Catholic Eldercare On Main
817 Main Street Northeast, Minneapolis, MN 55413 · Non profit - Corporation · 164 certified beds · (612) 379-1370 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (20% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0604, F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (32) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $24,713 in federal fines (most recent 2024-10-18)
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 5 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 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, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — 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 | 3 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 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 improved from 2 to 3 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 | 20.5% | 18.2% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.6% | 4.1% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 2.5% | 1.9% | 0.9% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.5% | 2.6% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 5.5% | 4.1% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.5% | 4.0% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 24.3% | 20.5% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 8.7% | 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 | 4.2% | 5.2% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 26.2% | 24.5% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 20.7% | 17.1% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 2.3% | 1.9% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 76.4% | 82.7% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 23.6% | 23.5% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 10.3% | 14.8% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.33 | 1.61 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.44 | 1.90 | 1.80 | better |
‡ 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.
63.7% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 140 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 57.1% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 77 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.25 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 36% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 10% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| 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 | 63.7%CMS range 53.8–72.3 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.4%CMS range 8.5–15.7 | 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 | 57.1% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 53.2% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 59.7% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 90.4% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care 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 | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.9%CMS range 3.9–11.4 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.65 | 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 164 beds and averages 146.8 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 17 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 4.18 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.11 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.63 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.70 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.38 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.26 to 0.72 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 20% is below the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are 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.
32 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 21 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-10-18 · 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 reassess and, if needed, develop interventions with unsupervised eating to reduce the risk of accidental choking or asphyxiation for 1 of 1 resident (R67) who ate unsupervised in their room and had two documented episodes of choking. This constituted an immediate jeopardy (IJ) situation for R67. The IJ began on 9/14/24 when R67 choked for a second time on oral food, and the facility failed to comprehensively reassess R67's risk of choking, implement any interventions for increased supervision while eating or safe swallowing (i.e., speech therapy), or reeducate R67 and her responsible party on the risks of choking if R67 remained eating unsupervised as she had been despite choking. The administrator and director of nursing (DON) were notified of the immediate jeopardy on 10/17/24 at 4:09 p.m. The IJ was removed on 10/18/24, but noncompliance remained at an isolated scope with potential for more than minimal harm that is…
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 · Ecited before2025-12-18 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview the facility failed to maintain a comfortable temperature between 71-81 degrees Fahrenheit (F) in 1 of 2 first floor dining areas. In addition, the facility failed to maintain acceptable temperature range in 1 of 1 split resident room for 2 of 2 residents (R41 and R45). Findings include:Observation/ interview on 12/15/25 at 1:30 p.m., during initial screening R41 was seated in her wheelchair in her room wearing a knitted scarf wrapped around her neck and wearing a blue quilled coat. She had her arms crossed her body and stated it was cold in her room, but it was better than the past couple of days when it was terribly cold outside. She reported she had told staff and asked to have her room warmer, but nothing had been done. she also reported it was hard to eat her meals in the room being used for the dining room because it was so cold, and she and the other residents had complained, but were told nothing could be done about it. Observation on 12/15/25 at 2:00 p.m. of the Atrium room being used for dining noted large floor to ceiling windows facing…
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 · E2025-12-18 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure appropriate infection control technique was followed during 1 of 1 meal service for hand hygiene and beard net use. In addition the facility failed to follow infection control practices for cleanliness and storage of reusable steam table pans . This had the potential to affect all 146 residents residing in the facility.Findings include: Observation on 12/15/25 at 1:13 p.m. with the certified dietary manger (CDM) during the initial kitchen tour identified the following items stacked on a metal cart as ready for use: 1.) Five 1/4 steam table pans that were stacked and were still wet.2.) Two 1/8 steam table pans stacked and were still wet, and a deep steam table pan with food substance left on the surface, and wetness present on the inside.3.) Two full sheet pans stacked and still wet on the interior surface.4.) Twelve 2-inch steam table pans that had been stored while still wet and remained wet at the time of observation.Interview on 12/15/25 at 1:20 p.m. with the CDM identified the steam table pans…
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 before2025-12-18 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to obtain and document an informed consent, including with explanation of risk and benefits, for 2 of 5 residents (R2, R157) reviewed for unnecessary medications.Findings include: R2R2's significant change in status Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 10/1/25, indicated R2 had short term and long-term memory impairment with no hallucinations or delusions, no behaviors, wandering or rejection of care.During an observation and interview on 12/17/25 on 7:52 a.m., R2 was observed in the small dining room, feeding herself breakfast. She smiles at surveyor but does not answer questions. R2 appears comfortable. R2's Order Summary Report, printed 12/18/25, included the following orders: -quetiapine (an antipsychotic medication) 25 milligram (mg) tablet; take 12.5 mg by mouth three times a day with a start date of 2/10/25-sertraline (antidepressant medication to help treat depression) 50 mg by mouth once daily with a start date of 5/16/23. R2's December Medication Administration Record (MAR/TAR), printed 12/18/25, included 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 · D2025-12-18 · 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 resident for safety and the ability to self-administer medications (SAM) for 2 of 2 resident (R109 and R170) reviewed for self-administration of medications.Findings include: R109's comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] identified R109 with intact cognition, required substantial assistance with toileting, showers, and dressing. Diagnoses included diabetes, morbid obesity, and an infection of the bone. R109's physician order (PO) for Miconazole powder, twice a day as needed dated 5/13/25, failed to indicate leaving it at bedside for self-administration. R109's care plan lacked indication of R109's ability to self-administer Miconazole. During observation on 12/15/25 at 2:23 p.m., R109 was sitting in wheelchair at bedside. On his rolling nightstand was a container of Miconazole Nitrate 2% antifungal powder with prescription label dated 5/13/25. R109 stated he used it as needed for skin infection. R109 also stated…
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 before2025-12-18 · 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 During observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to accommodate resident needs by ensuring the call light was accessible for 2 of 2 residents (R5, R101) reviewed for call lights.Findings include:R5R5's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE] identified R5 with impaired cognition, required substantial assistance for personal hygiene, dressing, and rolling from side to side in bed. In addition, R5 had diagnoses of diabetes, aphasia (communication disorder affecting speech, understanding, reading and writing), dementia, schizophrenia and had an indwelling catheter (tube from bladder to outside the body into a bag).R5's Care Plan dated 5/16/22 identified: Answer call lights per protocol.During observation on 12/15/25 at 2:35 p.m., R5 was lying in bed sleeping. Their call light was resting on top of nightstand out of sight and out of reach of resident.During interview with licensed practical nurse (LPN)-A on 12/16/25 at 3:32 p.m., LPN stated, Call light should be in reach at all time [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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-18 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
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 accuracy of 1 of 1 resident (R41) medical record when R41 had conflicting end of life (code status) documentation. :Findings include:R41's current, undated electronic medical record (EMR) identified R41 was marked as full code (wanting all lifesaving measures including cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), R41's [DATE], Provider Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) identifiedA: Attempt Resuscitation/CPRB. Full TreatmentC. Documentation of Discussion-Patient has Capacity D. Signature by R41 dated [DATE] and by certified nurse practioner (CNP) dated [DATE]R41's current, electronically signed physician orders identified her code status as Do Not Resuscitate/Do Not Intubate (DNR/DNI). Interview on [DATE] at 12:14 p.m. with R41 identified she wanted full resuscitative measures performed if she was found to not be breathing or have a pulse. Interview on 12/16//25 at 12:45 p.m. with licensed practical nurse (LPN)-C reported would initially…
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 · D2025-12-18 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolatedEnsure 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
Based on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from physical restraints for 1 of 1 resident (R101) who utilized a pillow rolled to prevent resident from attempting to self-transfer from his bed. Findings include: R101's 12/4/25 accepted Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment identified he had severed cognitive impairment, moderate visual impairment, was dependent on staff for ADLs including eating. His most recent fall occurred on 11/22/25 when he had fallen from his chair in the common areas. He had diagnosis of Parkinson's disease with psychotic disturbance, dementia in Alzheimer's disease, impaired mobility and ADLs, and depression, he received daily psychotropics, Parkinson's disease medication, Tylenol, and topical analgesic medication. Had been admitted to hospice services 4/24/25 with a terminal diagnosis of -Parkinson's disease with dementia. No restrictive devices were identified in the assessment.R101's current undated care plan identified he received hospice services, and the care plan was integrated with 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 · D2025-12-18 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure routine personal hygiene care (i.e., shower, and shaving) was provided for 1 of 3 residents (R171) reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL).Findings include:R171 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of jaw osteonecrosis due to drugs (condition where jawbone tissue dies and becomes exposed in the mouth), prostate cancer, depression, sleep apnea and polyneuropathy (damage to multiple peripheral nerves, causing numbness, weakness, and pain).R171's Resident Profile dated 12/18/25 indicated R171 required assistance with bathing, dressing, and toileting. Profile indicated R171 needed extensive assistance with grooming and set-up with eating. Resident Profile also indicated R171 was at risk for skin integrity loss and would require daily monitoring and wound treatment.R171's care plan indicated he needed assistance with grooming, bathing, toileting and dressing.During observation and interview on 12/15/25 at 5:51…
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 before2025-12-18 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to implement a palm protector for 1 of 1 resident (R78) reviewed for range of motion (ROM).Findings include:R78's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated R78 was cognitively intact, had no behaviors or rejected personal cares, needed touching assistance with eating, and needed maximal assistance with toileting hygiene, dressing, bed mobility and transfers. MDS indicated R78 was at risk for skin breakdown, and ROM was not assessed.R78's face sheet dated 12/18/25 indicated diagnoses of benign neoplasm of meninges (non-cancerous tumor growing in the protective membranes covering the brain and spinal cord), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (lung disease that blocks the airflow and make it difficult to breath) , hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body) and hemiparesis (weakness or inability to move one side of the body) following cerebral infraction affecting right dominant side.R78's Occupational Therapy Evaluation and Plan of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-18 · 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 record review, the facility failed to ensure appropriate management of an indwelling catheter was provided for 1 of 1 residents (R5) reviewed for indwelling catheters. Findings include:R5's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE] identified R5 with impaired cognition, required substantial assistance for personal hygiene, dressing, and rolling from side to side in bed. In addition, R5 had diagnoses of diabetes, aphasia (communication disorder affecting speech, understanding, reading and writing), dementia, schizophrenia and had an indwelling catheter (tube from bladder to outside the body into a bag).R5's physician orders (PO) dated 5/19/25 stated, Large drainage bag on when in bed (include daytime naps).During observation on 12/15/25 at 2:35 p.m., R5 was lying in bed sleeping. A small leg bag with urine was observed to be attached to R5's left leg, which was horizontal to level of bladder, however no large night urine drainage bag was not observed in room.During…
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 21 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-18 · tag F0790 — failed to provide dental care — isolatedProvide routine and 24-hour emergency dental care for each resident.
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 ensure dental needs were coordinated with a dental provider for further care to reduce the risk of complication (i.e., cavities, oral pain) for 1 of 1 residents (R14) reviewed for dental care and services.Findings include:R14's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, 10/9/25, indicated R14's cognition was severely impaired without hallucinations or delusions present with no behaviors, rejection of care, or wandering present. Further, the MDS identified a section titled Section L-Oral/Dental Status indicated unable to examine. Section K: Swallowing/Nutritional Status indicated R14 had complaints of difficulty or pain with swallowing.R14's face sheet, printed 12/17/25, identified relevant diagnoses included: vascular dementia with anxiety, osteoarthritis, anxiety disorder and chronic knee pain.During an interview and observation on 12/15/25 on 2:48 p.m., R14 was observed propelling herself in the hallway in her wheelchair. R14 was observed to be missing numerous teeth. R14 answered questions…
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 · D2025-12-18 · tag F0810 — isolatedProvide special eating equipment and utensils for residents who need them and appropriate assistance.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to provide adaptive equipment for 1 of 1 resident (R78) reviewed for adaptive equipment and observed having difficulty eating during meal observation.Findings include:R78's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated R78 was cognitively intact, had no behaviors or rejected personal cares, needed touching assistance with eating, and was dependent with toileting hygiene, dressing, bed mobility and transfers. MDS indicated R78 was at risk for skin breakdown, and limited range of motion (ROM) was not assessed.R78's face sheet dated 12/18/25 indicated diagnoses of benign neoplasm of meninges (non-cancerous tumor growing in the protective membranes covering the brain and spinal cord), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body) and hemiparesis (weakness or inability to move one side of the body) following cerebral infraction affecting right dominant side.R78's Resident Profile dated 12/16/25…
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 · F2024-10-18 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
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 ensure residents clothing was covered during storage and delivery to the residents. The uncovered linen had the potential to affect all residents. Findings include: During observation and interview on 10/14/24 at 1:13 p.m. laundry aide (H)-C was observed pushing a large metal uncovered laundry cart down a resident hallway on the first floor containing various cleaned resident clothing items. H-C stated she had worked at the facility as a laundry aide for a long time and they had never covered the personal laundry carts. During observation and interview on 10/15/24 at 1:28 p.m. H-A verified she was delivering cleaned personal linen on the second floor in an uncovered cart. H-A stated the carts used to deliver personal clothing were never covered. During interview on 10/15/24 at 1:34 p.m. the director of environmental services-housekeeping and laundry, (H)-B, stated he had been in his position since 2016, and they had never covered the carts used to deliver personal clothing. H-B added, we only cover the cart…
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 · Ecited before2024-10-18 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to promote a dignified home-like environment during dining services in 4 of 6 dining rooms reviewed. Finding include: R48's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 8/24/24, indicated R48 had intact cognition with no hallucinations or delusions with an admission date of 4/21/23. During observation on 10/14/24 at 5:08 p.m., on 2nd floor main dining room residents were seated and had been served their meals. It was observed each resident had a hard plastic tray in front of them which contained a plate of food that was sitting on a plate warmer. The drinks (which ranged from juice to coffee to milk) were also placed on the hard plastic tray along with the silverware. In the middle of the table were hard plastic dome shaped lids (which would have been used to cover the food plates). At 5:12 p.m., a staff member walked up to a resident who was sitting with her head down and prompted her to eat. During observation on 10/14/24 at 5:14 p.m., on 2nd floors smaller dining room, it was observed all residents had been…
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 · Ecited before2024-10-18 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide 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 document review, the facility failed to ensure appropriate wheelchair foot supports were provided or, if needed, therapy consulted to promote adequate wheelchair positioning to avoid complication (i.e., pain, edema) for 1 of 1 resident (R51); failed to ensure proactive skin interventions were consistently implemented to reduce the risk of skin tears or bruising for 1 of 1 resident (R110); and failed to assess and revise an insulin administration schedule to promote acceptable diabetes management and improve blood glucose levels for 1 of 1 resident (R161) reviewed for dialysis and who missed multiple doses of insulin related to scheduled dialysis treatments. Findings include: WHEELCHAIR POSITIONING: R51's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], identified R51 had severe cognitive impairment and demonstrated no rejection of care behaviors during the review period. Further, the MDS outlined R51 had no range of motion limitations in her upper or lower extremities, used 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 · D2024-10-18 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
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 consistently assess a resident's pain level prior administration of an as-need narcotic pain medication, in addition, the facility failed to assess for and implement if requested non-pharmacological pain interventions for 1 of 2 residents (R106) reviewed for pain management. Findings include: R106's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated R106 had intact cognition with no hallucinations or delusions. R106's diagnoses included polyneuropathy (damage or disease affecting nerves in roughly the same areas on both sides of the body), muscle weakness, radiculopathy (the pinching of the nerves at the root), other symptoms and signs involving the musculoskeletal system-wheelchair dependent and alcohol dependence with withdrawal. and required, at least, substantial/maximal assistance with dressing, sitting up or transferring. Further, under Section J - Health Conditions, the MDS identified R106 consumed no scheduled pain medication but…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-18 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and document review the facility failed to monitor for resident specific target behaviors related to antipsychotic medications use for 1 of 5 residents (R105) reviewed for unnecessary medications. Findings include: R105's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated R105 had moderately impaired cognition with no hallucinations or delusions and no behavioral symptoms including physical or verbal behavioral symptoms directed at others or behavioral symptoms not directed toward others. Further, it indicated R105 had received an antipsychotic medication during the seven-day look back period. R105's Physician Order Report, dated 10/16/24, included the following orders: -quetiapine (antipsychotic medication used to treat mental/mood disorders) tablet 25 milligrams (mg) take 12.5 mg one time a day at 8:00 a.m. for delusional disorder with a start date of 2/28/24 -quetiapine tablet 25 mg take one tablet by mouth once in the evening at 8:00 p.m. for delusional disorder with 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 · D2024-10-18 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolatedProvide or obtain dental services for 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 dental needs were coordinated with a dental provider for further care to reduce the risk of complication (i.e., cavities, oral pain) for 1 of 1 residents (R88) reviewed for dental care and services. Findings include: R88's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated R88 had intact cognition with no hallucinations or delusions with an admission date of 4/11/23. Further, R88's face sheet, printed 10/17/24, identified R88's primary payer as, Medicaid. R88's care plan, printed 11/5/23, identified R88 has natural teeth and may require assistance with oral care r/t [related to] Parkinson disease [a disease that affects the central nervous system that affects both motor and non-motor systems of the body], impaired mobility with a goal of adequate oral hygiene will be maintained. The care plan listed several interventions to help R88 meet this goal which included, assess condition of oral cavity, teeth, tongue, lips 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 · D2024-02-23 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolatedHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to identify, keep resident appraised of ongoing efforts or resolve an ongoing grievance for 1 of 3 residents (R2) reviewed. R2 had a roommate who would cry and scream out at night. In addition, the roommate would wander into R2's side of the room and R2 would have to call the nurses station almost daily to have the roommate removed. Finding Include: R2's nursing progress note dated 1/6/24 at 5:37 a.m. indicated R2 was awake most of the night and concerned about the new roommate. R2 indicated the roommate was disturbing her with noise. She requested the roommate should be moved. R2's nursing progress note dated 1/6/24 at 3:06 p.m. indicated R2 complained of not being to sleep at night due to disturbances by roommate. Family member (FM)-A spoke with staff about the possibility of relocating the roommate due to the resident not being able to sleep. Staff informed FM-A and R2 that frequent checks would be conducted to prevent disturbances and handle 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 · D2024-02-23 · 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 document review, the facility failed to report allegations of abuse to the State agency (SA) for 1 of 3 residents (R2) reviewed who reported allegations of abuse in the facility. R2 and R2's family repeatedly reported allegations of rough treatment and verbal abuse to multiple facility staff over a six-month period. Findings include: R2's nursing progress note dated 8/29/23 indicated R2 reported pain to the left ribcage area below the breast and to her pelvic area. She stated it started after she was put to bed with the mechanical lift. She reported that she had the pain before when she is put to bed but then it goes away soon, but this time it had been constant and not going away. R2's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R2 had a Brief Inventory of Mental Status (BIMs) score of 15 indicating no cognitive impairment. R2 required extensive assistance for activities of daily living. R2's pertinent diagnoses included Multiple Sclerosis, acute respiratory failure, displaced…
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 before2024-02-23 · 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 document review, the facility failed to implement identified interventions to prevent alterations in mood and behavior for 1 of 1 resident (R1) reviewed. A video recording identified R1 needing assisting and staff entered the room as R1 was crying. The nursing assistant (NA)-A did not speak with R1, adjusted a blanket, turned off her light and left resident crying. Findings include: R1's care plan dated 1/7/24 indicated R1 had a potential for communication deficits due to ability to understand, ability to be understood, hallucinations or delusions and decision-making ability. R1's goal was to be able to follow instructions. The staff's approach was to break down instructions into simple tasks, avoid lengthy explanations, face R1 when speaking with her. In new situations support and reassure her. Obtain R1's attention before speaking with her. Provide a quiet, non-hurried environment, free of distractions or conversations. Encourage resident to voice feelings and concerns about mood,…
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 before2024-02-23 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to comprehensively reassess, evaluate/analysis the fall hazards and risk and implement interventions consistent with the residents needs to reduce further falls for 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for falls. R1 had one fall where no assessments or interventions were completed. R1 had another fall five days later. Finding include: R1's care plan dated 1/7/24 indicated R1 was at risk for falls related osteoporosis, gait/balance problems, visual impairments, hearing impairment, elimination needs, impaired cognitive status and pain. R1's goals were to remain free from falls and fall related injuries. The staff's approach was a pharmacy consult per protocol. Promote scheduled rested periods. Reinforcement to request assistance. Safety check on shoes and monitor for foot pain. Monitor for glasses and/or hearing aid. Ensure proper lighting/night lights. Provide non-skid material in wheelchair. When falls occur to investigate the root cause through IDT meeting…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-11-16 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — patternHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure all staff knock on individual resident bedroom doors and introduce themselves prior to entry for 8 of 8 residents (R7, R15, R20, R28, R54, R56, R95, R99, R101, R109, R118, R138) reviewed for dignity. Findings include: R7's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated R7 with intact cognition. R7's diagnoses include seizures, multiple falls, osteoarthritis, and chronic pain. In addition, R7 required supervision with toileting and dressing with partial to moderate assistance needed for mobility. R15's quarterly MDS dated [DATE], indicated R15 with intact cognition. R15's diagnoses included coronary artery disease, heart failure, and depression. In addition, R15 required partial to moderate assistance with toileting, showering, and lower body dressing with supervision or touching to partial to moderate assistance for mobility. R20's annual MDS dated [DATE] indicated R20 with moderate impaired cognition. R20 required staff…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-11-16 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure nebulizer tubing and masks were changed according to physician orders and professional standards for 2 of 2 residents (R37 and R104) reviewed for respiratory therapy. In addition, the facility failed to ensure proper cleaning of a continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) machine to reduce the risk of complication (i.e., respiratory infection) for 1 of 1 residents (R153) observed for CPAP use. Findings include: R37's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R37 had severe cognitive impairment and required total assistance for eating and was dependent with all other activities of daily living (ADLs). R10's diagnosis included Alzheimer's disease, seizure disorder, malnutrition, asthma, and delusional disorder. R37's active orders indicated an order dated 10/1/23 for ipratropium-albuterol solution for nebulization, 0.5 milligrams (mg) - 3mg (2.5 mg base) 3 milliliters (ml); one inhalation once a day. In addition, an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-11-16 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
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 communicate changes in medications for 1 of 1 residents (R56) reviewed for notification of change in medications. Findings include: R56's Physician Order Report printed on 11/15/23, identified an admission date of 4/21/23, with diagnoses including type 2 diabetes, hypertension (high blood pressure), heart failure, chronic pain, major depressive disorder, adjustment disorder with anxiety and Parkinson's disease. R56's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R56 was cognitively intact. R56's most recent quarterly MDS dated [DATE], indicated R56 was cognitively intact, had type 2 diabetes, heart failure, high blood pressure, Parkinson's disease, anxiety, depression, and chronic pain. When interviewed, on 11/13/23, at 4:22 p.m., R56 expressed that she didn't know what medications she received. R56 stated she thinks she is on a blood thinner, doesn't know if her insulin dose changed after she had an incident with a low blood sugar 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 · Dcited before2023-11-16 · 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 reasonable accommodation of need related to call lights within reach for 1 of 1 residents (R51) with high risk for falls. Findings include: R51's face sheet indicated admission on [DATE], with admission diagnoses of multiple fractures of ribs including other diagnoses of fracture of left pubis, dementia, repeated falls, wedge compression fracture of vertebra, unspecified fall, fracture of skull and facial bone, fracture of arm and chronic pain due to trauma. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated , 3/28/23, indicated R51 had cognitive impairment, suffered a fracture as a result of a fall prior to admission, did not display any inappropriate behavior symptoms, required substantial/extensive assistance with activities of daily living including toileting assistance and mobility, always incontinent of bladder and continent of bowels. R51's fall assessment dated [DATE], identified R51 as a high fall risk. R51's quarterly Minimum…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-11-16 · 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 complete a person-centered care plan for 1 of 2 residents (R63), reviewed for trauma informed care. Findings include: R63's face sheet, dated 11/14/23 identified admission to the facility on 8/4/2020, with a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). R63's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, dementia, aphasia (language disorder that affects a person's ability to communicate), and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (condition including attention difficulty, hyperactivity, and impulsiveness). The assessment indicated cognitive impairment and inattentiveness wyhich fluctuates in severity. R63's care plan last revised on 10/31/2023, lacked documentation of an interrelation between trauma and symptoms of trauma. The document acknowledged history of PTSD however lacked identification on how to mitigate or eliminate triggers that may cause re-traumatization of R63 as no triggers are…
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 · D2023-11-16 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
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 feeding tube supplies were changed according to professional standards to avoid the possibility of feeding tube complications and/or infections for 1 of 1 resident (R37) reviewed for tube feedings. Findings include: R37's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R37 had severe cognitive impairment and required total assistance for eating, and was dependent with all other activities of daily living (ADLs). R10's diagnosis included Alzheimer's disease, seizure disorder, malnutrition, asthma, and delusional disorder. R37's care plan titled Feeding Tube dated 6/21/21, indicated, use of enteral nutrition via a gastric tube related to dehydration, history of refusal to eat, drink or take her medication. R37's care plan interventions included check for tube feeding (TF) placement and patency, assess for dehydration, cleanse site, monitor for signs of malnutrition and hypoglycemia. The care plan lacked interventions…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-11-16 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to attempt and document non-pharmacological interventions before as needed antipsychotic medications were administered to 1 of 5 residents (R104) reviewed for unnecessary medications. Findings include: R104's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated R104 was severely cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance with all ADLs. R104's Medical Diagnoses list, printed 11/16/23, indicated R104 had several medical diagnoses including dementia, delusional disorder (a type of mental health condition in which a person can't tell what's real from what's imagined) and major depressive disorder. R104's Physician Orders indicated an order for quetiapine (an antipsychotic medication that can treat schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and depression) 25 milligrams (mg) once a day at 4:00 p.m., dated 10/11/23 and twice a day as needed, dated 11/3/23 to be used for delusional disorder. R104's Medication Administration Record (MAR) for 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 · Dcited before2023-11-16 · tag F0790 — failed to provide dental care — isolatedProvide routine and 24-hour emergency dental care for 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 interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure assessed oral and dental abnormalities were acted upon and, if needed or desired, referred to a dental provider to reduce the risk of complication (i.e., further breakdown, oral pain) for 1 of 1 residents (R34) reviewed for dental hygiene and services. Findings include: R34's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], noted R34 with a facility admission date of 9/14/22 and indicated R34 had moderate cognitive impairment and required assistance with personal hygiene. R34's Oral Health Plan and Consent Form dated 9/13/22, indicated R34 chose to use an outside dental provider for all routine dental cares. This form lacked a resident signature. R34's care plan (CP) with dates prior to 11/14/23, lacked mention of offering to assist with dental hygiene and services. During observation and interview on 11/14/23 at 1:07 p.m., R34 was observed with no upper teeth and missing most of the bottom teeth. R34 stated she had upper dentures and lower…
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 · D2023-11-16 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolatedEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of 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 document review, the facility failed to accommodate dietary preferences for 1 of 1 residents (R153) reviewed for dietary preferences. Findings include: R153's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R153 had intact cognition and was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, kidney disease, diabetes, and malnutrition. The MDS indicated R153 required help setting up for oral care and meals and required substantial assistance with transferring and toileting hygiene. R153's Physician Note dated 8/21/23, indicated R135 had been diagnosed with type 1 diabetes (an autoimmune disorder where the body stops producing insulin, a hormone the body needs to process the sugar in food) at age twenty-four. The note indicated R153's blood sugars had recently become increasingly elevated with results in the range of 200 to 300 milligrams/deciliter (mg/dL). The note indicated that R153's blood sugars were often more elevated after the completion of her meals. The note 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
$24,713 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $24,713 — penalty dated 2024-10-18
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
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| FITZMORRIS, CHRIS | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/01/2017 |
| BAUMBERGER, GREGORY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF; ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/17/2017 |
| BARTA, MARIE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/17/2019 |
| ADETOLA, ADEKOLA | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2024 |
| MIELKE, JOHN | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/06/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 10 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
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.
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 245439. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-18, 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.