Hayes Residence
1620 Randolph Avenue, Saint Paul, MN 55105 · For profit - Corporation · 40 certified beds · (651) 690-4458 Medicaid only — no Medicare
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (15) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (58%) runs well above the national median (45%)
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) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 3 to 2 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 | 3.1% | 18.2% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.5% | 4.1% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 1.9% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 3.0% | 2.6% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 15.7% | 4.1% | 6.5% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 6.0% | 4.0% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 1.1% | 20.5% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 30.8% | 12.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 91.4% | 96.1% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.3% | 5.2% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 5.9% | 24.5% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 44.4% | 17.1% | 17.1% | worse |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 40 beds and averages 31.0 residents a day — about 78% occupied, or roughly 9 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 2.53 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.33 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.43 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.30 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 2.62 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.34 to 0.32 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 58% is well above 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.
15 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2025-06-26 · 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 a resident's wishes for resuscitation were accurately documented in all areas of the medical record for 1 of 36 residents (R24) reviewed for advanced directives. This resulted in an IJ for R24 who would have received CPR against his wishes in the absence of a pulse or respirations. The IJ began on [DATE], when the facility failed to accurately document a resident's code status in the EMR. The facility administrator and owner were notified of the IJ on [DATE] at 5:20 p.m. The IJ was removed on [DATE] at 3:44 p.m. but non-compliance remained at the lower scope and severity of a level D, no actual harm with potential for more than minimal harm, that is not immediate jeopardy. Findings include: R24's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated intact cognition and diagnoses of delusional disorders and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). It further indicated R24 was independent with activities of daily living (ADL) and mobility.…
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 · Fcited before2025-06-26 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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 record review the facility failed to ensure resident snack refrigerator temperatures were maintained to prevent food and drink items from spoiling and items in the snack refrigerator were labeled and dated. Furthermore, the facility failed to ensure the dishwasher was reaching temperatures required for proper sanitization and expired milk was removed from the main kitchen refrigerator. This had the potential to affect all residents who reside in the facility. Findings include: A facility document titled Nursing Refrigerator Log (bottom fridge) dated 6/2025, directed staff to notify maintenance if the temperature was greater than 41 degrees F. The document indicated temperatures were monitored on the following dates: 6/19/25, for 40 degrees Fahrenheit (F) -6/20/25, no temperature recorded -6/21/25, no temperature recorded -6/22/25, no temperature recorded -6/23/25 50 degrees F. -6/24/25 48 degrees F. A facility document titled Dish machine Temperature Log dated 6/2025, indicated temperatures were monitored twice daily and were within range 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 · E2025-06-26 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure a comfortable environment, having hot water available for 4 of 4 residents (R36, R34, R31, R15) who were received for concerns with cold showers. Findings include: R36's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated , 4/10/25 indicated cognition moderately impaired and independent for personal hygiene cares including bathing/shower. R36's care plan indicated independent with set up, it was very important showering early in the morning assist as needed. If declines offer at another time and day. R34' s admission MDS assessment dated , 3/26/25 indicated cognitively intact and set up or clean up assistance for personal hygiene cares including bathing/shower. R34's care plan indicated independent with set up assist as needed. If declines shower on assigned date offer another time or day. R31's quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] indicated cognitively intact and independent with set up for personal hygiene cares including…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-26 · 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 record review the facility failed to ensure call lights were accessible to 1 of 1 resident (R3). Findings include: R3's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated moderately impaired cognition and diagnoses of paranoid schizophrenia and post traumatic stress disorders (PTSD). It further included R3 had upper extremity impairment on one side, required staff assistance with most activities of daily living (ADL) and mobility, and was frequently incontinent of bladder and occasionally incontinent of bowel. During observation on 6/25/25 at 8:00 a.m., R3 was sitting in his recliner/lift chair in his room. His call light was stuck inside the bottom of his chair and not within reach. During observation and interview on 6/25/25 at 10:13 a.m., nursing assistant (NA)-A entered the room and assisted R3 to reposition in his chair. NA-A verified his call light was stuck in the chair and that it should be within reach. NA-A attempted to remove the call light from being stuck 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 before2025-06-26 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to provide quality of care for 1 of 1, resident (R34) to ensure bruises were adequately assessed, monitored and documented. Findings include: R34's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) cognition score 13, cognitively intact. R34's Care Area Assessment (CAA) for mood dated 3/26/25, indicated mood severity score 12. Risk for change in mood due to mental illness and needed to adjust to new environment. Staff to observe for change in mood, offer support and reassurance, and update doctor/Psych as needed. Functional abilities: R34 is new admit to [NAME] from home for ongoing support services for mental health and diabetes management. R34 was living in family home with brother until home sold. He was alert and oriented with forgetfulness, mental illness had diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder with baseline delusion about Satan and how he tried to control him. Had challenges of coping with his…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-26 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and document review the facility failed to ensure weekly monitoring and measurement of pressure ulcers were completed for 1 of 1 resident (R3). Findings include: R3's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated moderately impaired cognition, delusions, and diagnoses of paranoid schizophrenia and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). It further included upper extremity impairment on one side, required supervision with bed mobility, substantial assistance with toileting hygiene and transfers, was frequently incontinent of bladder and occasionally incontinent of bowel. R3's physician's orders dated 6/17/25, indicated nursing staff to measure wounds on right and left buttocks weekly and document in the nursing progress notes, in the evening every 3 days for wound care. It further included an order dated 1/19/24, which indicated weekly skin checks (to be done on shower day) every night shift, (Friday) for skin monitoring and to document any skin abnormalities in the progress notes.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-26 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure a root cause analysis and ensure interventions were implemented for 1 of 1 residents (R5) reviewed for falls. Findings include: R5's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R5 had moderately impaired cognition and diagnoses of paranoid schizophrenia. R5 required substantial assistance for toileting and partial assistance to transfer from bed to chair. R5 was at risk of falls and had 2 or more falls since the prior assessment. R5's fall risk assessment dated [DATE], indicated R5 was at high risk for falls due to intermittent confusion, 1-2 falls in the past 3 months, chair bound and need for assistance with elimination. R5's nursing progress note dated 6/13/25 at 8:15 a.m., indicated R5 was found on the floor at 7:50 a.m., R5 was sitting upright with her back against the bed reaching for their shoes. Apparently, R5 had slid out of bed. No injury was noted. R5 was assisted back to bed. The TMA staff remained with R5…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-26 · tag F0909 — failed to maintain a comfortable temperature — isolatedRegularly inspect all bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails (if any) for safety; and all bed rails and mattresses must attach safely to the bed frame.
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 separately purchased bed rails and bed frame were compatible for 1 of 1 resident who was reviewed for bed rail use. Findings include: R8's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R8 had moderate cognitive impairment and diagnoses of schizophrenia. R8 had grab bars in place and was independent with sitting to standing and bed mobility. R8's care plan revised 3/17/24, indicated R8 was at risk for falls related to gait instability and used a grab bar on the bed to assist with independent bed mobility and transfer. The manufactures recommendations for R8's bed rails installed at the time of entrance was requested however was not received. An observation on 6/23/25 at 6:40 p.m., R8 was lying in their bed. R8's bed was placed against a wall and had a bed rail placed on the other side. The bed rail mounted in the middle of R8's bed in a sleeve like bar. R8 grabbed the rail to assist themselves up to the edge of the bed. 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 · Fcited before2024-09-24 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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 food items were properly labeled and dated and disposed of. Furthermore, the facility failed to maintain clean cooking equipment. This had the potential to affect all residents who ate food from the kitchen. Findings include: During the initial tour with cook (C)-A on 9/22/24 at 10:28 a.m., observed the following: Refrigerator: • A tray of juices and milks uncovered in the refrigerator. C-A stated it would be tossed out. • Lettuce that had yellowish brown discoloration and was undated. C-A stated it would be tossed out and verified it was undated. • A 16 ounce bottle of barbeque sauce with barbeque sauce located around the outside of the lid. C-A took it out of the refrigerator and stated it would get wiped down. Freezers: • A package of 10 beef patties in a bag that was twisted shut with no date. C-A stated they were beef patties and verified they were undated. • A blue bag of fish that was undated. Equipment: • A KitchenAid contained yellow particles along the top where the attachments connect and 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 · Fcited before2024-09-24 · 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 clean linen was transported and stored in a manner to prevent the spread of infection. This had the potential to impact all 31 residents who reside in the facility. Findings include: An observation on 9/23/24 at 8:25 a.m., housekeeper (HSK)-A had brought up a cart of linens from downstairs. The cart contained fitted sheets, flat sheets, pillowcases, and fabric incontinent protector/pads. The linens were not covered during transport. The cart was transported down past residents and resident rooms and stored on the far end of the east hallway. An observation on 9/23/24 at 12:07 p.m., the same linen cart was now halfway down the west hallway. The cart contained less linens than earlier. The linens remained uncovered. At 12:10 p.m., HSK-B pushed the uncovered linen cart to the middle hallway just outside of the dining room. Residents were coming and going from the dining room for lunch and moving past the uncovered cart. When interviewed on 9/23/24 at 12:12 p.m., HSK-B was not sure if the linen 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 · D2024-09-24 · tag F0700 — isolatedTry 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 comprehensively assess, discuss risks and benefits, and attempt alternatives prior to installation of grab bars for 1 of 1 residents (R31) who were observed to have grab bars affixed to their bed. Findings include: R31's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R31 was cognitively intact and had diagnoses of alcohol use and neuropathy. R31 was independent with rolling side to side and moving from lying to sitting in bed. R31's physical device review dated 8/29/24, lacked indication R31 was assessed or had been educated on the risks of grab bars or had attempted alternatives prior to installation of grab bars. R31's care plan dated 9/8/24, indicated R31 was independent in bed mobility. R31's care plan lacked indication R31 used a grab bar for assistance. R31's provider and nursing orders lacked indication R31 required a grab bar. An observation on 9/22/24 at 11:05 a.m., R31 was sitting on their bed. R31's bed was placed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-24 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and document review the facility failed to ensure 2 of 5 residents (R31, R1) were accurately assessed and offered the pneumococcal vaccination according to the Centers of Disease Control (CDC). Findings include: R31's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R31 was [AGE] years old, was cognitively intact and had diagnoses of alcohol use and nicotine dependence. Furthermore R31's MDS indicated R31 was not offered the pneumococcal vaccination. R31's Minnesota Information Connection (MIIC) printed 9/24/24, indicated R31 had no prior pneumococcal vaccinations. The CDC identified on the Pneumococcal Vaccine Timing for Adults Chart, dated 3/15/23, directed residents 19-[AGE] years of age who had no history of previous vaccination and a risk factor of smoking to give one dose of pneumococcal 15-valent Conjugate Vaccine (PCV15), pneumococcal 20-valent Conjugate Vaccine (PCV20), or pneumococcal 21-valent Conjugate Vaccine (PCV21). R31's paper and electronic medical record lacked…
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 · Fcited before2023-08-31 · 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 proper infection control practices were maintained during medication administration and laundry services. This had the potential to affect all 31 residents residing in the facility. Findings include: Hand Hygiene During medication administration observation on 8/28/23 at 1:34 p.m., trained medication aide (TMA)-A prepared medications for resident (R)26. TMA-A crushed a pill and stirred it into a cup of applesauce and poured a cup of water. TMA-A took the two cups and entered R26's room. R26 was standing by his bed holding on to his walker with his soiled pants and soiled brief around his ankles. TMA-A placed the two cups on the TV stand and donned gloves. TMA-A gathered a new brief and clean pants and helped R26 don the new items. TMA-A picked up the soiled brief and placed in the trash and grabbed the soiled pants and placed in the laundry. TMA-A removed gloves, picked up the two cups and proceeded to spoon the applesauce into R26's mouth and handed him the water cup for consumption. Hand hygiene…
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 before2023-08-31 · 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 physician orders for orthostatic blood pressures (BPs) (BPs-measured while sitting and standing to detect a significant drop upon standing which may cause dizziness or light-headedness and may contribute to falls) were transcribed into the electronic medical record (EMR) and carried out for 6 of 7 sampled residents (R7, R13, R14, R26, R29, R30) receiving antipsychotic medications. Findings include: R7 R7's annual MDS dated [DATE], indicated R7 was cognitively intact, independent with ambulation, did not exhibit rejection of care, and received antipsychotic medications. R7's diagnoses included schizoaffective disorder (mental illness affecting thought, mood, and behavior), and anxiety. R7's care plan, revised 8/29/22, indicated R7 would remain free from psychotropic drug related complications including hypotension (low BP). R7's physician order sheet signed as reviewed by registered nurse (RN)-A on 8/1/23, indicated BLOOD PRESSURE…
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 · D2023-08-31 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY R2's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R2 was cognitively intact and had delusions. R2 required extensive assistance with bed mobility and toileting, limited assistance with transfers, supervision when walking in corridor, and was independent when walking in room. Diagnoses included diabetes mellitus and schizophrenia. R2's care plan dated 8/7/23, indicated R2 had potential for skin breakdown related to daily bladder and occasional bowel incontinence and refused repositioning. Staff were directed to monitor skin weekly to ensure intact, provide good peri cares with each incontinent episode and apply protective barrier cream for skin protection. R2's physician orders dated 8/8/18, directed staff to apply Bacitracin ointment 500 unit/gm applied topically as needed for skin tears and/or abrasions. R2's order dated 1/21/20, directed staff to toilet R2 every two to three hours every day and evening shift. An order dated 9/16/20, directed staff to place small cushion/pillow under one buttock…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership Data Not Available |
The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
What families pay in MN
CMS lists this home as Medicaid-certified only — it can accept Medicaid for long-term care, but it is not Medicare-certified, so Medicare will not pay for a short rehabilitation (“skilled nursing”) stay here. 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 24E508. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-06-26, 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.