Presbyterian Homes Of Arden Hills

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

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.

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.

38.7% 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 41 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 52.6% 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 38 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.28 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 41% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 1% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 128 beds and averages 124.8 residents a day — about 98% occupied, or roughly 3 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.16 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.81 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.95 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 3.84 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.29 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.90 to 0.57 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 19% is below the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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.

This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.

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.

22 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 11 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2025-06-06 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and document review the facility failed to ensure adequate supervision and scheduled toileting to reduce the risk for falls for 1 of 3 residents (R1) who had a history of falls. This resulted in actual harm for R1 who had an unwitnessed fall requiring emergency department (ED) services, sustained a laceration to the head, received five staples, and was admitted to the hospital for further observation. The facility implemented corrective action prior to the survey so the deficient practice was issued at past non-compliance. Findings include: R1's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified diagnoses of severely impaired cognition without behaviors and lower impairment of range of motion (ROM) on one side, repeated falls, hip fracture, weakness, and shortness of breath), Alzheimer's, and dementia. R1 required supervision/touching with oral and personal hygiene, frequently incontinent of bowel and bladder, and verbal cues or touching/steadying with ambulation up to 150…

  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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · D2026-06-29 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and document review the facility failed to review and revise a care plan for 1 of 3 residents (R1) whose care plan was reviewed for revisions.Findings include: R1's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R1 was moderately cognitively impaired, dependent on staff for transfers from surface to surface, and had diagnoses included dementia. R1's care plan dated 1/23/26, indicated R1's family member (FM)-A gave verbal permission for R1 to continue to use the stand aid lift as long as the resident was able to do so and understood the risk of bruising and skin tears R1 may receive. R1's Resident Transfer assessment dated [DATE], indicated R1 was full weight bearing, was able to stand for 8 (eight) seconds safely while holding onto an assistive device, and was cooperative during transfers. The recommended mechanism for transfers from surface to surface was a two-person transfer with the stand assist lift. R1's progress note dated 6/11/26 at 10:40 a.m., indicated R1 may no longer be…

  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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-05-01 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
  Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
  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 interview and record review, the facility failed to immediately consult with the resident's physician for a need to alter treatment significantly for one of one resident (R1) reviewed. This practice resulted in a delay of treatment to R1's pressure ulcers. Findings include: R1's face sheet indicated R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a primary diagnosis of unspecified atrial fibrillation. R1's additional diagnoses included chronic kidney disease stage 3 and spinal stenosis, sarcoidosis of other sites. R1's progress note dated 4/22/25 at 9:40 a.m. indicated medical director (MD)-A reviewed R1's sacral ulcer. Progress note indicated the pressure ulcer was red that extended out from the wound under four centimeters with moderate odor and drainage on the dressing. The progress note indicated the facility staff, or the MD would be calling nurse practitioner (NP)-A to arrange wound clinic visit or hospitalization for debridement soon. R1's progress note dated 4/22/25 at 9:49 a.m. indicated R1 was…

  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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-16 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide 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 Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to use proper personal protective equipment (PPE) who are on enhanced barrier precautions (EBPs) for 1 of 3 (R1) residents reviewed for falls. Findings include: R1's Face Sheet dated 1/1/19, indicated R1 had retention of urine. R1's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R1 had moderate cognitive impairment, had an indwelling catheter, and needed extensive assistance with all cares. R1's care plan dated 3/31/35, indicated R1 was on enhanced barrier precautions (EBPs) because R1 had an indwelling medical device the plan directed staff to wear gown and gloves during high-contact resident care activities. Enhanced Barrier Precautions signage on R1's door undated, indicated providers and staff would wear gloves and gown for the following High-Contact Resident Care Activities: dressing, bathing, transferring, changing linens, providing hygiene, changing briefs or assisting with toilet use, and when caring for wounds 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.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-09-12 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and document review the facility failed to ensure food was properly disposed of after their best by dates in 2 of 4 serving kitchens and failed to ensure food was properly stored in 2 of 4 of the serving kitchens reviewed. This had the potential to impact residents who reside on the unit the serving kitchen is located. Findings include: An observation on 9/9/24 at 1:21 p.m., the 3rd floor serving kitchen was reviewed. Server (S)-A was in the serving kitchen cleaning up after lunch. In the cupboard was a box containing 2 individual packets of instant cream of wheat. The top of the box was torn off. There was no use by date on the box. A second un-opened box of cream of wheat was next to the open box. The top of the box included best if used by date of 4/18/24. An interview on 9/9/24 at 1:30, S-A verified there was no best by date on the opened box of cream of wheat and the April date on the unopened box. S-A further stated lead server (LS) who was responsible for checking the dates…

  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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-09-12 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide 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 Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure appropriate transmission-based precautions (TBP) were used for 3 of 3 residents (R69, R108, R4) who had COVID-19. Furthermore, the facility failed to ensure proper hand hygiene was used for 1 of 1 residents (R72) observed during personal care. Findings include: R69 significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R69 had severe cognitive impairment and diagnoses of dementia. R69's MDS further indicated R69 was dependent on staff for eating. R69's nursing progress note dated 9/1/24 at 5:07 p.m., indicated R69 had tested positive for COVID-19. R69's nursing order dated 9/1/24, indicated R69 required TBP because of an active infection of a highly transmissible pathogen that had been acquired by physical contact, airborne or droplet transmission. Staff were to assist resident to maintain strict isolation. R108's quarterly MDS dated [DATE], indicated R108 was cognitively intact and had diagnoses of cancer of the spine…

  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.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-09-12 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
  Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
  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 interview and document review, the facility failed to report to the state agency (SA) allegations of potential neglect and verbal abuse for 2 of 3 residents (R30, R37). Findings include: R30's Optional State Assessment (OSA) dated 7/18/24, indicated R30 rarely made self understood, did not have behaviors or reject cares, required extensive assistance for all activities of daily living (ADLs), had aphasia (a language disorder that affects a person's ability to communicate), and hemiplegia or hemiparesis (paralysis or weakness on one side of the body). R30's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R30 had both a long-term and short-term memory problem, was always incontinent of bowel and bladder, was at risk for developing pressure ulcers. R30's care plan dated 8/2/24, indicated R30 had an ADL self-care performance deficit and interventions included, R30 required two staff participation to dress, one staff person assist with personal hygiene, and one assist with eating. R30's care plan dated…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-09-12 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, observation, and document review, the facility failed to ensure R30 received a pillow for positioning for prevention of pressure ulcers and that aided in comfort associate with contractures. Findings include: R30's annual MDS dated [DATE], indicated R30 had severely impaired cognitive skills for daily decision making, had an impairment in range of motion to both upper and lower extremities, was dependent on staff for all activities of daily living, was at risk for pressure ulcers and had pressure relieving devices for the chair and bed. R30's Medical Diagnosis form indicated the following diagnoses: hemiplegia and hemiparesis following unspecified cerebrovascular disease affecting the right dominant side, vascular dementia, contracture of the right and left hand, abnormal posture, and osteoarthritis of unspecified site, R30's care plan dated 8/2/24, indicated R30 had limited physical mobility related to impaired balance, range of motion, dementia, right and left hand contractures,…

  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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-09-12 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide 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 Based on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure supplemental oxygen was properly maintained per professional standards for 1 of 1 resident (R30). Findings include: R30's Optional State Assessment (OSA) Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R30 required extensive assist with bed mobility, transfers, eating, and toileting. R30's annual MDS dated [DATE], indicated R30 had severely impaired cognitive skills for daily decision making, did not identify whether R30 utilized oxygen therapy. R30's Medical Diagnoses form indicated the following diagnoses: chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (low levels of oxygen in body tissues). R30's physician's orders indicated the following order: • 1/8/24, Ok to keep oxygen at 1 to 4 liters via nasal cannula (NC) to keep oxygen saturations greater than 88%, change tubing every week. R30's care plan revised 8/2/24, indicated R30 had chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia and R30's goal was to receive oxygen per physician's orders 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-09-12 · tag F0699 — isolated
  Provide care or services that was trauma informed and/or culturally competent.
  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 inteview and document review the facility failed to identify potential triggers and offer specialized services for 1 of 1 resident (R275) who had a history of trauma. Findings include: R275's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated intact cognition and diagnoses of major depressive and anxiety disorder. It further indicated R275 had a behavior of socially isolating herself, required substantial assistance with toileting and partial assistance with mobility. R275's Long Term Care (LTC) Psychosocial assessment dated [DATE], indicated R275 had a dignoses of major depressive disorder, anxiey, and had a history of trauma. It also indicated R75 had felt numb, detached from others, activities and/or surroundings as a result of that trauma. It lacked documentation that triggers were assessed to prevent re-traumatization. R275's Comprehensive Nursing Assessment Data Collection dated 8/22/24, indicated R275 preferred female caregiver only. It lacked documentation that triggers were assessed to…

  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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-09-12 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
  Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide medication as ordered by the provider for 1 of 3 residents (R72) observed during medication administration. Findings include: R72's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R72 had cognitive impairment and diagnoses of dementia and delusional disorder. R72's provider order dated 1/9/24, indicated R72 required Seroquel (antipsychotic medication used to help treat delusional disorders) 25 milligrams (mg) daily at bedtime. R72's September medication administration record (MAR) indicated R72 did not receive the ordered Seroquel on 9/9/24 as the dose was not available. R72's nursing progress note dated 9/9/24 at 6:52 p.m., indicated R25's Seroquel was not available and follow up with pharmacy was needed. A facility form titled Refill Reorder Form dated 9/1/24, indicated R72's Seroquel was requested to be refilled. A facility form titled Refill Reorder Form dated 9/8/24, indicated R72's Seroquel was requested to be…

  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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“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.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to PRESBYTERIAN HOMES & SERVICES — 21 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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 19 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

3 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 $1.7M 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 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in MN