Ascension Living Via Christi Village McLean
777 N McLean Blvd, Wichita, KS 67203 · Non profit - Corporation · 36 certified beds · (316) 942-7000 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
- 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
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
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 | 21.2% | 17.9% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.4% | 4.9% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 1.6% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 2.9% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 3.2% | 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 | 8.7% | 4.3% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 10.9% | 16.2% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 18.4% | 23.2% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 95.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.8% | 4.4% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 20.8% | 22.6% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 17.6% | 18.1% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.9% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 94.8% | 73.8% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 22.1% | 22.4% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 17.2% | 11.5% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.72 | 1.80 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.74 | 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.
49.5% 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 78 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 74.6% 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 59 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 0.37 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 62% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% 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 | 49.5%CMS range 38.7–60.6 | 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 | 9.7%CMS range 6.3–15.1 | 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 | 74.6% | 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 | 72.9% | 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 | 54.2% | 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 | 100.0% | 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 | 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 | 2.9% | 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 | 1.4% | 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 | 5.7%CMS range 3.0–10.9 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.63 | 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 36 beds and averages 33.2 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 3 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 4.39 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.48 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.69 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.89 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.60 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.71 to 0.91 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 40% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
14 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Actual harm · G2023-11-15 · 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 - Review of Resident (R)10's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed diagnoses which included: morbid obesity (a serious health condition resulting from an abnormally high body mass) and schizoaffective disorder (a mental disorder in which a person experiences a combination of symptoms). The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating intact cognition. She required extensive assistance of two staff for transfers. Her balance was not steady, and she was only able to stabilize with staff assistance. She had no falls since her prior assessment. The Falls Care Area Assessment (CAA), dated 12/09/22, documented the resident was at a high risk for falls. The Quarterly MDS, dated 09/07/23, documented the resident had a BIMS score of 15, indicating intact cognition. She required extensive assistance of one staff for transfers and had steady balance. She had no falls since her prior assessment. The care plan, revised 09/26/23,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-14 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
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 32 residents, with 12 residents sampled for advanced directives (a written document, which indicates the medical decisions for health care professionals when the person could not make their own decisions). Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one resident's advanced directives were thoroughly completed when Resident (R)34 had a do not resuscitate (DNR- or no code, a legal document or order that means the person does not desire resuscitative measures) which was only signed by two licensed nurses as a verbal order and lacked a physician signature rendering it invalid. This placed the resident at risk for an impaired right to have advance directives honored. Findings included:- R34 's Electronic Health Record (EHR) revealed diagnoses of dementia (progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, confusion), depression (a mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest), and anxiety (mental or…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-14 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
The facility reported a census of 32 residents. The sample included 12 residents. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the correct and complete Beneficiary Protection Notification forms were issued to one of three residents reviewed, Resident (R) 27. This placed the resident at risk for uninformed decisions.Findings included:- On 08/13/25 a review of the Skilled Nursing Facility Advance Beneficiary Notice of Non-Coverage Form CMS-20052 (SNF ABN) revealed the facility lacked a completed form for R27. R27's Notification of Medicare Non-Coverage Form 10123(NOMNC- the form used to notify Medicare A participants of their rights to appeal and the last covered date of service) was signed on 05/21/25. Last covered day of service was 05/23/25. R27 remained in the facility for long-term care.R27's 05/08/25 Progress Note at 01:48 PM documented R27 was admitted from hospital for skilled nursing care/rehab.R27's 05/23/25 Physical Therapy Discharge Summary documented R27 was discharged from physical therapy to reside in this long-term care facility. Goal partially…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-14 · 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 reported a census of 32 residents. The sample included 12 residents, which included five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that Resident (R) 34's as-needed antianxiety (a class of medications that calm and relax people) medication had a 14-day stop date, or a specified duration, and physician rationale for the extended duration. This deficient practice placed the affected resident at risk for adverse effects associated with the use of psychotropic (alters mood or thoughts) medications.Findings included:R34 's Electronic Health Record (EHR) revealed diagnoses of dementia (progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, confusion), depression (a mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest), and anxiety (mental or emotional reaction characterized by apprehension, uncertainty, and irrational fear).The 11/05/24 Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) documented resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of zero, 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-14 · 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 had a census of 32 residents. The sample included 12 residents, with one resident reviewed for hospitalization. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a written bed hold policy and failed to issue a written notification as soon as practicable for transfers of Resident (R) 39. This placed the resident at risk for impaired rights related to returning to the facility. Findings included:Review of the Electronic Health Record (EHR), documented R39 had diagnoses acute hypoxia (a condition characterized by a relatively sudden onset inadequate supply of oxygen that are usually severe), and respiratory failure (a condition where the lungs can't adequately provide enough oxygen to the body or remove enough carbon dioxide, leading to potentially dangerous levels of oxygen and/or carbon dioxide in the blood).R39's 05/17/25 Entry Minimum Data Set (MDS) documented a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated intact cognition. The MDS documented R39 was totally dependent on staff for transfers, toileting, and lower-body dressing.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-14 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
The facility had a census of 32 residents. The sample included 12 residents. Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to provide services to meet professional standards of care when staff signed a treatment order as completed but did not complete the treatment for Resident (R) 15. This placed the resident at risk for delayed healing and infection. Findings included:- R15 's Electronic Health Record (EHR) revealed diagnoses of depression (a mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest), and diabetes mellitus (DM-when the body cannot use glucose, not enough insulin is made, or the body cannot respond to the insulin).R15's 05/27/25 Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) documented a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of seven, which indicated severely impaired cognition. The MDS documented R15 required moderate assistance for bathing, toileting, lower body dressing, and footwear. The MDS documented R15 had one venous stasis ulcer (lesion of the lower leg due to poor circulation) and required a non-surgical dressing…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-14 · 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 32 residents. The sample included 12 residents with one dependent resident reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs). Based on observation, interviews, and record review the facility failed to provide ADL care including grooming of facial hair for Resident (R) 9. This placed the resident at risk for impaired dignity and poor hygiene. Findings included:- R9's Electronic Health Record (EHR) revealed diagnoses of Parkinson's disease (a slowly progressive neurologic disorder characterized by resting tremors, rolling of the fingers, masklike faces, shuffling gait, muscle rigidity, and weakness) and depression (a mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest). R9's 11/26/24 Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12, which indicated moderately impaired cognition. The MDS noted R9 required set-up assistance for personal hygiene and oral care. The MDS noted R9 required moderate assistance with toileting, standing, and transfers. The 12/05/24 Functional Abilities…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-14 · 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
The facility reported a census of 32 residents; the sample included 12 with five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications and related monitoring. Based on observation, interview, and record review revealed the facility failed to monitor and respond to Resident (R)14 and R36 for lack of bowel movements. This placed the residents at risk for complications including constipation and bowel obstruction. Findings included:- R14's Electronic Health Records (EHR), under the Physician Orders (POS), documented diagnoses which included dementia (a progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory and confusion), hypothyroidism (a condition characterized by decreased activity of the thyroid gland), hypovolemia (abnormally low circulating blood volume), and constipation (difficulty passing stools),R14's 4/15/25 Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of nine, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS noted R14 was frequently incontinent of bowel, without a toileting program, and/or constipation.The Urinary Continence and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-14 · 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
The facility reported a census of 32 residents. The sample included 12 residents. Based on interviews, observation and record review, the facility failed to utilize 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) when providing direct care to a Resident (R) 42 with a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC-a thin, flexible tube that is inserted into a vein in the upper arm and threaded into a large vein above the heart). The facility further failed to ensure adequate hand hygiene during personal care for R3 when staff failed to complete proper hand hygiene. The facility failed to store respiratory equipment in a sanitary manner for R6. These deficient practices had the potential to spread infections to the residents in the facility.Findings included:- Observation on 08/12/25 At 11:54 AM, R6 had oxygen tubing dated 08/03/25 stored in a plastic bag attached to an oxygen concentrator. The plastic bag had a large hole noted on the bottom and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2023-11-15 · 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 reported a census of 35 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 11/14/23 at 10:03 AM, the following areas of concern were noted: 1. The white freezer had food debris on the bottom shelf. 2. The ice machine drainage pipe lacked an air gap and rested directly touching on the grate of the floor drain. 3. The stationary can opener had dried, sticky food debris on the tip and on the surrounding holding device. 4. A large fan which blew directly onto the shelf where pots and pans were placed to dry, had a heavy build-up of dust and debris on the cage surrounding the blades. The fan was on and blowing at the time of the initial tour and again on a follow up visit to the kitchen. The facility policy for Sanitation and Infection Prevention/Control, revised 01/2023, included: A basic sanitation inspection is conducted at least…
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 before2023-11-15 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide 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 35 residents. Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an effective infection control program with the failure to ensure sanitary storage of clean linen in the beauty shop, lack of housekeeping staff knowledge of cleaning products for clostridium difficile (a spore producing highly transmissible bacteria), use of expired sanitizing wipes, and unsanitary catheter care for resident (R)33. Findings included: - Observation, on [DATE] at 09:30 AM, during the environmental tour of the facility, revealed the beauty shop contained plastic wrapped clean towels placed directly on the floor. Administrative Staff A stated she would expect all staff to ensure towels were stored off the floor to prevent contamination. Furthermore, interview, on [DATE] at 11:30 AM, with Housekeeping Staff W, revealed she did not know what cleaning solutions were required to clean an isolation room for clostridium difficile and thought the nursing staff would provide…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-11-15 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — patternMake 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
The facility reported a census of 35 residents. Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for residents and staff regarding the parameter of the kitchen floor containing trash and debris. Findings included: - During an initial tour of the kitchen on 11/14/23 at 10:03 AM, the following area of concern was noted: The parameter of the kitchen floor contained food and trash debris throughout. On 11/15/23 at 10:01 AM, Dietary staff BB confirmed the kitchen floor needed to be cleaned around the parameter. The cleaning schedule for the kitchen, used as a cleaning policy, revealed the kitchen floor was to be mopped every shift. The facility failed to provide a safe, functional, sanitary and comfortable environment for residents and staff.
- Potential for harm · E2023-11-15 · tag F0923 — patternHave enough outside ventilation via a window or mechanical ventilation, or both.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
The facility reported a census of 35 residents. Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the beauty shop exhaust ventilation remained in good working order for the residents of the facility. Findings included: - Observation, on 11/14/23 at 02:30 PM, with Beauty Shop Operator V, revealed she did not know if the beauty shop had an exhaust fan, but that she provided very few permanents that would create foul odors. Observation, on 11/15/23 at 09:03 AM, with Maintenance Staff U and Administrative Staff A during the environmental tour, revealed the ventilation exhaust fan was non-working. Administrative Staff A stated the fan was checked once a year and staff did not report that fan was not working, and the damper was probably non-functioning. The facility lacked a policy for maintenance of the beauty shop exhaust fan. The facility failed to ensure the beauty shop exhaust fan was maintained in good working order as required for the residents of the facility who utilize the beauty shop.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-15 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure 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 35 residents with 15 selected for review which included six residents observed for medication administration. Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure appropriate storage of one Resident (R)19's inhaler of the six residents observed. Findings included: - Review of Resident (R) 19 Physician Order Sheet, dated 11/10/23, instructed staff to administer Advair disckus (an inhaled medication containing a steroid and broncho dilator) 100/50 micrograms one inhalation twice a day for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD- progressive and irreversible condition characterized by diminished lung capacity and difficulty or discomfort in breathing). Observation, on 11/14/23 at 08:08 AM, revealed Licensed Nurse (LN) H, prepared to administer morning medications to Resident (R)19. LN H could not find the resident's inhaler in R19's box in the medication cart. LN H looked in the resident's room and was unable to find the inhaler. The resident was sitting at the common dining room table. LN H noted the inhaler in a flower…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| VIA CHRISTI VILLAGES INC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 10/01/2001 |
| SHADBOLT, ERIN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2024 |
| SMOOT, KENNETH | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2024 |
| MUSGRAVE, LISA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2024 |
| ASCENSION HEALTH SENIOR CARE | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2014 |
| MCCUE, TAMARA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2023 |
| POLLEY, VALAN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/15/2022 |
| HEALTH DIMENSIONS CONSULTING INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/02/2019 |
| INTERIM HEALTH CARE OF WICHITA INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/14/2024 |
| MEDICAL SOLUTIONS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/14/2017 |
| WEISS STAFFING SOLUTIONS | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/17/2021 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 17 rows in the source record cover these 11 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 $1.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 15% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
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 175543. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-14, 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.