Green Lea Senior Living
115 North Lyndale, Rr 2 Box 49, Mabel, MN 55954 · For profit - Corporation · 41 certified beds · (507) 450-5738 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0602), cited Sep 2023
- 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
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0568)
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- inspectors recorded 1 serious finding 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
- a high number of inspection citations overall (38) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
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 1 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 | 15.8% | 18.2% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.0% | 4.1% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 2.9% | 1.9% | 0.9% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 2.0% | 2.6% | 2.0% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 5.9% | 4.1% | 6.5% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 1.0% | 4.0% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 20.1% | 20.5% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 9.9% | 12.5% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 96.0% | 96.1% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.1% | 5.2% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 26.4% | 24.5% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 5.6% | 17.1% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.9% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 61.9% | 82.7% | 79.4% | worse |
‡ 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.
48.2% 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 33 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.29 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 44% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 0% 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 | 48.2%CMS range 36.2–62.7 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.4%CMS range 6.1–16.0 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 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 | 7.7%CMS range 4.3–13.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.10 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 41 beds and averages 28.9 residents a day — about 70% occupied, or roughly 12 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 2.37 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.14 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.72 is below 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 2.22 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 2.43 on weekdays — 9% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.14 to 0.14 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
38 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 26 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2025-10-17 · 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 comprehensively assess falls for root cause, implement appropriate interventions and implement/revise the care plan to prevent and/or reduce the risk of fall with major injury for 2 of 3 residents (R1, R4) who had falls. This resulted in an immediate jeopardy (IJ) for R1 who sustained a resulted in a subarachnoid hemorrhage (type of brain bleed) and was hospitalized .The IJ began on 9/30/25 after R1's third fall with no completion of a causal analysis or implementation of fall interventions which resulted in and/or could have mitigated the risk of R1's fall on 10/3/25 fall with major injury that required 5-day hospitalization and two subsequent falls on 10/8/25 upon readmission to the facility. The administrator and director of nursing (DON) were notified of the IJ on 10/14/25 at 5:31 p.m. The immediate jeopardy was removed on 10/17/25 at 2:50 p.m., but non-compliance remained at the lower scope and severity level D, which indicated no…
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.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2025-09-26 · 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 interview and document review the facility failed to ensure safe transfers for 1 of 1 resident (R1) while using a mechanical lift and did not follow the correct procedure for applying the straps of the sling to the lift. As a result, the sling became unhooked from the mechanical lift, R1 fell to the floor, and sustained a hematoma (collection of blood outside a blood vessel) to the back of her head, and fractures to the left 3rd, 4th, and 6th ribs which resulted in an immediate jeopardy (IJ).The IJ began on 9/15/25 when facility staff failed to follow manufacturer directions for connecting a sling to a mechanical lift and R1 fell from the lift. The Administrator, nurse consultant, and director of nursing (DON) were notified of the past non-compliance (PNC) IJ on 9/26/25 at 11:35 a.m. The facility immediately implemented and began corrective action on 9/15/25, and the deficient practice was corrected on 9/17/25, prior to the start of the survey and was therefore issued as a PNC IJ.Findings include:R1's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-08 · 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 observation, interview and documentation, the facility failed to comprehensively assess and monitor a wound for 1 of 3 residents (R3) reviewed for wound care.Findings include:R3's diagnoses list dated 4/7/26 included orthopedic aftercare following surgical amputation, acquired absence of right leg below the knee, and other complications of amputation stump.R3's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] identified R3 did not have cognitive impairment. R3's received surgical wound care.R3's care plan dated 3/24/26 indicated a risk for impaired skin integrity related to surgical intervention right below the knee amputation (BKA), decreased mobility and need for assistance with personal cares. Interventions included but were not limited to dressing change every other day initiated on 3/31/26 and evaluate skin integrity. The care plan also included R3 has peripheral vascular disease (PVD) related to diabetes mellitus type 2 and hypertensive heart disease with chronic kidney disease.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-08 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to establish a system of medication records that enables periodic accurate reconciliation and accounting for all controlled medications stored in an emergency medication kit and failed to establish a system to account for medications brought from home and stored in the medication room. Findings include:During an observation on 4/7/2026 at 9:43 a.m., registered nurse (RN)-A was observed unlocking the medication room then unlocking a cabinet to access the emergency medication kits (e-kit). A small e-kit was labeled with a list of controlled medications including the number of stocked pills/bottles and was secured with a breakaway lock with numbers. A larger e-kit labeled with non-controlled medications was also secured with a breakaway lock with numbers. A binder was observed with an every shift listing of lock numbers and staff initials. During an interview, RN-A stated to remove a controlled medication the nurse would first check the resident's provider orders. If the order matched a medication in the e-kit,…
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 · F2025-10-17 · tag F0839 — widespreadEmploy staff that are licensed, certified, or registered in accordance with state laws.
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 4 of 7 facility employed nursing assistants' (nursing assistant (NA)-B, NA-H, NA-I, and NA-L) certificates were current with the states nursing assistant registry. This had the potential to affect all thirty-two residents that resided in the facility.Findings include: Review of the State of Minnesota Nursing assistant registry on [DATE] identified the following:-NA-B's nurse aide certificate expired on [DATE].-NA-H's nurse aide certificate expired on [DATE].-NA-I's nurse aide certificate expired on [DATE].-NA-L's nurse aide certificate expired on [DATE].The facility's employee records were reviewed on [DATE] and identified NA-B, NA-H, NA-I, and NA-L were scheduled and completed shifts from [DATE] thought [DATE] with an expired nurse aide certificate.During an interview on [DATE] at 12:25 p.m., director of nursing (DON) stated she was not aware that NA-B, NA-H, NA-I, and NA-L had been working without a current nursing assistant certificate since…
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 · F2025-10-17 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — widespreadSet up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and document review the facility failed to ensure the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI)committee identified, investigated, analyzed, and responded to identified resident care issues by developing and implementing action plans for process improvement identified resident care issues related to high number of falls. This had the potential to affect all 32 residents residing in the facility. Findings include:SEE F689: Based on observation, interview, and document review the facility failed to comprehensively assess falls for root cause, implement appropriate interventions and implement/revise the care plan to prevent and/or reduce the risk of fall with major injury for 2 of 3 residents (R1, R4) who had falls. This resulted in an immediate jeopardy (IJ) for R1 who sustained a resulted in a subarachnoid hemorrhage (type of brain bleed) and was hospitalized .Review of the QAPI facility minutes for past 6 months identified the following:-5/8/25 QAPI meeting minutes identified two falls for month of April and falls isolated (one with no injury and 1 with…
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 · D2025-10-17 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and document review the facility failed to ensure call lights were accessible and within reach for 2 of 3 residents (R2 and R5) reviewed for fallsFindings include:R2's face sheet dated 10/16/25, identified diagnoses of Parkinson's disease (a progressive brain disorder that affects movement, causing symptoms like tremors, stiffness, and slowed movements) and dementia (a decline in memory, thinking, reasoning and problem solving). R2's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified R2 had severe cognitive impairment, needed extensive assistance for all transfers. R2's fall focus care plan identified R2 was at risk for falls related to poor balance and unaware of safety risks. Intervention of call light to be within reach. During and observation and interview on 10/10/25 at 4:05 p.m., R2 was sitting in his room in his wheelchair with a tray table in front of him. R2 asked for surveyor to come into his room, there was a drinking cup on the floor to R2's left side. R2 asked surveyor…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-10-17 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely 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
Based on interview and document review the facility failed to timely report to the State Agency (SA) a fall with serious injury for 1 of 1 resident (R1) who had multiple prior falls without fall assessments and implementation of appropriate fall interventions to prevent/mitigate risk of re-current falls. R1's face sheet dated 10/15/25, identified diagnoses of hemiplegia (a condition that causes paralysis or weakness on one side of the body) and hemiparesis (partial weakness on one side of the body making it difficult to perform daily activities) following cerebral infarction (stroke). Review of R1's fall incidents identified R1 had falls on 9/26/25, 9/28/25, 9/30/25, and 10/1/25; no comprehensive analysis for causal factors were completed after each fall nor were appropriate interventions to prevent/mitigate the risk of falls and falls with major injury. R1's fall incident report dated 10/3/25 at 9:24 a.m., identified R1 was found on floor between door and bed. R1 had an injury above right eye that was swollen and bleeding, and two skin tears on right forearm. Predisposing factors…
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 · D2025-10-17 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and document review the facility failed to accurately complete a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for residents who had falls. Findings include:R1's face sheet dated 10/15/25, identified diagnoses of hemiplegia (a condition that causes paralysis or weakness on one side of the body) and hemiparesis (partial weakness on one side of the body making it difficult to perform daily activities) following cerebral infarction (stroke). R1's fall incident report dated 9/26/25 at 2:00 p.m., identified R1 had an unwitnessed fall from wheelchair in room. R1 stated she was trying to get to the bathroom. R1's progress note dated 9/28/25 at 7:17 p.m., indicated R1 fell from bed onto cushioned mat on the floor. R1's progress note dated 9/30/25 at 9:47 p.m., identified R1 had a fall at 8:50 p.m. R1 was found lying on the fall mat next to her bed. R1 had removed brief and only had on gripper sock on. R1's 5-day MDS assessment with an assessment reference date of 9/30/25, identified section J1800 was coded as R1 had not had any falls since…
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 · D2025-10-17 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
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 assure baseline line care plan addressed safety interventions to prevent/mitigate the risk of decline or injury from falls for 1 of 1 resident (R1) at risk for falls had a fall with major injury. Findings include:R1's face sheet dated 10/15/25, identified diagnoses of hemiplegia (a condition that causes paralysis or weakness on one side of the body) and hemiparesis (partial weakness on one side of the body making it difficult to perform daily activities) following cerebral infarction (stroke). R1's admission Nursing assessment dated [DATE] (R1's admission date), identified R1was alert and orientated to person, but not aware of time and place, used a wheelchair for mobility, had poor trunk control due to right sided deficit from stroke, and surface to surface transfer was not steady and needed staff assistance for transfers. R1's Morse Fall Scale (a tool used to assess a resident risk for falling) dated 9/25/25, identified R1 was moderate…
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 · D2025-10-17 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and document review the facility failed to ensure received appropriate treatment and services to prevent decline in incontinence and urinary symptoms and further failed to develop and implement an individualized toileting program for 1 of 1 resident (R4) who had a diagnoses of Huntington's disease, was continent upon admission, but had fluctuating symptoms of incontinence, urgency, and frequency. Findings include: Urge Incontinence is associated with detrusor muscle over activity resulting in a sudden, strong urge (also known as urgency) to expel moderate to large amounts of urine before the bladder is full). It is characterized by abrupt urgency, frequency, and nocturia (part of the overactive bladder diagnosis). The resident can feel the need to void but is unable to inhibit voiding long enough to reach and sit on the commode. It is the most common cause of urinary incontinence in elderly persons. Stress Incontinence is associated with impaired urethral closure which allows…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-10-17 · 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 observations, interview, and document review the facility failed to ensure proper handwashing/hand hygiene was implemented for 1 of 3 residents (R1) observed for handwashing/hand hygiene during toileting/incontinence care. Findings include: R1's face sheet dated 10/15/25, identified diagnoses of hemiplegia (a condition that causes paralysis or weakness on one side of the body) and hemiparesis (partial weakness on one side of the body making it difficult to perform daily activities) following cerebral infarction(stroke). R1's minimum data set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified R1 was dependent for all transfers and toileting, and was cognitively intact. During an observation and interview on 10/16/25 at 4:11 p.m., R1 informed nursing assistant (NA)-F and registered nurse (RN)-C that she needed to go to the bathroom. NA-F pushed R1 to her room. Upon entering R1's room, NA-F applied gloves without performing hand hygiene. NA-F used a stand-aide to transfer R1 to the commode; she voided and had a bowel…
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.
Show the remaining 26 citations
- Potential for harm · F2025-06-05 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespreadHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure the services of a registered nurse (RN) onsite for 8 consecutive hours/7 days a week. This had the potential to affect all residents who resided at the facility. Findings include: The payroll based journal (PBJ) staffing report for quarter 2 of 2025 (January 1-March 31) indicated no RN hours reported for the following days : 1/02 (TH), 1/03 (FR), 1/04 (SA), 1/05 (SU), 1/09 (TH), 1/18 (SA), 1/19 (SU), 2/02 (SU), 2/16 (SU), 3/1 (SA), 3/02 (SU), 3/15 (SA), 3/16 (SU), 3/29 (SA), 3/30 (SU). Review of facility payroll and staffing schedules indicated 4 hours of RN coverage on 1/4/2025 and no RN coverage for 1/05, 1/18, 1/19, 2/02, 2/16, 3/01, 3/02, 3/15, 3/16, 3/29, and 3/30. During interview on 6/3/25 at approximately 3 p.m., the regional nurse consultant confirmed there was no RN coverage for the indicated dates and confirmed it is an expectation to have an RN in the building 8 consecutive hours a day/ 7 days a week. During an interview on 6/5/25 at 12:17 p.m., the assistant director of nursing (ADON) stated the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-05 · tag F0557 — isolatedHonor the resident's right to be treated with respect and dignity and to retain and use personal possessions.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, observation, and record review, the facility failed to maintain respect and dignity for personal possessions for 1 of 2 residents (R28) reviewed who had his room searched and items removed without consent. Findings include: R28's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] included no cognitive impairment. Furthermore, his mood assessment indicated he rarely socially isolated. R28 is independent with eating, oral hygiene, toileting, dressing, and repositioning. R28 required minimal cueing for showering/bathing. During interview on 6/03/25 at 11:20 a.m., R28 stated the previous administrator at the facility entered his room without his permission and searched his room, the administrator told him they were searching his room because they thought he was making moonshine with orange peels and water or mouthwash. They also confiscated his vape pens and won't give them back. R28 added the administrator came into his room without consent and removed multiple cups and dishes. R28 said he…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-05 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to accommodate bathing/showering preferences for 1 of 1 resident (R1) reviewed for choices. Finding include: R1's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified admission to the facility on 4/30/25, had intact cognition. R1 required substantial/maximal assistance from facility staff for shower/bathing. R1's care plan dated 5/7/25 contained only one item; R1 had a potential nutritional deficit related to Parkinson's, dementia, chronic pain and depression. The care plan lacked personal preference for showering/bathing preferences. During observation and interview on 6/3/25 at 11:05 a.m., R1 stated he preferred to have showers/baths on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday (M/W/F). R1 stated he rarely gets 3 showers/baths as he prefers; usually getting showers/baths 2 days per week; Tuesdays and Fridays. During interview on 6/4/25 at 10:34 a.m., R1 stated he told the facility when he was admitted he preferred showering/bathing on…
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 · D2025-06-05 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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 record review the facility failed to develop a person-centered care plan for 2 of 2 residents (R19, R1) reviewed for care planning. Findings include: R19 R19's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated R19 was cognitively intact with no behaviors. R19 had limited range of motion to one lower extremity, supervision with eating and oral cares, partial moderate assistance for toileting hygiene and bathing and lower body dressing, and supervision with bed mobility. The MDS indicated R19 was frequently incontinent of urine and bowel and had multiple medical conditions including: atrial fibrillation (abnormal rhythm of the heart), heart failure, hypertension (high blood pressure), peripheral vascular disease (impaired blood flow to extremities), renal insufficiency (impaired kidney function), diabetes, anxiety, and schizophrenia (mental health diagnosis), R19's admission MDS also indicated R19 had a history of falls prior to admission. The MDS indicated R19 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 · D2024-09-05 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — isolatedKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to keep 2 of 2 mechanical lifts in proper working condition. Findings include: During an observation on 9/5/24 at 9:41 a.m., nursing assistant (NA)-A was observed with Volara brand mechanical sit-to-stand lift (used to assist a resident to different positions with the resident needing to provide half of the weight bearing status) identified by the label B01-18. The lift had handle bar up and down switches that when pressed did not work to raise the resident up into a standing position. The same lift had a remote with an up and down function and the button to lower a resident to a sitting position was non-functioning. All of the machine wheels were visibly caked with hair that prevented the machine to easily turn or push. A full body mechanical lift A02-16 had a remote with the two buttons hanging out of the secure button holder held together by electrical tape. The wheels of this lift were also caked with hair. During an interview on 9/5/24 at 9:41 a.m., NA-A stated both of the lifts were still in use even though…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-08-14 · tag F0838 — failed to assess facility resources and resident needs — widespreadConduct and document a facility-wide assessment to determine what resources are necessary to care for residents competently during both day-to-day operations (including nights and weekends) and emergencies.
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 the Facility Assessment identified the facility's staffing needs based on the care needs of the resident population. This had the potential to affect all 32 residents who resided in the facility. Findings include: Refer to F688. The Facility assessment dated [DATE], included a Purpose Statement, The purpose of this assessment is to determine what resources are necessary to care for our residents competently during both day-to-day operations (including nights and weekends) and emergencies. It further identified the assessment would address staffing needs and noted This facility assessment will be used to: Inform staffing decisions to ensure that there are a sufficient number of staff with the appropriate competencies and skill sets necessary to care for its residents' needs as identified through resident assessments and plans of care; Consider specific staffing needs for each resident unit in the facility and adjust as necessary based on…
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 · D2024-08-14 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for 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 record review, the facility failed to ensure ambulation program was provided to maintain mobility to reduce the risk for falls as ordered by physical therapy for 1 of 1 resident (R2) who had a history of falls. Findings include: R2's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated R2 had intact cognition, no rejection of care, was independent with toileting hygiene, required partial assistance with showering, personal hygiene, was independent with bed mobility, utilized a walker and wheelchair, and walking was listed as not applicable. Diagnoses included heart failure, arthritis, and kidney failure. R2's care plan revised 8/9/24, indicated R2 had limited physical mobility with fall risk r/t disease process, functional loss, and history of falls on 2/18/24, 3/14/24, 4/2/24, and 7/24. Interventions per therapy recommendation dated 3/8/24, included patient ambulation 3x/day with use of 2WW (two wheeled walker) and CGA (contact guard assistance) with…
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 · D2024-08-14 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to maintain a complete, accurately documented, and readily accessible medical record in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices for 1 of 1 resident (R1) reviewed for medical record accuracy. Findings include: R1's provider orders included a treatment order dated 5/8/24, directing staff to complete a Body Audit assessment weekly one time a day every Friday. R1's treatment administration record (TAR) included the Body Audit assessment order scheduled on Fridays. R1's TAR dated 7/1/24 to 7/31/24, included charting of the Body Audit assessment as completed on 7/5/24, 7/12/24, 7/19/24, and 7/26/24. R1's TAR dated 8/1/24 to 8/31/24, included charting of the Body Audit assessment as completed on 8/2/24 and not completed on 8/9/24. Review of R1's electronic health record (EHR), identified Body Audit assessments dated 7/5/24, and 7/12/24. R1's EHR lacked records of the Body Audit assessments charted as completed on 7/19/24, 7/26/24, and 8/2/24. In an interview on 8/13/24 at 12:25 p.m., licensed practical nurse…
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 before2024-08-14 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure proper infection control procedures were followed for 2 of 2 residents (R3 and R4) when staff failed to follow enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) while providing cares and treatment. Findings include: R3's face sheet printed 8/14/24, indicated diagnoses of pressure ulcer of right buttock stage 4 and chronic kidney disease. R3's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment indicated R3 had severe cognitive impairment, lower extremity impairment on both sides, use of a wheelchair, dependent on staff for toileting hygiene, bathing, lower body dressing, and substantial assistance for personal hygiene, and indwelling bladder catheter. R3's care plan revised 3/25/23, indicated a self-care performance deficit r/t (related to) right buttock pressure ulcer and two staff assistance for transfers with use of a standing mechanical lift. R3's care plan revised 6/19/24, also indicated the presence of an indwelling foley catheter with a goal of no…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-04-18 · 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 ensure 3 of 5 residents (R21, R26, R7) reviewed for immunizations were offered and/or provided the pneumococcal vaccine series (pneumonia vaccine) as recommended by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) to help reduce the risk of associated infection(s). Furthermore, the facility failed to ensure the influenza vaccination (flu vaccine) was offered 2 of 5 residents (R7, R11) reviewed for vaccinations. Findings include: The Center for Disease Control and Prevention identified on the Pneumococcal Vaccine Timing for Adults Chart, dated 3/15/23, Adult [AGE] years of age or older who had received the PPSV23 (pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine 23) only at any age should receive one dose of either pneumococcal 20-valent Conjugate Vaccine (PCV20) or pneumococcal 15-valent Conjugate Vaccine (PCV15). The dose of PCV20 or PCV15 should be administered at least one year after the most recent PPSV23 dose. R21's quarterly (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-18 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
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 record review, and interview the facility failed to provide a written notification/copy of a bed hold for 1 of 3 residents (R5) reviewed for hospitalization. Findings include: R5's quarterly minimum data set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated R5's diagnoses included hypothyroidism, traumatic brain injury, convulsions, chronic kidney disease, cardiac murmur, dementia, hypertension, R5's progress notes indicated R5 became nauseous with emesis on 8/30/24. After brief monitoring at facility, doctor ordered resident to emergency room (ER) for further examination the same day. Progress notes further indicated facility staff attempted to contact resident's representative regarding bed hold form but was unable to speak with them via phone, with no option to leave a message. Progress note further indicated facility would send a copy of bed hold policy to representative via the mail. Resident was hospitalized from [DATE] until 9/07/23. Resident was discharged from hospital back to facility. R5's medical…
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 before2024-04-18 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide facial grooming for 1 of 2 residents (R24) reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL's) for residents who are dependent on staff for their care. Findings include: R24's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 2/2/2024, indicated R24 has severe cognitive impairment with no behaviors or rejection of care. Furthermore, R24 MDS included R24 is dependent on staff to perform all personal hygiene tasks, including facial grooming. R24's diagnosis include, dementia without behavioral, mood, psychotic disturbances and anxiety. R24's care plan, identified R24 having an ADL self-care performance deficit with a goal of being dressed and groomed according to personal preference on a daily basis, directs staff to provide personal hygiene and grooming daily and as needed (PRN). R24's bathing record reviewed from 4/5/2024 through 4/14/2024, indicated R24 required substantial to dependent assistance with bathing. R24's personal hygiene record review from 3/19/2024 through 4/17/2024, indicated R24 required…
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 · D2024-04-18 · tag F0887 — isolatedEducate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
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 the COVID-19 (C-19) vaccine to a resident eligible to receive the vaccine for 1 of 5 residents (R7) reviewed for immunizations. Findings include: R7's admission Minimal Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated R7 cognition moderately impaired with diagnosis of medically complex conditions, diabetes mellitus, and a pulmonary disease (lung disease). MDS indicated that R7 had been admitted on [DATE]. Facility provided document, titled, Minnesota Immunization information correction (MIIC), indicated R7 had not received any of the C-19 vaccination series. During an interview on 4/17/24 at 1:06 p.m., the infection preventionist (IP) stated during the admission process individuals are reviewed for vaccination status. IP stated she would follow-up and review the C-19 vaccination status as well. IP stated she was not sure why the R7's record failed to show a history or offering of the C-19 vaccination and it should be offered with a consent and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-26 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure physician notification of skin injury that required treatment for 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for pressure ulcers. The findings include: R1's face sheet printed 3/25/24, included diagnoses of chronic right heart failure, acute respiratory failure, type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic polyneuropathy (a type of nerve damage that can occur if you have diabetes. High blood sugar [glucose] can injure nerves throughout the body.), type 2 diabetes mellitus with foot ulcer, pressure ulcer of sacral region (the portion of your spine between your lower back and tailbone) stage 2, non-pressure ulcer of other part of right foot with fat layer exposed. R1's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R1 had moderate cognitive impairment, R1 was at risk for pressure ulcers, had one unhealed stage 2 pressure ulcer (partial thickness loss of dermis [The inner layer of the two main layers of the skin] presenting as a shallow open…
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 · D2024-03-26 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
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 revise the care plan that addressed goals and interventions for new diagnoses of nonthrombocytopenic pupura for 1 of 1 resident (R2) who developed substantial bruising. Findings include R2's admission record indicated R2 had diagnoses that included chronic pain and other nonthrombocytopenic purpura (purple, red, or yellowish-brown spots or patches develop under the skin due to inflammation, damaged blood vessels, or an underlying health condition). R2's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified R2 did not have cognitive impairment, was independent with oral hygiene and eating, and was dependent with toileting, dressing, personal hygiene, and mobility. R2 was at risk for pressure ulcers and no other skin problems identified. R2's care plan dated 4/6/23, included R2 has a potential for impairment to skin integrity related to immobility, and incontinence. Interventions included: keep skin clean and dry. Observe skin during cares. Report…
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 · D2024-03-26 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to complete pressure ulcer risk assessment, failed to comprehensively assess and monitor pressure ulcers, notify physician, and follow physician orders to prevent and/or mitigate the risk of new ulcer development or deterioration for 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for pressure ulcers. Findings include: Stage 1 Pressure Injury: Intact skin with a localized area of non-blanchable erythema (redness). In darker skin tones, the PI may appear with persistent red, blue, or purple hues. The presence of blanchable erythema or changes in sensation, temperature, or firmness may precede visual changes. Color changes of intact skin may also indicate a deep tissue PI (see below). Stage 2 Pressure Ulcer: Partial-thickness loss of skin with exposed dermis, presenting as a shallow open ulcer. The wound bed is viable, pink or red, moist, and may also present as an intact or open/ruptured blister. Unstageable Pressure Ulcer: Full-thickness skin and tissue…
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 · D2023-09-20 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolatedProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
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 secure a narcotic medication which was delivered without a corresponding medication order, and facility failed to investigate circumstances surrounding lost narcotic and implement action plan to prevent potential reoccurrence for 1 of 1 resident (R1) reviewed for drug diversion. Findings include: R1's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated an intact cognition. The MDS indicated R1 had occasional mild pain and received scheduled pain medication. The progress notes showed on 8/26/23, R1 rated hip pain at 10/10 despite oral medication and topical application of ice pack to area. The progress notes indicated R1 was transported to the hospital's emergency department at 4:30 p.m. and returned at 9:30 p.m., with an order for hydrocodone-acetaminophen 5-325 milligrams (mg) 1 tablet every six hours as needed for pain times three days. The progress notes further indicated the order for hydrocodone was sent to pharmacy. However, the progress…
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 before2023-09-20 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely 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 records review, the facility did not report allegation of drug diversion in a timely manner for 1 of 1 resident (R1) reviewed for medication management. Findings include: R1's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated an intact cognition. The MDS indicated R1 had occasional mild pain and received scheduled pain medication. The progress notes dated 8/26/23, indicated R1 requested to be sent to the emergency department (ED) related to hip pain, which she rated at 10/10. The ED visit summary notes dated 8/26/23, indicated an order for R1 to start hydrocodone-acetaminophen 5-325 milligram (mg), also known as Norco, one tablet every six hours as needed for pain times three days. However, the pharmacy packing slip dated 8/28/23, indicated pharmacy delivered to the facility and registered nurse (RN)-A received 10 tablets of 5 mg oxycodone for R1 instead of Norco. During interview on 9/19/23 at 10:09 a.m., RN-A verified receiving 10 tablets of 5 mg oxycodone for R1 on 8/28/23. RN-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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-20 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond 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 did not evaluate training program and re-train staff regarding allegations of verbal abuse for 1 of 1 residents (R2) reviewed for verbal abuse. Findings include: R2's significant change MDS dated [DATE], showed intact cognition, and indicated no behaviors. The MDS listed R2's active diagnoses, including stroke, pneumonia, diabetes mellitus, and depression. R2's care plan indicated communication deficit related to minimal hearing loss. The care plan directed staff to encourage R2 to continue stating thoughts even if he is having difficulty, and respond to the feeling resident is trying to express; to observe and document frustration level and wait 30 seconds before providing with word; and to use communication techniques which enhance interaction, and clarify to ensure understanding. The careplan also indicated R2 a vulnerbale adult and susceptible to abuse. The careplan directed staff to ensure R2 was in a safe environment. During interview on 9/20/23 at 8:13…
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 · D2023-06-15 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
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 assess the resident and determine safety for self-administration of medications (SAM) for 2 of 2 residents (R16 and R28) reviewed for SAM. Findings include: R16's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R16 was cognitively intact and was diagnosed with non-ST elevated myocardial infarction (type of heart attack), type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension (high blood pressure), coronary artery disease and was independent with most activities of daily living (ADL's). During an interview on [DATE], at 3:23 p.m., R16 stated he was able to self-administer all his medication except his nitroglycerin. R16 stated he would like to self-administer his nitroglycerin and had requested to do so back in December of 2022, after an incident where he had chest pain and waited fifty minutes before he received the nitroglycerin. R16 stated he was told he could not self-administer the nitroglycerin but was never given a reason to why…
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 before2023-06-15 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
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 and assess a resident who requested to self-administer nitroglycerin medication for 1 of 1 resident (R16) reviewed for choices. Findings include: R16's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R16 was cognitively intact and was diagnosed with non-ST elevated myocardial infarction (type of heart attack), type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension (high blood pressure), coronary artery disease and was independent with most activities of daily living (ADL's). During an interview on 6/12/23, at 3:23 p.m., R16 stated he would like to self-administer his nitroglycerin and had requested to do so back in December of 2022, after an incident where he had chest pain and waited fifty minutes before he received the nitroglycerin. R16 stated he was told he could not self-administer the nitroglycerin but was never given a reason to why not. R16's signed physician orders dated 12/5/22, indicated R16 could self-administer medications…
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 before2023-06-15 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure bathing assistance was provided for 1 of 4 resident (R10) reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL's). Findings include: R10's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R10 has mildly impaired cognition and was diagnosed with cardiomegaly (enlarged heart), obesity, hypertension (high blood pressure), chronic kidney disease, and required moderate assistance with bathing. R10's care plan updated on 5/1/23, indicated R10 required an assist of one staff with shower twice weekly and as necessary. During an observation on 6/13/23 at 12:08 p.m., R10 had a strong body odor notable from the hallway outside his room. R10's electronic health record (EHR) indicated he received a shower on 6/6/23, refused a shower on 6/9/23 and not applicable was documented for his shower scheduled on 6/13/23. During an observation and interview on 6/14/23, at 9:32 a.m., R10 had strong body odor present. R10's polo shirt had dried food stains…
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 · B2025-06-05 · tag F0568 — patternProperly hold, secure, and manage each resident's personal money which is deposited with the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure resident's trust account statements were provided on, at least, a quarterly basis. The lack of provided statements had the potential to affect all residents with trust accounts at the care center. During the recertification survey from 6/2/25 to 6/5/25, a facility complaint regarding access to funds was investigated. An incidental finding during this investigation revealed the facility was not sending quarterly statements to residents or resident representatives. During interview on 6/3/25 at 24:45 p.m., business office manager (BOM) stated the facility does not send out quarterly statements. During interview on 6/4/25 at 8:57 a.m., administrator confirmed the facility does not send out quarterly statements. An undated facility policy titled Accounting and Records of Resident funds; individual accounting records are made available to the resident through quarterly statements and upon request.
- No harm found · C2023-06-15 · 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 consistently include all licensed nursing staff on the daily nurse staff posting. This had the potential to affect all 33 current residents, their families and visitors. Findings include: During observation on 6/12/23, at 2:15 p.m. the facility nurse staff posting was posted on the wall next to the nurses office. The posting included the date, direct care nursing staff shifts, numbers, census and total hours worked. During interview on 6/15/23, at 8:31 a.m. the staffing coordinator (SC) stated she was not responsible for updating and posting the nurse staff posting, but rather the nurses. In review of the facility's staff postings and the actual working schedules, it was noted the facility lacked documentation / posting all licensed nurses for a 24 hour period. The facility failed to list the director of nursing (DON) and other corporate nurses who covered the days where licensed coverage and overall staffing numbers would have been low. During interview on 6/15/23, at 10:28 a m. interim administrator…
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 · C2023-06-15 · tag F0851 — widespreadElectronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data.
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 consistently include the facility census on the daily nurse staff posting. This had the potential to affect all 29 current residents, their families and visitors. Findings include: The facility's Staffing Data Submission Payroll Based Journal (PBJ), noted the facility was triggered for survey review of Low Weekend Staffing and Licensed Nurses for 24 hours per day during the 1st quarter of 2023 for the following dates: Wednesday 10/05/22 Wednesday 10/12/22 Tuesday 10/25/22 Monday 11/07/22 Sunday 11/13/22 In review of the facility's staff postings and the actual working schedules, it was noted the facility lacked documentation / posting all licensed nurses for a 24 hour period. The facility failed to list the director of nursing and other corporate nurses who covered the days where licensed coverage and overall staffing numbers which would have been low. In review of facility staff schedules and time card entries. provided by the facility for the five dates listed above, corporate / management nurses scheduled…
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 · B2023-06-15 · tag F0582 — patternGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to provide the required Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice (SNFABN) to 2 of 6 residents (R13 and R184) reviewed whose Medicare A coverage ended and then remained in the facility. In addition, the facility failed to provide the required Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) for 2 of 6 residents (R13 and R183) reviewed whose Medicare A coverage ended and one resident (R13) remained in the facility and one resident (R183) transferred to another facility. Findings include: R13 R13's Medicare Part A skilled Services began on 3/28/23. Last coverage day (LCD) was documented as 5/8/23. Resident remained in the facility. R13's medical record was reviewed and lacked any evidence a SNFABN and/or NOMNC had been provided to explain the estimated cost per day or provide rationale or explanation of the extended care services or items to be furnished, reduced, or terminated. The Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) Beneficiary Protection Notification Review form (CMS-20052) completed by social worker (SW) for R13 indicated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“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.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to ACCURA HEALTHCARE — 41 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 1 of 5 | 2.5 | -1.5 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 2.6 | -1.6 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 3.1 | -2.1 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 2.8 | +1.2 vs chain |
The other 40 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.5★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TEALWOOD ENTERPRISE INC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 05/31/2013 |
| GROFF, HOWARD | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER | 50% | since 01/01/1989 |
| SHERIDAN, GAIL | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER | 50% | since 01/01/1989 |
| FEUERHELM, NATALIE | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 01/01/2023 |
| TURBES, SANDRA | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 04/01/2024 |
| LENEAVE, TED | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 08/16/2022 |
| AMERICAN HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT SERVICES LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 10/01/2019 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 10 rows in the source record cover these 7 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $250K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in MN
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 245536. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-06-05, 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.