Diversicare Of Larned
1114 W 11th Street, Larned, KS 67550 · For profit - Corporation · 80 certified beds · (620) 285-6914 Medicare & Medicaid certified
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 (4/5)
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- a high number of inspection citations overall (19) — 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) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 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 | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating 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 | 9.2% | 17.9% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.8% | 4.9% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.6% | 1.6% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.1% | 2.9% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.5% | 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 | 8.4% | 4.3% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 10.1% | 16.2% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 17.0% | 23.2% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 95.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.9% | 4.4% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 23.8% | 22.6% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 8.7% | 18.1% | 17.1% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.87 | 1.80 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.37 | 2.13 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ 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.
Met the expected recovery: 65.0% 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 20 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 0.28 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 42% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 13% 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.7%CMS range 7.3–15.4 | 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 | 65.0% | 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 | 35.0% | 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 | 55.0% | 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 | 12.0% | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.88 | 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 80 beds and averages 47.0 residents a day — about 59% occupied, or roughly 33 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.40 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.70 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.50 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 2.96 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.59 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.81 to 0.42 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 52% 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.
19 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 9 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-01-08 · 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 reported a census of 44. Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide adequate infection control practices related to Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP-infection control interventions designed to reduce transmission of resistant organisms which employ targeted gown and glove use during high contact care), hand hygiene and sanitizing shared equipment. Findings included:- Initial tour of the facility on 01/06/26 at 08:00 AM revealed a lack of visible signage to identify residents who required EBP. The facility had no visible setup for personal protective equipment (PPE) readily accessible to staff to apply before entering residents' rooms to provide direct care. During an observation 01/07/26 at10:16 AM, Licensed Nurse (LN) J and LN G entered the Resident (R) 2's room to provide catheter (tube inserted directly into the body to drain urine) care. The room lacked signage to indicate R2 required EBP. R2's room lacked the required EBP personal protective equipment (PPE) (gowns). There were gloves available in the room. R2's catheter bag…
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 · D2026-01-08 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolatedHonor 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY The facility had a census of 44 residents. The sample included 12 residents with one reviewed for missing personal property. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility staff failed to document and promptly resolve Resident (R) 7's grievance when she reported to staff she had missing clothing items. Findings included:- R7's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) documented R7 had diagnoses of dementia (a progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory and confusion) and depression (a mood disorder which causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest). R7's Significant Change in Status Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented R7 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of eight, which indicated moderately impaired cognition. The MDS documented R7 was dependent and required substantial/maximal assistance for activities of daily living (ADLs). A review of the Resident Grievance/Complaint Log from 10/1/25 to present, provided by Social Services X, lacked…
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 · D2026-01-08 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
The facility reported a census of 45 residents. The sample included 12 residents with two residents reviewed for facility discharge. Based on interview and record review e facility failed to complete a recapitulation of Resident (R) 47's stay in the facility. Findings included:- R47's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) revealed the following diagnoses: atherosclerotic heart disease (heart disease) and type two diabetes (a disease in which the body's ability to produce or respond to the hormone insulin is impaired, resulting in abnormal metabolism of carbohydrates and elevated levels of glucose in the blood and urine). R47's 10/02/25 admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 15, which indicated intact cognition. The MDS recorded R47 required supervision or touching assistance with toileting, and substantial/maximal assistance with bathing. R47's Care Plan identified a self-care deficit related to recent surgery. R47's endurance was low from the surgery; R47 had difficulty with ambulation over long distances and directed staff to offer a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-08 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
The facility identified a census of 44 residents. The sample included 12 residents. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for Resident (R) 1's antipsychotic (a class of medications used to treat major mental conditions which cause a break from reality) medication and R31's activities of daily living (ADLs) for a dependent resident. Findings included:- R1's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) revealed diagnoses of bipolar disorder (a major mental illness which causes people to have episodes of severe high and low moods) and depression (a mood disorder which causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest). R1's 05/09/25 Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 13, which indicated intact cognition. R1's MDS documented no behaviors and minimal depression. R1's MDS recorded R1 received an antianxiety (a class of medications which calm and relax people) and an antidepressant (a class of medications used to treat mood disorders) in the look-back period. R1's…
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 · D2026-01-08 · 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
The facility reported a census of 44 residents. The sample included 12 residents with one resident reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs). Based on observation, interviews, and record review the facility failed to offer and provide assistance with nail care and facial hair removal for Resident (R) 31. Findings included:- R31 's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) revealed diagnoses of cerebral infarction (stroke - sudden death of brain cells due to lack of oxygen caused by impaired blood flow to the brain by blockage or rupture of an artery to the brain), hemiparesis/hemiplegia (weakness and paralysis on one side of the body), and dementia (a progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory and confusion). R31's 05/13/25 Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 11, which indicated moderately impaired cognition. R31's MDS documented she had an impairment in her upper and lower extremities on one side. R31's MDS documented she required total assistance with all ADL, except she required setup for eating. R31's 05/14/25…
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 · Fcited before2024-01-17 · 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
The facility reported a census of 46 residents. Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to prepare and serve food under sanitary conditions, to the residents of the facility appropriately to prevent the potential for food borne bacteria. Findings included: - During an initial tour of the kitchen on 01/11/24 at 08:01 AM, the following areas of concern were noted. 1. The stationary can opener had a build-up of dried on food substance on the cutting tip of the opener. 2. Six cutting boards were heavily grooved making the surfaces unsanitizable. 3. The inside of the microwave had dried on food on the top, sides and bottom. 4. A plastic container holding the roll of clear food wrap had a build-up of food substances and dust. 5. The two-door reach-in refrigerator had spilled, dried chocolate milk in several places on the inside. 6. The ice machine vents had a heavy build-up of dust. On 01/16/24 at 03:49 PM, Dietary staff BB confirmed the above areas needed to be cleaned. The facility policy for Kitchen Cleanliness, undated, documented the Certified Dietary…
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 · F2024-01-17 · tag F0851 — widespreadElectronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
The facility reported a census of 46 residents. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to electronically submit to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, (CMS) complete and accurate direct care staffing information, including information for agency and contract staff, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data in a uniform format according to specifications established by CMS {i.e., Payroll Base Journal (PBJ)}, related to licensed nursing staff coverage 24 hours a day. Findings included: - Review of the Payroll Base Journal (PBJ) Staffing Data Report for the third quarter of fiscal year (FY) 2023, (04/01/23-06/30/23), revealed the lack of a License Nurse (LN) for 24 hours/seven days a week (24/7) on 04/01 Saturday (SA); 04/09 Sunday (SU); 04/15 (SA); 04/29 (SA); 04/30 (SU); 05/13 (SA); 05/14 (SU); 05/20 (SA); 05/27 (SA); 05/28 (SU); 06/04 (SU); 06/18 (SU); 06/24 (SA); and 06/25 (SU). Review of the facility's time sheets for licensed nursing staff on the above dates, revealed the facility had the required licensed nursing staff 24 hours each day,…
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 · E2024-01-17 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop 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 46 residents with 16 residents sampled. Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to review and revise the care plan for three sampled Residents (R)27 regarding revising the care plan to include an intervention following one fall, R 33 regarding revising the care plan to include staff instruction for verbalizations of suicidal tendencies, and R 2 regarding revising the care plan to include interventions following multiple falls. Findings included: - Review of Resident (R)33 electronic medical record (EMR) included the following diagnoses: insomnia (the inability to sleep) and depression (a mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest). The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 11, indicating moderately impaired cognition. He had verbal behavioral symptoms directed towards others on one to three days of the assessment period with…
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 · E2024-01-17 · 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 reported a census of 46 residents with 16 selected for review which included five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to follow up on pharmacy recommendations in a timely manner for two Residents (R)2 and R29, of the five sampled residents, and failed to ensure pharmacy reviews for October 2023 and November 2023 for the five sampled residents R15, R23, R2, R29 and R27 . Findings included: - Review of Resident (R)23's electronic medical record (EMR), revealed diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease (progressive mental deterioration characterized by confusion and memory failure), diabetes (when the body cannot use glucose, not enough insulin made or the body cannot respond to the insulin), pain hypothyroidism (condition characterized by decreased activity of the thyroid gland), dementia (progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, confusion), and depression (a mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness…
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 · D2024-01-17 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her 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 46 residents which included 16 residents sampled with one resident reviewed for dignity. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the dignity/privacy of the one sampled resident (R)9, with a catheter/urine collection bag, with the lack of a cover for the urine collection bag to prevent full visualization of the resident's urine. Findings included: - Review of resident (R)9's Physician Orders, documentation included diagnoses of retention of urine, injury of kidney unspecified, and need for assistance with personal care. The Significant Change in Status Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], documentation included the resident with the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating cognitively intact. Her continence was not rated due to ostomy and indwelling catheter. The Urinary Incontinence/Indwelling Catheter Care Area Assessment (CAA) for urinary incontinence/indwelling catheter, dated 01/03/24, documented the resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 9 citations
- Potential for harm · D2024-01-17 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY The facility reported a census of 46 residents with 16 selected for review which included five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one resident (R)15, of the five residents reviewed, received laxatives for lack of bowel movement as ordered by the physician. Findings included: - Review of Resident (R)15's Physician Order Sheet dated 12/13/23, revealed diagnoses included Alzheimer's (progressive mental deterioration characterized by confusion and memory failure), and osteoporosis (abnormal loss of bone density and deterioration of bone tissue with an increased fracture risk). The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], assessed the resident with severely impaired decision making. The resident was rarely/never understood. The resident received antipsychotic, antianxiety, and antidepressant medications. The resident was on antipsychotics on a routine basis. The Psychotropic Drug Use Care Area Assessment (CAA) dated…
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 · D2024-01-17 · 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 46 residents. The sample included 16 residents, which included four residents sampled for accidents. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate to identify causal factors of falls and/or initiate/implement immediate, appropriate interventions to prevent further falls for three sampled dependent residents, including Resident (R)15, related to a lack of wheelchair pedals for support while staff propelled the resident; R27, who experienced a fall with an inappropriate intervention; and for the multiple falls experienced by cognitively impaired R2, with the most recent fall resulting in major injury with two fractured (broken bone) vertebrae (bones of the spine). Findings included: - Review of R2's Physician Orders, dated 12/13/23, included diagnoses of fractured thoracic (middle section of the spine) vertebra, repeated falls, dementia (progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, confusion), need for assistance…
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 before2024-01-17 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY The facility reported a census of 46 residents which included 16 residents. The facility failed to maintain an effective infection control program to prevent cross contamination and the prevention infection related to urinary catheter care and services provided to one sampled Resident (R )9 with a urinary catheter/urine collection bag. Findings included: - Review of resident (R)9's undated Physician Orders, documentation included diagnoses of retention of urine, injury of a kidney unspecified, and the need for assistance with personal cares. The Significant Change in Status Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], documented the resident with the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating cognitively intact. She used an indwelling urinary catheter. The Urinary Incontinence/Indwelling Catheter Care Area Assessment (CAA), dated 01/03/24, included the resident used an indwelling urinary catheter. The care plan for indwelling catheter, dated 12/04/23, directed the staff to position the catheter bag…
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 · Fcited before2022-03-10 · 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
The facility census totaled 47 residents with all residents receiving meals from one main kitchen. Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to prepare and serve food in a sanitary manner by the failure to change gloves when handling ready to eat food items and the failure to maintain clean cooking equipment that worked properly to prepare meals. Findings included: - On 03/09/22 at 11:20 AM observation of the facility kitchen revealed a large pan with sweet potato soufflé and a pan of pumpkin bars baking in the upright oven. Several checks of the food items in the oven by Dietary Staff E revealed the food was not done cooking. At 12:00 PM Dietary Staff E removed the pan of pumpkin bars from the oven though they could not be served due to not setting up or baked fully, and the staff served an alternate of ice cream. At 12:10 PM Dietary Staff E removed the sweet potator souffle from the oven. The middle of the soufflé was not set up. The soufflé had a temperature of 160 degrees Fahrenheith (F), but the center was runny. Dietary Staff E just stirred it all…
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 · D2022-03-10 · 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 47 residents with 13 sampled, including two for hospitalization. Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to send a copy of the facility-initiated hospitalization transfer/discharge notice to the representative of the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman for Resident (R) 47. Findings Include: - Review of R47's Minimum Data Set (MDS) tracking form documented the resident discharged to the hospital on [DATE] and returned to the facility on [DATE]. Review of R47's Medical Record lacked evidence of written notification of the facility-initiated hospitalization transfer/discharge to R47's Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman. On 03/07/22 at 04:09 PM R47 sat in his room in his recliner with his legs elevated, his walker next to his chair and all needed items within reach. On 03/08/22 at 11:35 AM Administrative Staff A confirmed the facility must notify the Office of the State Long Term Care Ombudsman at the time of discharge to 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 · D2022-03-10 · 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 reported a census of 47 residents with 13 sampled, which included two for hospitalization. Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide a copy of the facility bed hold policy to Residents (R) 47 and R34 or their representative when they transferred out of the facility to the hospital. Findings Included: - Review of R47's Minimum Data Set (MDS) tracking form documented the resident discharged to the hospital on [DATE] and returned to the facility on [DATE]. Review of R47's Medical Record lacked evidence of written notification of the facility-initiated transfer to the hospital, which included a bed hold given to R47 or his representative. On 03/07/22 at 02:09 PM R47 ambulated with his walker to the bathroom with staff assistance. On 03/08/22 at 03:12 PM Administrative Nurse B stated the facility went over the bed-hold policy on admission, but they would not send a policy with a resident when they went to the hospital. On 03/09/22 at 11:29 AM Licensed Nurse (LN) F…
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 · D2022-03-10 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY The facility reported a census of 47 residents, with 13 in the sample, and Resident (R) 18 reviewed for Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR). Based on observation, interviews, and record review the facility failed to obtain a Care Assessment Screening for R18 upon admission. Findings include: - R18's Physician Order Sheet dated 01/29/21 documented the following diagnoses: dementia with behavioral disturbance (progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, confusion), major depressive disorder (abnormal emotional state characterized by exaggerated feelings of sadness, worthlessness, emptiness and hopelessness), and post-traumatic stress disorder (psychiatric disorder characterized by an acute emotional response to a traumatic event or situation involving severe environmental stress, such as natural disaster, military combat, serious automobile accident, airplane crash or physical torture). The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status…
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 · D2022-03-10 · tag F0661 — isolatedEnsure necessary information is communicated to the resident, and receiving health care provider at the time of a planned discharge.
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 47 residents with 13 selected for review, which included one resident reviewed for discharge. Based on interview and record review the facility failed to document a recapitulation of the resident's stay upon discharge for Resident (R) 52. Findings included: - Review of the R52's Physicians Order Sheet dated 01/06/22 revealed diagnoses of muscle weakness and post covid condition (persistent symptoms experienced after a covid infection). The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] assessed the resident with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 indicating intact cognition. The resident required limited assistance of two staff for activities of daily living (ADL). The Activities of Daily Living Care Area Assessment (CAA) dated 01/12/22 indicated the resident required assistance in ADL due to impaired balance and transition during transfers, and functional impairment in activity. The Nurse's Notes dated 01/25/22 documented the resident discharged from 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.
- No harm found · C2026-01-08 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — widespreadMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
The facility reported a census of 44 residents. Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide a safe, functional, and sanitary environment in the laundry area. Findings included:- The laundry tour on 01/08/2026 10:54 AM, with Laundry Staff U, Consultant GG, revealed the following concerns:A large yellow trash bin full of trash, without a cover, sat next to the washing machine.The laundry room ceiling had a brown discolored area adjacent to peeling paint and a strip of unfinished plaster without paint, approximately four feet by 10 inches above the dump tank.The folding room ceiling had a brown water stain approximately two feet by two inches along the junction of the ceiling to the wall over the folding table.On 01/08/2026 at 11:10 AM, Maintenance Staff V confirmed the above findings and reported the stains had occurred when the pipes froze. He stated he did not have a plan to repair the areas noted above.The facility policy Infection Control, dated 5/2025, documentation included the center's infection control policies and practices, which are…
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.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to DIVERSICARE HEALTHCARE — 44 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 | 5 of 5 | 2.6 | +2.4 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 2.5 | +1.5 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 3.0 | +1.0 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 3.5 | +1.5 vs chain |
The other 43 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.6★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 43; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DIVERSICARE KANSAS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 01/29/2013 |
| ADVOCAT FINANCE, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 01/29/2013 |
| DAC NEWCORP INC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 04/04/2022 |
| DIVERSICARE HEALTHCARE SERVICES LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 04/04/2022 |
| DIVERSICARE HOLDING COMPANY LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 01/29/2013 |
| DIVERSICARE MANAGEMENT SERVICES LP. | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 01/29/2013 |
| STACEY, BRYAN | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/15/2016 |
| KELLMAN, FRANKLIN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 09/13/2024 |
| KOHN, BRIAN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 11/19/2021 |
| RATNER, ERAN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 09/13/2024 |
| BODIE, REBECCA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 03/02/2020 |
| NEE, STEPHEN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 02/20/2023 |
| WEISHAAR, MATTHEW | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 12/01/2003 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 16 rows in the source record cover these 13 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
6 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 $275K 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 175235. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-08, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.