (R)1, R5, R8, R11, and R19. Findings included: - The electronic medical record (EMR), indicated that Resident (R)19 received an influenza vaccine on 09/17/20. The other four reviewed residents' EMRs, indicated that R1, R5, R8, and R11 received an influenza vaccine on 10/14/20. The EMRs all lacked consent forms for the influenza vaccination for these five residents. On 09/21/21 at 11:48 AM, Administrative Nurse F stated that the nurse providing the vaccine would supply the vaccine information sheet and have the consent filled out. On 09/21/21 at 03:50 PM, Administrative Nurse D stated the facility does a blanket consent for treatment that the resident/representative signs and there was not a consent form provided before…
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 · D2021-09-21 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY The facility reported a census of 20 residents. The sample contained 12 residents, with one resident reviewed for limited range of motion. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide interventions to promote maintenance of range of motion and prevent decline in the right hand, for the one sampled resident, Resident (R) 8. Findings included: - The signed Physician Order Sheet (POS), dated 09/09/21, documented R8's diagnoses included cataract (clouding of the lens of the eye) of unspecified eye, vascular dementia (a progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory and confusion caused by a decreased blood flow to the brain), diabetes mellitus (when the body cannot use glucose, not enough insulin made or the body cannot respond to the insulin), irritable bowel syndrome (abnormally increased motility of the small and large intestines), and stroke (damage to tissues in the brain due to a loss of oxygen to the area). An annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE],…
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 before2021-09-21 · 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 20 residents. The sample contained 12 residents, with two residents reviewed for accidents. Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure safe mobility to prevent accidents when the facility failed to provide foot pedals to the wheelchair, while transporting one of the two sampled residents, dependent Resident (R) 9. Findings included: - The signed Physician Order Sheet (POS), dated 07/28/21, documented R9 had a diagnosis of bilateral (affecting both sides) osteoarthritis (degenerative changes to one or many joints characterized by swelling and pain) of the knee. An annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R9's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was 11, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. R9 required limited assistance with locomotion on the unit. A Cognitive Loss Care Area Assessment (CAA), dated 03/17/21, documented R9's primary language was Japanese and confusion resulted when she did not understand. An…
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 · D2021-09-21 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY The facility reported a census of 20 residents with twelve selected for review, including one Resident (R)5, reviewed for respiratory care. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to change R5's oxygen tubing in a timely manner. This practice increased the risk of Resident (R)5 developing a respiratory infection. Findings included: - The Problem List, located in the electronic medical record (EMR), for Resident (R)5, included diagnoses of pulmonary fibrosis (lung tissue becomes damaged and thickened leading to shortness of breath), obstructive sleep apnea (intermittent airflow blockage during sleep), and chronic cough. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], assessed R5 with a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating intact cognition. He did not experience shortness of breath with exertion, lying flat, or at rest, and did require oxygen. The Annual MDS, dated 08/25/21, did not reveal any changes to R5's BIMS score, oxygen use, or shortness 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.
“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
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership Data Not Available |
The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
What families pay in KS
CMS lists this home as Medicaid-certified only — it can accept Medicaid for long-term care, but it is not Medicare-certified, so Medicare will not pay for a short rehabilitation (“skilled nursing”) stay here. 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 17E577. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-02-13, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.