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

Truman Senior Living

400 North 4th Avenue East, Truman, MN 56088 · Non profit - Corporation · 30 certified beds · (507) 776-2031 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (507) 776-2031 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 11 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)

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.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
403 N 4th Ave E · (507) 776-7901 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1123 E Blue Earth Ave · (507) 235-5965 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
1496 230th Ave · (507) 236-1519 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Graf Park0.1 mi
350 E 1st St N · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased21.8%18.2%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight1.7%4.1%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder2.5%1.9%0.9%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.3%2.6%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms3.9%4.1%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury1.3%4.0%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened17.9%20.5%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication9.8%12.5%18.9%better
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers1.1%5.2%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control34.9%24.5%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table2.6%17.1%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication4.9%1.9%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine86.4%82.7%79.4%typical

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.

11.4%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
0.09U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.03hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.01hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.09 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 5% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 6% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.4%CMS range 7.2–17.810.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identifiednot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot 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 dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF staynot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsenednot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalizationnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.031.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.90
RN hours/ resident / day
1.01
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.86
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.77
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.81
RN hoursweekends
45.5%
Total nursing turnover
33.3%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 30 beds and averages 23.9 residents a day — about 80% occupied, or roughly 6 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 4.77 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.90 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.86 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 4.41 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.91 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.93 to 0.81 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 46% is about the same as 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

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-01-02)
1
at the previous standard inspection (2024-11-14)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

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

  • Potential for harm · D2026-01-02 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
    Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure the resident's representative was notified of a new bruise for 1 of 1 resident (R5)who was reviewed for skin injury. Findings include: R25's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease, Non-Alzheimer's dementia with behavioral disturbance and hemiplegia (complete paralysis on one side of body) and hemiparesis (partial weakness on one side). R2 had severe cognitive impairment with moderate hearing loss and adequate vision. R25 had delirium with symptoms of inattention and disorganized thinking but no behaviors. R25 was dependent on staff for all activities of daily living. R25's plan of care last revised on 4/30/25, indicated R5 had a cognitive impairment as indicated by her diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease and was unable to answer questions. Interventions included allowing R25 time to process information; approach R25 from the front, make eye contact and explain cares before…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-02 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure resident medication status was accurately coded in the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for 1 of 1 resident (R21) reviewed for medications, specifically insulin. Findings include:R21's face sheet received on 1/6/26, included diagnosis of type 2 diabetes mellitus (when the body does not produce enough insulin or use it properly).R21's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated R21 had diabetes.R21's physician orders included Trulicity (Trulicity is not insulin. It is a glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist which controls blood sugar by signaling brain to feel full, slowing digestion and stimulating insulin release) subcutaneous solution pen-injector 0.75 mg (milligram) /0.5 ml (milliliters) at bedtime every Wednesday related to type 2 diabetes mellitus. R21's care plan dated 10/14/25, indicated R21 had diabetes type 2 and required medication for control.R21's MDS, Section N indicated the number of days that…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-02 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure a falls care plan for 1 of 1 resident (R5) was updated to include the current interventions. Finding include: R5's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated R5 understands and is understood and had intact cognition. R5 was dependent on staff with transfers, and partial to moderate assistance with oral hygiene, independent with eating and requires substantial to maximal assistance with dressing and personal hygiene. R5 uses a manual wheelchair for mobility. R5's diagnoses included high blood pressure, coronary artery disease, renal insufficiency, diabetes mellitus, depression and asthma. R5's plan of care last updated 8/20/25, indicated R5 was at moderate fall risk as evidenced by the most recent Morse Fall Scale score (a fall scale calculator that predicts risk of falling) related to impaired cognitive function which can affect her reasoning. Interventions included R5 had a low bed so she can…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-14 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure resident medication status was accurately coded in the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for 1 of 2 residents (R17) reviewed for medications. Findings include: R17's facesheet printed on 11/14/24, included diagnosis of type 2 diabetes mellitus (a condition in which the body has trouble controlling blood sugar). R17's current quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE], indicated the number of days that insulin injections were received during the last seven days, as seven. R17's admission MDS dated [DATE], indicated the same, as did R17's significant change MDS dated [DATE]. R17's physician orders included: --glimepiride 1 mg (milligram), give 0.5 mg by mouth in the morning related to type 2 diabetes mellitus --Jardiance 25 mg by mouth in the morning related to type 2 diabetes mellitus --Orders did not include insulin injections R17's care plan dated 4/30/24, indicated he was on an oral diabetic medication for management. During an interview on…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-21 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan that identified R1 had failed to use call light appropriately and/or refusals to use the call light for 1 of 1 (R1) resident reviewed for care plan. Findings include: R1's, 7/07/24 quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) identified R1 had severely cognitive impairment, little interest, or pleasure in doing things, and feeling down, depressed, or hopeless for never to 1 day. R1 was dependent on staff with cares and was incontinent with bowel and bladder. R1 had a diagnosis of anxiety and manic depression. R1 had taken antipsychotic and antidepressant on a routine basis. R1's, undated care plan identified R1 had verbal aggression related to her bipolar disorder and the goal was for R1 to have 1 or fewer episodes per week. Staff interventions were to administer medication, analyze places, times, circumstances, triggers and what de-escalate the behaviors. Staff were to understand R1's situation and allow time to express her feelings, provide choices for care 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-21 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide 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

    Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to complete appropriate assessments and failed to reposition and document that repositioning for 1 of 1 resident (R1). Review of the report filed to the State Agency identified on 8/13/24 at 2:30 p.m., two nursing assistants placed R1 on a bedpan at approximately 12:30 p.m., and was found by staff remaining on the bed pan at approximately 4:15 p.m., when R1 call out to staff notifying them staff had forgotten to return and remove R1 off the bed pan. R1's, 7/07/24 quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) identified R1 had severely cognitive impairment, little interest, or pleasure in doing things, and feeling down, depressed, or hopeless for never to 1 day. R1 was dependent on staff with cares and was incontinent with bowel and bladder. R1 had a diagnosis of anxiety and manic depression. R1 had taken antipsychotic and antidepressant on a routine basis. Interview on 8/20/24 at 9:07 a.m., with family member (FM)-A stated she received a phone call from the facility's registered nurse (RN)-A of R1 had been found with a bedpan under her…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-21 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolated
    Ensure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, facility failed to ensure 1 of 1 nursing assistant (NA)-C was deemed competent upon hire or yearly thereafter to provide care to residents. Findings include: Review of NA-C's employee file identified a hire date of 6/03/24. Review of NA-C timesheets identified she had worked at the facility on 6/16, 6/17, 6/19, 6/20, 6/21, 6/24, 6/25, 6/27, 6/28, 6/29, 6/30, 7/01, 7/02, 7/03, 7/05, 7/06, 7/07, 7/08, 7/09, 7/11, 7/12, 7/13, 8/05, 8/06, 8/07, 8/08, 8/09, 8/10, 8/11, 8/12, 8/14, 8/15 and 8/16/24. Review of NA-C, 5/08/24 Relias (online training program) identified she had completed a clinical asssessment training. The facility did not provide facility specific competencies for NA-C upon hire. Interview on 8/21/24 at 3:31 p.m., with administrator and director of nursing agreed competency training should be given to all employees to reflect current knowledge of the facilitys resident specific needs and services. Review of January 2024 Orientation policy identified the facility would provide department orientation plan that would reflect the skills 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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-03-19 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide 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 record review the facility failed to ensure appropriate supplemental oxygen was delivered according to physician orders and failed to revise or develop a respiratory care plan for 2 of 2 residents (R1 and R2) reviewed for respiratory care. Findings include: R1's annual Minimal Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified R1 had moderately impaired cognition and diagnoses which included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (disease of the lungs). R1 required staff assist with dressing, toileting, transferring, and personal hygiene. The MDS also identified use of oxygen therapy. R1's hospital Physician's Plan of Care dated 3/13/24, indicated R1 had been hospitalized for aspiration pneumonia, COVID-19, and urinary tract infections (UTI). Further ordered R1 to receive continuous supplemental oxygen (O2) therapy at 1-3 liters per minute (LPM) by nasal cannula to keep 02 saturation greater than 90%. R1's hospital Physician's Plan of Care dated 3/15/24, indicated R1 had been observed at…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-02-27 · tag F0576 — pattern
    Ensure residents have reasonable access to and privacy in their use of communication methods.
    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 resident mail was delivered on Saturdays for 1 of 1 residents (R8) who voiced concerns with mail delivery. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all 22 residents residing in the facility. Findings include: During an interview on 2/27/24 at 12:41 p.m., with R8 who was the resident council president, and who according to a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], was cognitively intact. The interview took place in R8's room due to the facility being in Covid-19 outbreak status. R8 stated mail was delivered to the facility on Saturdays, described as a small stack of mail wrapped up, and the nursing staff locked it away until Monday when the activities director delivered it. Review of resident council meeting minutes from January 2023 through February 2024, (minus two months: February and September 2023), indicated R8 had been present at each of the 12 meetings. During an interview on 2/27/24 at 11:28 a.m., nursing…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-02-27 · tag F0572 — isolated
    Give residents a notice of rights, rules, services and charges.
    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 provide ongoing communication to residents about their rights (e.g., through resident groups). This had the potential to affect all 22 residents residing in the facility. Findings include: During an interview on 2/27/24 at 12:41 p.m., with R8 who was the resident council president, and who according to a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], was cognitively intact. The interview took place in R8's room due to the facility being in Covid-19 outbreak status. R8 stated the resident council met monthly and meetings were facilitated by the activities director who also took minutes for the meetings. R8 stated she did not recall resident rights ever being talked about or reviewed at resident council meetings. Review of resident council meeting minutes from January 2023 through February 2024, (minus two months: February and September 2023), indicated nothing regarding resident rights. The minutes indicated R8 had been present at each 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-02-27 · tag F0849 — isolated
    Arrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice 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 observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to have an integrated care plan to coordinate services between the facility and the hospice agency to ensure those services were being provided for 1 of 1 resident (R6) reviewed for hospice care. Findings include: R6's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated R6 was rarely/never understood, dependent on staff for dressing, hygiene, transfers, utilized a wheelchair, received hospice care, and diagnoses indicated non-traumatic brain dysfunction, and non-Alzheimer's dementia. R6's care plan dated 12/13/23, indicated R6 was receiving hospice services and interventions included: consult with physician and social services to have hospice care for resident in the facility, encourage support system of family and friends, hospice provider: . (name of agency) Hospice, keep the environment quiet and calm, observe closely for signs of pain, administer pain medications as ordered. On 2/26/24, at 2:17 p.m., licensed practice…

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

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
GROSKREUTZ, WILLIAMIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 08/22/2022
NESS, JAMESIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 03/03/2014
NOORLUN, YVONNEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 02/28/2022
SUPPALLA, WILLIAMIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 03/03/2014
WEIHE, KARENIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/14/2019
ANDERSON, JEANIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 03/03/2014
ERICKSON, WILLIAMIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 03/03/2014
HARDT, HEATHERIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/04/2018
KNOLL, CHRISTOPHERIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2019
LANGBEHN, JENNIFERIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/01/2023

CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 10 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.

$3.3M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-20.6%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 53%Medicare 8%Other / private 39%

A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$445per resident / day
operating cost
$13,528per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$369per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in MN

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Minnesota Medicaid page.

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

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 245346. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-02, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next