No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Harmony River Living Center

1555 Sherwood Street Southeast, Hutchinson, MN 55350 · Non profit - Corporation · 120 certified beds · (320) 484-6000 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (320) 484-6000 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citations — no harm found (F0609, F0610) — most recent Jun 2026Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0744)2 actual-harm citations CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)$13,520 in federal fines
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (30% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • inspectors recorded 2 serious findings as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
  • the CMS record shows $13,520 in federal fines (most recent 2025-10-15)
  • its payroll-based staffing score sits well above its independent inspection score
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)

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.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 5 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 2 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's staffing rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the staffing score rests on the facility's own payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
3 Century Ave SE · (320) 234-3290 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1460 Montreal St SE · (320) 587-2509 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Aldi0.7 mi
1320 Highway 15 S · (855) 955-2534 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Elks Park0.7 mi
1100 Sherwood St SE · (320) 587-6331 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
1005 MN-15 · (320) 587-4414

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 2 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 1 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 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 fell from 5 to 4 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.

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased17.6%18.2%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight2.5%4.1%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder2.0%1.9%0.9%typical for the state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection4.1%2.6%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms6.6%4.1%6.5%typical
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury3.6%4.0%3.3%typical
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened17.9%20.5%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication11.0%12.5%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine88.8%96.1%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers8.4%5.2%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control22.9%24.5%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table23.0%17.1%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication2.2%1.9%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine89.2%82.7%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission22.7%23.5%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit6.6%14.8%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.331.611.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days4.211.901.80worse

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

44.2% 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 69 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

44.2%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.4%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
66.1%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.24U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.14hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.06hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.04hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 66.1% 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 124 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 0.24 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 33% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 6% 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF44.2%CMS range 35.2–54.551.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.4%CMS range 6.3–15.410.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge66.1%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge54.0%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge36.3%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 identified97.9%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge96.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.7%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened4.3%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.1%CMS range 3.7–12.57.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.041.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

0.77
RN hours/ resident / day
0.38
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.94
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.09
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.49
RN hoursweekends
29.5%
Total nursing turnover
25.9%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 115.5 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 4 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 4.09 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.77 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.94 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 3.83 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.20 on weekdays — 9% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.88 to 0.49 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 30% 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

1
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-04-07)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2025-02-20)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

12 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Actual harm · Gcited before2026-04-07 · 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 provide care consistent with a resident's needs and care plan to eliminate/reduce the risk of an accident during cares in bed for 1 of 3 residents (R111). This resulted in actual harm to R111 when staff repositioned R111 on her side with one staff member instead of two staff members per care plan, causing R111 to roll out of the bed to the floor. As a result, R111 was admitted to the hospital on [DATE] for a fracture of the right femur and a closed fracture of the left hip. R111 had surgery on 12/6/25 on the right femur and surgery on 12/11/25 on the left hip femur. The facility had implemented actions to prevent recurrence prior to the survey on 4/6/26, therefore, the citation was issued at past non-compliance.R111's quarterly Minimal Set Data (MDS) dated [DATE], identified R111 as cognitively intact. R111 was dependent on staff for toileting, rolling to the left and right in bed, and lower body dressing and needed maximal assistance…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Actual harm · G2025-10-15 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolated
    Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
    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 medications were administered according to physician orders for 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for significant medication errors. This failure resulted in actual harm when R1 did not receive twelve doses of a medication for treatment of congestive heart failure and subsequently required a two-day hospitalization. The facility implemented appropriate corrective action prior to the onsite investigation; therefore, the deficiency is being cited at past non-compliance. Findings include:R1's admission Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE], identified diagnoses of congestive heart failure (CHF) and renal insufficiency, R1 used diuretic medications (helps the body get rid of excess water).R1's care plan initiated 8/5/25, indicated R1 had an alteration in cardiovascular status related to atrial fibrillation (irregular heartbeat), CHF, and high blood pressure with a goal to receive medication per physician orders. Interventions included to observe for…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-10 · 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 an allegation of sexual abuse to the state agency (SA) for 2 of 3 residents (R4, R5) reviewed for reporting of alleged violations when R1 displayed sexual behaviors towards R4 and R5. Findings include: R1 R1's admission Record printed 6/11/26, indicated he was admitted to the facility 2/10/26. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, dementia and psychosis. R1's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified severe cognitive impairment and indicated he displayed verbal behaviors toward others one-to-three days during the assessment period. The MDS indicted R1 transferred independently and ambulated with supervision. R1's care plan dated 4/13/26, identified limited physical mobility and indicated he required assistance from one staff for transfers and ambulate. The care plan revised on 3/17/26 indicated a history of requiring one-to-one staff supervision due to sexual advancements toward others. Interventions included:…

    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 · D2026-06-10 · tag F0744 — failed to care for residents with dementia — isolated
    Provide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with dementia.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and document review the facility failed to develop and implement resident specific approaches to behavior for 1 of 3 residents (R1) diagnosed with dementia who displayed negative behaviors affecting himself and other residents in the facility. Findings include: R1's admission Record printed 6/11/26, indicated he was admitted to the facility 2/10/26. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, dementia and psychosis. R1's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified severe cognitive impairment and indicated he displayed verbal behaviors toward others one-to-three days during the assessment period. The MDS indicted R1 transferred independently and ambulated with supervision. R1's care plan: Revised on 3/17/26, identified an alteration in mood or behavioral expression due to Alzheimer's and dementia. Targeted behaviors included exit seeking, wandering into other residents' rooms, sexual behaviors toward staff, delusions and hallucinations. Revised on 3/1/26, see…

    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 · D2026-06-10 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolated
    Ensure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
    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 pharmacy recommendations were addressed to include a clinical rationale for declined recommendations and failed to identify and address medications as a contributing factor for falls for 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed who sustained multiple falls following the implementation of hospice prescribed medications. Findings include: R1's admission Record printed 6/11/26, indicated he was admitted to the facility 2/10/26. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, dementia and psychosis. R1's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified severe cognitive impairment and indicated he displayed verbal behaviors toward others one-to-three days during the assessment period. The MDS indicted R1 transferred independently and ambulated with supervision. R1 received scheduled and as needed medication to relieve pain as well as non-medication interventions. R1 denied having, pain or hurting, during the assessment period. R1's care plan…

    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
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-10 · 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 allegations of abuse to the state agency, immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation is made, for one of three residents (R1) reviewed. R1 reported he was abused in his room multiple times during the night.Findings include: Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated R1 was admitted to the facility for treatment of osteoarthritis of the right knee. R1's relevant diagnoses included chronic pain, mild intellectual disability, anxiety, unspecified psychosis, and developmental disorders. R1 required substantial to maximal assistance with repositioning in bed. R1 used a wheelchair to ambulate. R1's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was 10 out of 15, indicating he had mild cognitive impairment. R1's care plan indicated he had a history of behavioral disturbances. R1's care plan indicated R1 experienced delusions and paranoid about people in his room intending to harm him. R1's care plan indicated R1 was at risk for…

    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 · D2025-12-10 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    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 conduct a formal investigation into the allegations of physical and sexual abuse for one of three residents reviewed (R1) for abuse.Findings include: Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated R1 was admitted to the facility for treatment of osteoarthritis of the right knee. R1's relevant diagnoses included chronic pain, mild intellectual disability, anxiety, unspecified psychosis, and developmental disorders. R1 required substantial to maximal assistance with repositioning in bed. R1 used a wheelchair to ambulate. R1's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was 10 out of 15, indicating he had mild cognitive impairment. R1's care plan indicated he had a history of behavioral disturbances. R1's care plan indicated R1 experienced delusions and paranoid about people in his room intending to harm him. R1's care plan indicated R1 was at risk for abuse and had a history of making allegations against staff. R1's care plan indicated staff were 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-02-20 · 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 create a comprehensive care plan for a resident with a history of respiratory conditions for 1 of 1 residents (R102) reviewed for care plans. Findings include: R102's Medicare 5-day Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R102 cognitive impairment could not be decided. Diagnoses included pneumonia and respiratory failure. R102's comprehensive care plan undated, lacked a patient specific care plan or interventions related to R102's history of pneumonia and respiratory failure. During an interview on 2/20/25 at 1:16 p.m., registered nurse (RN)-B stated the care plan was updated either when there was a change in the resident's condition or when a new MDS assessment performed. RN-B reviewed R102's MDS and 5-day care plan. She acknowledged the respiratory conditions listed in the MDS but were not found on the care plan. RN-B stated the care plan should have been updated with a respiratory care plan, goals, and interventions when the MDS was updated…

    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 · D2025-02-20 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and document review facility failed to provide activities of daily living (ADL) assistance for 1 of 1 resident (R38) who required assistance with eating. Findings include: R38's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified R38 had moderate cognitive impairment and required assistance with all activities of daily living (ADL)'s. R38's diagnoses included progressive neurological conditions, seizure disorder/epilepsy, bipolar disorder and other drug induced secondary parkinsonism. MDS did not indicate R38 exhibited any behaviors. R38's care plan dated 12/16/23, identified R.8 required assistance of 1 for eating due to extensive tremors. During observation on 2/18/25, at 5:19 p.m., R38 was seated at dining room table with two other residents. Staff served the other two residents their plates, who started eating, R38 sat there watching the other residents eat. At 5:25 p.m., R38 continued watching other two resident eat. At 5:28 p.m., staff brought R38's plate to table 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 · Dcited before2025-02-20 · 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 follow provider orders for a resident on mild thickened liquids for 1 of 2 residents (R102) reviewed for diet changes. Findings include: R102's Medicare 5-day Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R102 cognitive impairment could not be decided. Diagnoses included pneumonia and respiratory failure. R102's Order Summary Report dated 1/16/25 indicated R102 had an active diet order for level 6 soft and bite sized texture with mild thick consistency liquids. R102's care plan revised on 12/29/24, indicated R102 had a nutritional problem and diet was to be served as ordered. R102's therapy interdepartmental team (IDT) communication dated 2/3/25, indicated nursing and dietary was notified by speech therapy (ST) R102 was on mild thick liquids. Facility care sheets undated, indicated R102 was suppose to have mild thickened liquids. On 2/19/25 at 2:47 p.m., R102 was observed with a plastic glass half full of non-thickened water that 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2024-01-09 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — widespread
    Ensure 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure medication carts were properly secured for 4 of 8 medication carts observed. Findings Include: On 1/8/24, at 8:50 a.m. during medication observation trained medication aide (TMA)-A stepped away from medication cart, entered nursing office out of view of medication (med) cart with lock button observed to be in extended position. TMA-A returned to cart, continued with medication administration When interviewed on 1/8/24, at 9:03 a.m. TMA-A stated when lock button in extended position the medication cart was unlocked. TMA-A demonstrated entering code into touchpad on top surface of cart locked med cart by pulling lock button into cart. TMA-A then re-entered code demonstarting lock button extended out from cart then opening drawer demonstrating med cart was unlocked. On 1/8/24, at 9:04 a.m. observed TMA-A step away from med cart with lock button extended out. TMA-A went into nurse office dropped blood pressure machine into office,…

    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
  • Potential for harm · D2024-01-09 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolated
    Develop 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 ensure 3 of the 5 residents (R16, R63, R89) reviewed for immunizations were offered and/or provided the pneumococcal vaccination series as recommended by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) to help reduce the risk of associated infection(s). Findings include: A CDC Pneumococcal Vaccine Timing for Adults feature, dated 3/15/2023, identified various tables when each (or all) of the pneumococcal vaccinations should be obtained. This identified when an adult over [AGE] years old had received the complete series (i.e., PPSV23 and PCV13; see below) then the patient and provider may choose to administer Pneumococcal 20-valent Conjugate Vaccine (PCV20) for patients who had received Pneumococcal 13-valent Conjugate Vaccine (PCV13) at any age and Pneumococcal Polysaccharide Vaccine 23 (PPSV23) at or after [AGE] years old. R16's face sheet, dated 1/9/2024, indicated she was [AGE] years old. The immunization record, dated 1/5/2024, indicated she received a…

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

    Infection Control 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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$13,520 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $13,520 — penalty dated 2025-10-15

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to PRESBYTERIAN 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 4 of 54.3-0.3 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 53.4-0.4 vs chain
Staffing 5 of 54.9≈ chain avg
Quality measures 2 of 52.8-0.8 vs chain
The other 20 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.3★, per CMS)

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
PRESBYTERIAN HOME CARE CENTERS INCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 08/01/2018
COMPEER FINANCIALOrganization5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; 5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTERESTsince 11/30/2010
USDA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE RURAL DEVELOPMENTOrganization5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; 5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTERESTsince 11/30/2010
HANTGE, WENDYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 08/01/2018
LARSON, DUANEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 08/01/2018
MEYER, MARKIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/01/2018
MULDER, STEVENIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 02/10/2012
PEDERSON, MARKIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2023
REMPLE, TIMOTHYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/01/2018
FLETCHER, JONATHANIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/01/2025
PHS MANAGEMENT, LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/01/2018
KRUEGER, LUKEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/04/2019
PETERSON, HEIDIIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2023

CMS files one row per role, so the 25 rows in the source record cover these 13 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

4 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.

$13.8M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-11.0%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.0M
Related-party expense7% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 52%Medicare 8%Other / private 40%

This home reported $1.0M 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

$383per resident / day
operating cost
$11,644per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$345per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in Minnesota
$10,646/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$13,870/mo
Nursing home (private)
$6,573/mo
Assisted living

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 245114. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-07, 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.

What to do next