Aberdeen Village
17500 W 119th Street, Olathe, KS 66061 · Non profit - Corporation · 60 certified beds · (913) 599-6100 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (36% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (15) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $8,021 in federal fines (most recent 2024-10-22)
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 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 3 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 | 35.3% | 17.9% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.3% | 4.9% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.4% | 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 | 1.6% | 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 | 3.3% | 4.3% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 32.0% | 16.2% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 22.6% | 23.2% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.1% | 95.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.9% | 4.4% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 36.2% | 22.6% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 6.3% | 18.1% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.8% | 1.9% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 62.5% | 73.8% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 35.4% | 22.4% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 2.2% | 11.5% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.08 | 1.80 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.16 | 2.13 | 1.80 | better |
‡ 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.
44.7% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 97 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
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 40 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 0.25 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 34% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 20% 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 | 44.7%CMS range 36.2–53.3 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.3%CMS range 6.1–14.4 | 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 | 70.0% | 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 | 62.5% | 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 | 75.9% | 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 | 96.3% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this 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 | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.7% | 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 | 3.5% | 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 | 6.2%CMS range 3.3–10.1 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.78 | 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 60 beds and averages 52.0 residents a day — about 87% occupied, or roughly 8 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 5.17 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.26 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.34 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 4.83 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.30 on weekdays — 9% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.40 to 0.93 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 36% is below 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.
15 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-10-22 · 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 55 residents. The sample included three residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent an elopement for cognitively impaired Resident (R)1, who required staff assistance for activities of daily living (ADL) including safe ambulation with her walker and was at risk for falls. On 10/17/24 between 04:00 AM and 04:30 AM, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) M heard R1's toilet flush, entered R1's bathroom, and asked R1 if she needed anything. R1 responded No and CNA M left to assist another resident without assisting R1 back to bed as CNA M assumed the resident would go back to bed. At approximately 04:40 AM, per camera footage, R1 ambulated to the elevator, took the elevator to the first floor, walked to a set of double doors, passed through them into the main lobby area, and proceeded to exit the main entrance doors on the south side of the facility without staff knowledge or supervision. At approximately 05:30…
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 before2026-05-20 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to provide individualized care and services related to dementia care (a progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory and confusion) for Resident (R)1, who displayed wandering behaviors into other resident's rooms. Findings Included:- R1's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) documented diagnoses of dementia, need for continuous supervision, adjustment disorder (a short-term, intense emotional or behavioral reaction to a stressful life change that is disproportionate to the event), muscle weakness, anxiety disorder (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty, and irrational fear), Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD - a mental disorder characterized by an acute emotional response to a traumatic event or situation involving severe environmental stress) and cognitive communication deficient (an impairment in organization, sequencing, attention, memory, planning, problem-solving, and safety awareness).…
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 · D2026-02-10 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolatedPrevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
The facility identified a census of 54 residents. The sample included 19 residents, with five reviewed for unnecessary medications. Based on observations, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure Resident (R) 20 remained free from chemical restraint related to the use her antipsychotic medication (a class of medications used to treat major mental conditions that cause a break from reality) without a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) approved indication. Findings Included: - The Medical Diagnosis section within R20's Electronic Medical Records (EMR) included diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease (progressive mental deterioration characterized by confusion and memory failure), 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), insomnia (difficulty sleeping), and major depressive disorder (major mood disorder). R20's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated 01/16/26 noted a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of four,…
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 · D2026-02-10 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure 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
The facility identified a census of 54 residents. The sample included 19 residents, with five sampled reviewed for unnecessary medications. Based on observations, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the Consultant Pharmacist's (CP) recommended a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) approved indication related to Resident (R) 20's antipsychotic (a class of medications used to treat major mental conditions that cause a break from reality) medication. Findings Included: - The Medical Diagnosis section within R20's Electronic Medical Records (EMR) included diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease (progressive mental deterioration characterized by confusion and memory failure), 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), insomnia (difficulty sleeping), and major depressive disorder (major mood disorder). R20's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated 01/16/26 noted a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of four, indicating…
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 · F2024-05-15 · 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 identified a census of 56 residents, one kitchen, four serving areas, and dining rooms. Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to follow sanitary dietary standards related to cleaning, food storage, equipment storage, and food preparation practices. These deficient practices placed the residents at risk related to food-borne illnesses and food safety concerns. Findings include: - On 05/13/24 at 08:09 AM during the initial tour, observation revealed the following: Bowls were stored upright on the rack by the delivery doors instead of inverted. Three refrigerator and four freezer temperature logs lacked evidence staff checked the temperature on Sunday, 05/12/24 in the main kitchen. The walk-in freezer had breaded chicken breasts that were uncovered and not dated. The commercial meat slicer was uncovered but not in use. The dishwasher temperature logbook lacked evidence staff checked the water temperature on 05/09/24 and 05/11/24. The cottage cheese and milk were open and not dated. On 05/15/24 at 11:40 AM Dietary Staff (DS) CC prepared…
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 · E2024-05-15 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
The facility reported a census of 56 residents. The facility identified one medication room and four medication carts. Based on observations, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to store medications and biologicals appropriately when the facility failed to lock the medication room and additionally failed to appropriately label Resident (R)31's insulin (a hormone that lowers the level of glucose in the blood) medication once opened. This deficient practice placed the residents at risk for unnecessary medication and administration errors. Findings Included: -On 05/13/24 at 08:15 AM a walkthrough of the facility's second floor was completed. An inspection of the medication room revealed the entry door was not locked. The room contained a secured digital medication storage system for the facility's prescription medications, a locked medication refrigerator, and a shelf with unsecured stock (over-the-counter medications) medications. The room was secured by Licensed Nurse (LN) J upon completion of the medication room inspection. On 05/14/24 at 08:47 AM an inspection of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-05-15 · 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 56 residents. The facility identified six residents on enhanced barrier precautions (EBP-infection control interventions designed to reduce transmission of resistant organisms which employs targeted gown and glove use during high contact care) and one resident on contact precautions (transmission-based precautions for infectious disease that may spread with direct or indirect contact). Based on record review, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure adequate infection control standards related to following enhanced barrier precautions, wearing personal protective equipment (PPE), and indwelling catheter maintenance (tube placed in the bladder to drain urine into a collection bag). These deficient practices placed the residents at risk for infectious diseases. Findings Included: - On 05/13/24 at 08:11 AM an inspection of Resident (R)6's room revealed no enhanced barrier precaution signage or personal protective equipment was posted in or around his room for his wound care. On 05/13/24 at 08:13 AM an inspection of R14's room…
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 · D2024-05-15 · 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 identified a census of 56 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents' rights and dignity were respected by staff when staff failed to honor Resident (R) 37's request during dining. The facility further failed to ensure R46's dignity was maintained during care provided in the common area. This placed the residents at risk for decreased self-esteem and decreased self-worth. Findings included: - On 05/14/24 at 08:19 AM R37 sat in his wheelchair at the dining table with other residents and was a given chocolate shake. On 05/14/24 at 08:21 AM R37 sat in his wheelchair in the dining room. R37 asked staff if he could go into the TV room to eat. R37 asked staff repeatedly to take him to the TV room. Licensed Nurse (LN) H, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) N, and Certified Medication Aide (CMA) R continued to stay seated assisting other residents. On 05/14/24 at 08:26 AM, CNA N gave R37 some apricots. R37 asked staff if he could go 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 · D2024-05-15 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolatedEnsure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is 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 identified a census of 56 residents. The sample included 15 residents with four residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL). Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure Resident (R) 46 received the necessary assistive services for transfers. This deficient practice placed R46 at risk for loss of independence, decreased self-esteem, and impaired dignity. Findings included: - R46's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) from the Diagnoses tab documented diagnoses of cerebral infarction (stroke - the 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), dementia (a progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, confusion), 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 a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of three 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 · D2024-05-15 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY The facility identified a census of 56 residents. The sample included 15 residents with four reviewed for pressure ulcers (localized injury to the skin and/or underlying tissue usually over a bony prominence, because of pressure, or pressure in combination with shear and/or friction). Based on interviews, observations, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure Resident (R)47's pressure-reducing interventions were implemented correctly when the low air-loss mattress pump was set at an inaccurate weight for the resident. The facility additionally failed to complete weekly wound assessments on R37. This deficient practice placed all affected residents at risk for complications related to skin breakdown and pressure ulcers. Findings Included: - The Medical Diagnosis section within R47's Electronic Medical Records (EMR) included diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease (progressive mental deterioration characterized by confusion and memory failure), major depressive disorder (major mood disorder), pressure ulcer,…
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 · D2024-05-15 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY The facility identified a census of 56 residents. The sample included 15 residents with three residents reviewed for catheters (a flexible tube inserted through a narrow opening into a body cavity, particularly the bladder, for removing fluid) and urinary tract infection (UTI infection in any part of the urinary system). Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to provide appropriate treatment for Resident (R) 31 with an indwelling catheter (a tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine into a collection bag) when the facility failed to prevent the drainage bag from resting on the floor. This deficient practice placed R31 at risk for catheter complications including infection. Findings included: - R31's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) from the Diagnoses tab documented diagnoses of bladder cancer, dementia (a progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, and confusion), and urinary retention (lack of ability to urinate and empty the bladder). The Annual Minimum…
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 · D2024-05-15 · 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 identified a census of 56 residents. The sample included 15 residents with one resident reviewed for respiratory care. Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure Resident (R) 5's continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP- ventilation device that blows a gentle stream of air into the nose to keep the airway open during sleep) mask was stored in a sanitary manner. This placed R5 at an increased risk for respiratory infection and complications. Findings included: - R5's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) from the Diagnoses tab documented diagnoses of hypertension (HTN-elevated blood pressure), kidney disease (a condition in which the kidneys are damaged and cannot filter blood as well as they should), depressive disorder (a mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest), edema (swelling resulting from an excessive accumulation of fluid in the body tissues), obstructive sleep apnea (an open airway during typical breathing during sleep…
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 · D2024-05-15 · tag F0700 — isolatedTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
The facility identified a census of 56 residents. The sample included 15 residents with four reviewed for siderails. Based on observations, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to identify Resident (R)47's low air-loss mattress and bolstered overlay as possible risks on R47's side rail assessment. This deficient practice placed R47 at risk for inadequate care due to unidentified care needs. Findings Included: - The Medical Diagnosis section within R47's Electronic Medical Records (EMR) included diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease (progressive mental deterioration characterized by confusion and memory failure), major depressive disorder (major mood disorder), pressure ulcer, anxiety disorder (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty, and irrational fear), and insomnia (difficulty sleeping). R47's Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) completed 04/02/24 noted a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of four indicating severe cognitive impairment. The MDS noted she required substantial to maximal assistance for bed mobility,…
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 before2022-09-27 · 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 49 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to secure chemicals in a safe, locked area, and out of reach of the 13 cognitively impaired independently mobile residents. This placed the affected residents at risk for accidents. Findings Included: - On 09/21/22 at 07:10AM an observation of the secured memory care unit revealed an unlocked sink cabinet in the kitchenette area accessible to the dementia care (progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, confusion) residents. Further investigation revealed two quart-size bottles which contained bleach disinfectant. The label stated, keep out of reach of children, hazardous to humans can cause eye irritation, harmful if swallowed. On 09/22/22 at 07:30AM an inspection of the sink cabinet revealed the door to be secured. Licensed Nurse (LN) H stated that staff should be checking the cabinets and drawers daily before and after meal services to ensure they were locked. In an interview on 09/27/22 at 02:30PM Licensed Nurse (LN)…
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 before2022-09-27 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY The facility identified a census of 49 residents. The sample included 15 residents with two residents reviewed for dementia care (progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, confusion). Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews, the facility failed to provide dementia care and services which included adequate supervision and activities to support Resident (R)43 and R49's highest practicable level of well-being. This deficient practice placed the residents at risk for decreased quality of life and impaired well-being due related to dementia. Findings Included: - The Medical Diagnosis section within R43's Electronic Medical Records (EMR) included diagnoses of dementia, major depressive disorder (major mood disorder), general anxiety disorder (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty and irrational fear), retention of urine (lack of ability to urinate and empty the bladder), benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH- non-cancerous enlargement of the prostate which…
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
$8,021 in federal fines across 1 penalty. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.
- $8,021 — penalty dated 2024-10-22
- Medicare payment denial — starting 2024-11-14 for 15 days
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to PRESBYTERIAN MANORS OF MID-AMERICA — 13 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 | 3.8 | +1.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 3.5 | +0.5 vs chain |
| Staffing | 5 of 5 | 4.3 | +0.7 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 3.2 | +0.8 vs chain |
The other 12 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.8★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PRESBYTERIAN MANORS INC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 01/01/2015 |
| BONNEY, ROBERT | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 07/01/2019 |
| BRENNECKE, GARY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 07/01/2015 |
| COOK, PATRICIA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 07/01/2022 |
| DULING, NANCY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 07/01/2020 |
| FARMER, CARLA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 09/01/2025 |
| GOODWIN, JOHN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 07/01/2018 |
| HARRIS, DANIEL | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 07/01/2019 |
| SCHENDEL, ROB | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 11/15/2023 |
| HIND, SHERRY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 07/01/1989 |
| MILLER, JOAN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 09/01/1997 |
| OWENS, MELANIE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 07/10/2017 |
| SHOGREN, BRUCE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 07/01/2011 |
| TAYLOR, WILLIAM | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 07/01/2015 |
| PRESBYTERIAN MANORS OF MID-AMERICA INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 06/18/2001 |
| ALLIN, JOHN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/12/2007 |
| EAPEN, JEENA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/31/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 22 rows in the source record cover these 17 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
2 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 $1.4M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in 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 175448. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-10, 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.