Mahnomen Health Center

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 32 beds and averages 28.5 residents a day — about 89% occupied, or roughly 4 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.24 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.80 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.89 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

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.

15 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · F2026-03-11 · tag F0851 — widespread
  Electronically 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 interview and document review, the facility failed to accurately submit the payroll-based journal system (PBJ) staffing data to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). This had the potential to affect all 31 residents residing in the facility.Findings include:The facilities PBJ data submitted to CMS for 10/1/25, through 12/31/25 (Q4 25), identified the facility was triggered for failure to submit data for the quarter.On 3/10/26 at 10:40 a.m., the chief financial officer (CFO) stated the staff member that submitted the PBJ data in 2025 no longer worked for the facility as of 2026. The staff member had access to the PBJ submission program, however there wasn't anyone else in the facility with access and the staff member had not submitted Q4 2025 data prior to leaving their position. The CFO stated by the time they realized the data hadn't been submitted, the timeframe had passed, and they were unable to submit. The CFO stated they have a plan to move forward to ensure the data will be submitted in a timely manner.A policy regarding submitting data to the Centers for…

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

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2026-03-11 · tag F0868 — widespread
  Have the Quality Assessment and Assurance group have the required members and meet at least quarterly
  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 Assessment and Assurance (QAA) committee failed to ensure the medical director was present quarterly and attendance of key members was documented. In addition, the facility infection preventionist (IP) failed to provide comprehensive infection control and antibiotic infomration as required for proper QAA analysis. These findings had potential to affect all 29 residents residing within the facility. Findings include:The Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) meeting minutes from the last standard survey dated 6/4/25 were reviewed and identified the following:June 2025 meeting minutes failed to identify who attended the meeting. The director of nursing (DON), medical director or their designee, and at least three other staff members are required, one of which must be either the administrator, owner, board member or other individual in a leadership role along with the infection preventionist (IP)July/August 2025 meeting identified the following were in attendance: DON who is also the IP, 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.

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Fcited before2026-03-11 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and document review the facility failed to establish and implement an outcome surveillance program to track, trend and analyze resident actual and potential infections. This had the potential to affect all 29 residents that resided in the facility. Findings include:The last three months of infection control tracking, trending and analysis were requested and not received. On 3/9/26 at 5:11 p.m., the director of nursing (DON), who also worked as the infection preventionist, stated she did not have a system to track resident symptoms or infections. She stated she reviewed the resident's medical records and communicated with the nursing staff to help identify symptoms of illnesses or infections.On 3/10/26 at 8:20 a.m., the DON stated although she had not been formally tracking infections, she did have interdisciplinary (IDT) notes and Quality Assessment and Performance Improvement (QAPI) minutes to show what she had been doing regarding infections.The QAPI meeting minutes from the last standard survey dated 6/4/25 were reviewed and identified the following:June 2025,…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2026-03-11 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — widespread
  Implement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to implement their comprehensive antibiotic stewardship program to help reduce unnecessary antibiotic use and infections; and implement a facility-wide system to monitor the use of antibiotics for 2 of 2 residents (R5, R16) in the sample who were prescribed antibiotics. The lack of a follow through on a program had the potential to affect all residents prescribed antibiotics. Findings include:R5:R5's progress notes dated 12/25/26 through 12/26/26, identified R5 had confusion and weakness, and on 12/26/26, was sent to the emergency room (ER). Later that same day, R5 returned to the facility with a diagnosis of UTI (urinary tract infection) and new orders for outpatient intravenous (IV) Rocephin (antibiotic). R5's UA (urine analysis) results dated 12/26/25, identified there was no predominant organism, and no further identification or susceptibility would be done.R5's ED notes dated 12/26/25, identified R5 received Rocephin (antibiotic) 1gm IV x 1 dose.R5's progress note dated 1/28/26, identified R5's IV antibiotics were…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2026-03-11 · tag F0882 — widespread
  Designate a qualified infection preventionist to be responsible for the infection prevent and control program in the nursing home.
  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 infection preventionist (IP) had completed specialized training in infection prevention and control and received certification. This had the potential to affect all 29 residents residing in the facility. Findings include:See F880: Based on interview and document review the facility failed to establish and implement a surveillance plan to track, trend and analyze resident actual and potential infections. This had the potential to affect all 29 residents that resided in the facility. See F881: Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to implement their comprehensive antibiotic stewardship program to help reduce unnecessary antibiotic use and infections; and implement a facility-wide system to monitor the use of antibiotics for 2 of 2 residents (R5, R16) in the sample who were prescribed antibiotics. The lack of a follow through on a program had the potential to affect all residents prescribed antibiotics. The infection preventionist infection control certification was requested and not…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-11 · tag F0641 — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure medications were coded correctly on the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for 2 of 5 residents (R5, R20) reviewed for unnecessary medications. Findings include: The MDS 3.0 Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual dated 10/25 directs facilities to document how many days the resident received the following classes of medications: antipsychotic, antianxiety, antidepressant, hypnotic, anticoagulant, antibiotic, diuretic, opioid, antiplatelet, hypoglycemic and none of the above. R5: During the MDS observation period from 1/29/26 through 2/4/26, R5's February 2026, medication administration record (MAR), identified R5 was receiving the following medications:Aldactone (a diuretic) (commonly known as a water pill) 25 milligrams (mg) every morning for congestive heart failure.Buspirone (an anti-anxiety medication) 7.5 mg twice a day for anxiety. R5's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified R5 had diagnoses of congestive heart failure, high…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-06-04 · tag F0641 — pattern
  Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
  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 accurate coding of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for 2 of 2 residents (R11, R27) reviewed for unnecessary medications; 2 of 2 residents (R8, R17) reviewed for restraints; and 7 of 7 residents (R4, R8, R26, R6, R10, R17, R20, R26) reviewed for grab bars. Findings include: MEDICATIONS: R11 R11's annual Minimum data set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified R11 had a moderate cognitive impairment and had diagnoses that included dementia, major depressive disorder, anxiety, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). R11used antipsychotic, antianxiety, and antidepressant medications. The MDS further identified R11 had not had a gradual dose reduction (GDR) or R11 had documented an indication for use. R11's physician orders identified the following: - buspirone (antianxiety medication) 7.5 milligram (mg) tablet; take 1 tablet by mouth three times a day. - donepezil ((cholinesterase inhibitors) Donepezil is a medication primarily used to treat dementia…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-06-04 · tag F0700 — pattern
  Try different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
  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 residents with attached grab bars were comprehensively assessed for use on the bed for 7 of 7 residents (R4, R8, R26, R6, R10, R17, R20) whom had grab bars. Findings include: R4 R4's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified R4 had a severe cognitive impairment and had diagnoses that included dementia. R4 was nonambulatory, required substantial assistance for eating and was dependent on staff for all other care areas. The MDS did not identify R4 used grab bars. R4's care plan dated 7/7/22, identified R4 was contracted at bilateral knees to 90 degrees flexion (bent). R4 had pain with some stretching into extension more in left knee than in right knee but was able to complete range of motion (ROM) at ankles and hips with no difficulties. Res. also has tightness noted in left ring and pinky finger, no other tightness or difficulties noted with ROM in bilateral upper extremities. The care plan did not identify R4 used…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-04 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolated
  Ensure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
  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 residents were free from physical restraints while in bed for 2 of 2 residents (R8, R17) reviewed for restraints. Findings include: R8: R8's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified R8 had a mild cognitive impairment and had diagnoses that included history of a stroke, hallucinations, disorientation, restlessness and agitation, hemiplegia (one sided paralysis) and hemiparesis (one sided weakness). R8 was nonambulatory and required touching/supervision assistance for eating and was dependent on staff for all other care areas. The MDS identified no restraints were used for R8. R8's Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) Functional/Rehabilitation Potential Care Area Assessment (CAA) dated 2/20/25, identified R9 was dependent on staff for most ADLs and R8 had left sided neglect from a stroke. R8's care plan revised 5/22/25, identified R8, on admit, did seem to be a low risk for falls/elopement. R8 was chair fast and could…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-05-24 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to develop and implement interventions to reduce fall risks for 1 of 3 residents (R3) reviewed for accidents. Findings include: R3's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified intact cognition, socially isolated self often, and no behaviors identified. R3 had functional impairment upper extremity on one side. R3 required supervision or touching assistance with personal hygiene, sit to stand, ambulation, toilet transfers, toileting hygiene, shower/bath, upper body dressing, and putting on and taking off footwear. R3 required partial to moderate assistance with lower body dressing. R3 was frequently incontinent of bladder and occasionally incontinent of bowel. R3 had diagnoses of anemia (low red blood cell that carry oxygen to the body and can cause fatigue and shortness of breath), CHF (congestive heart failure), diabetes mellitus (DM), depression, and asthma (chronic lung disease affecting of the lungs and can cause shortness…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Fines & penalties

$12,534 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $12,534 — penalty dated 2024-02-06

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

Who owns this facility

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.

What families pay in MN