Bigfork Valley Communities
258 Pine Tree Drive, Bigfork, MN 56628 · Government - Hospital district · 40 certified beds · (218) 743-3177 Medicare & Medicaid certified
On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (27% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
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 | 3 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 | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 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 held steady at 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 | 15.1% | 18.2% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.7% | 4.1% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 2.6% | 1.9% | 0.9% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 7.6% | 2.6% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 3.2% | 4.1% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.0% | 4.0% | 3.3% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 14.1% | 20.5% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 21.9% | 12.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.0% | 5.2% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 26.7% | 24.5% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 14.3% | 17.1% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.9% | 1.4% | better |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
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.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.07 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 3% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 2% 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.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 40 beds and averages 20.5 residents a day — about 51% occupied, or roughly 20 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 6.04 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 2.09 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.60 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 4.89 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 6.50 on weekdays — 25% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 2.45 to 1.22 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 27% 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.
10 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-11 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to complete a medication assessment per doctor's orders for 1 of 5 resident (R19) reviewed for unnecessary medication. Findings include:R19's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified R19 had moderate cognition, and diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, anxiety, and depression. R19 received antianxiety medication 4 days and antidepressant medication 7 days during the assessment period.R19's nurses communication form to the physician dated 11/5/25, identified R19 continued to tolerate lorazepam 0.5 mg three times daily, had no increased lethargy or sedation and requested to continue as ordered previously and re-assess in 30 days. The communication was signed by medical doctor (MD)-A on 11/6/25.R19's signed medication order dated 11/5/25, identified continue lorazepam 0.5 mg oral tablet give 0.5 mg by mouth three times a day for anxiety, re-assess on 12/6/25.R19's medical record failed to identify R19 was reassessed for continued use 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 · D2025-11-14 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolatedHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and document review the facility failed to follow up on grievances related to call light response times for 2 of 3 residents (R1, R4) reviewed for grievances.Findings include:R1's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R1 required substantial to maximal assistance for bed mobility, was dependent on staff for transfers and was always incontinent of bowel. R1's care plan identified limited physical mobility and directed staff to assist with positioning using two staff and indicated he was dependent on staff for transfers using a mechanical lift.R1's undated admission Record identified R1 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnosis included paraplegia, neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder and a stage IV pressure ulcer (a full-thickness tissue loss where exposed bone, tendon, or muscle is visible or directly palpable in the wound bed). R1's care plan dated 7/11/25, identified bowel incontinence, high risk for pressure injuries and a self-care deficit. The care plan indicated R1…
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 · D2024-10-23 · 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 Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to assist with personal hygiene as directed by the care plan for 1 of 3 (R17) residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs). Findings include: R17's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified R17 was cognitively aware with diagnoses that included malignant neoplasm of accessory sinus (sinus cavity cancer), type 2 diabetes, heart failure and hypertension. R17 required set up or clean up assistance with personal hygiene and R17 completed the activity. R17's care plan dated 7/1/24, identified R17 required extensive assist of one staff for personal hygiene. During an observation on 10/21/24 at 6:20 p.m., R17 was lying in bed on his left side. R17 had dried, dark red blood that had oozed from his left nostril to the left corner of his mouth and onto R17's beard. R17 hair was greasy and disheveled. During an observation on 10/22/24 at 9:36 a.m., RN-A administered R17's Lantus injection. R17 was lying in bed and 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-23 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure a transfer belt was utilized while transferring 1 of 1 residents (R11) reviewed for ambulation. Findings include: R11's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified R11 had severe cognitive impairment and required supervision to touching assistance with walking (Helper provides verbal cues or touching/steadying assistance a resident completes activity). R11 had a diagnosis of Alzheimer's and identified a fall without injury since R11's assessment. R11's care plan dated 1/23/24, identified R11 was a limited to extensive assist of one for ambulation and to use a transfer belt. R11's physical therapy discharge note from 2/23/24, identified R11 needed contact guard assist (the caregiver places one or two hands on the patient's body to help with balance and assistance to perform the functional mobility task) with ambulation. R11's fall risk assessment dated [DATE], identified R11 was at risk for falls. During an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-23 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure they received an appropriate physician response to a gradual dose reduction for use for 1 of 5 (R9) residents reviewed for unnecessary medication. Findings include: R9's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified R9 had a moderate cognitive impairment and had diagnoses that included Alzheimer's disease, anxiety and depression. R9's physician orders dated 11/20/23, lorazepam (an antianxiety medication) 0.5 milligram (mg). Give 0.5 mg orally three times a day related to anxiety disorder. R9's Consultant Pharmacist's Medication Review dated 11/8/23, identified R9 was due for a second request for lorazepam GDR. R9's last GDR was rejected by family earlier this year. R9 currently takes lorazepam 0.5 mg orally three times a day for anxiety. Would you like to attempt a lower dose at this time or continue as is? (Could try lorazepam 0.5 mg every morning and at bedtime with 0.25 mg at noon.) A physician response dated 11/8/23, identified…
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 · D2024-10-23 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure behavior monitoring and gradual dose reduction (GDR) or justification of continued use was identified for 1 of 5 (R9) residents reviewed for unnecessary medication who were on a psychotropic medication. Findings include: R9's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified R9 had a moderate cognitive impairment and had diagnoses that included Alzheimer's disease, anxiety and depression. R9's physician orders dated 11/20/23, lorazepam (an antianxiety medication) 0.5 milligram (mg). Give 0.5 mg orally three times a day related to anxiety disorder. R9's Consultant Pharmacist's Medication Review dated 11/8/23, identified R9 was due for a second request for lorazepam GDR. R9's last GDR was rejected by family earlier this year. R9 currently takes lorazepam 0.5 mg orally three times a day for anxiety. Would you like to attempt a lower dose at this time or continue as is? (Could try lorazepam 0.5 mg every morning and at bedtime with 0.25 mg…
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 · D2024-10-23 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to use standard and enhanced barrier precautions (EBP); and failed to maintain proper infection control procedures for insulin administration for 1 of 3 (R17) residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL's). Findings include: R17's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified R17 was cognitively aware and had diagnoses that included malignant neoplasm of accessory sinus (sinus cavity cancer), type 2 diabetes, heart failure and hypertension. R17 required set up or clean up assistance with personal hygiene and R17 completed the activity. R17 had indwelling urinary catheter. R17's care plan dated 10/1/24, identified R17 required extensive assist of one staff for personal hygiene. R17 had a diagnosis of left-sided sinonasal squamous cell carcinoma with left orbital involvement (a rare tumor that affected the nasal and sinus cavity). R17 had his sinus's irrigated twice daily and contact precautions needed to be taken. R17…
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 F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — patternDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to offer and provide education regarding the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine 20 variant (PVC20) education for those elegible as directed by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) for 5 of 5 residents (R2, R4, R16, R17, R71) reviewed for immunizations. Findings include: R2's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified R2 had diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). R2's undated, Minnesota Immunization Information Connection (MIIC) report identified R2 received the pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23) on 4/19/18, and the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine 13 variant (PCV13) on 5/20/05. R2's medical record lacked evidence the PCV20 was offered and/or education was provided in conjunction with the provider to R2/R2's representative. R4's quarterly MDS dated [DATE], identified diagnoses of diabetes and atrial fibrillation. R4's undated Minnesota Immunization Information Connection (MIIC) report identified R4 received…
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 before2023-11-15 · 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 Based on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure proper placement of a full mechanical lift sling to ensure a safe transfer for 1 of 2 (R2) observed during full mechanical lift transfers. Findings include: R2's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified R2 was severely cognitively impaired, and diagnoses included hemiplegia, hemiparesis, and aphasia. R2's care plan dated 10/3/23, identified staff used the full mechanical lift for transfers to and from the bed. During observation on 11/14/23 at 3:13 p.m., nursing assistant (NA)-A and NA-B were assisting R2 from wheelchair to bed. NA-A and NA-B placed the full mechanical lift sling behind R2's back and buttocks. NA-A stated the lift sheet did not slide behind R2's back and under legs very well and was sticking to R2's clothing. NA-A reached for the strap and pulled hard on the sling under R2's leg. NA-B fastened the sling loops to the mechanical lift. NA-A attempted but was unable to fasten the sling loops to the mechanical lift…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · C2025-12-11 · tag F0732 — widespreadPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and document review the facility failed to include the daily census and actual hours worked by nursing staff. This had the potential to affect all 21 residents, staff and visitors who wished to review the information. Findings include:On 12/10/25 at 7:59 a.m., the daily staff postings hanging on a corkboard on the wall next to the Aspen Circle entrance, there was staff postings grouped together dated 12/10/25 through 12/21/25, with 12/10/25 on top of the postings, The postings identified the date, registered nurse (RN) hours, licensed practical nurse (LPN) hours, nursing assistant (NA) hours and additional hours for orientation. The forms failed to identify the resident census as well as the total number of actual hours worked by licensed and unlicensed nursing staff directly responsible for resident care per shift. On 12/10/25 at 12:10 p.m., the director of nursing (DON) stated there was not a place within the facility that showed the resident census or how many and type of staff were working on a particular shift. The daily staff posting 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.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| ANSELMO, GREGORY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 01/01/2025 |
| COOK, CLINTON | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 01/01/2021 |
| COOK, GREGORY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 09/02/2014 |
| FREDRICKSON, KURT | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 11/28/2023 |
| GILBERTSON, CAROL | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 01/01/2023 |
| HEINECKE, DANIEL | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 01/01/2025 |
| KITTRIDGE, TERESA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 05/05/2025 |
| LAMONT, TOM | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 09/03/2019 |
| RAHIER, GORDON | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 01/01/2021 |
| SALMELA, LARRY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 01/03/2017 |
| SEDGWICK, SALLY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 10/03/2023 |
| SURSELY, DAN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 01/01/2019 |
| WATSON, HEIDI | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 01/03/2011 |
| NIEMALA, AMANDA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/02/2008 |
| ANDERSON, DARLA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/02/2020 |
| HOUGH, NATHAN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/01/2024 |
| NORTHERN ITASCA HOSPITAL DISTRICT | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/01/1975 |
| ANDERSON, JESSICA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/30/2024 |
| MCKELLAR, PAULA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 08/11/2025 |
| SCRIVNER, JEFFREY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 08/01/2002 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 26 rows in the source record cover these 20 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
1 organizational owner 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.
What families pay in MN
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 Minnesota 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 245529. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-11, 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.