Kirksville Manor Care Center
1705 East Laharpe, Kirksville, MO 63501 · For profit - Corporation · 119 certified beds · (660) 665-3774 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Jun 2025
- it has citations for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0567, F0568)
- inspectors cited 2 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (54) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $250,823 in federal fines (most recent 2024-10-04)
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (57%) 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 | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 1 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 | 1 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 1 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 1 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 1 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 12.6% | 18.1% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.4% | 5.3% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 3.8% | 1.1% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 5.0% | 2.3% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 2.4% | 18.5% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 6.8% | 4.1% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 9.9% | 17.4% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 36.4% | 25.6% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 90.9% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.1% | 4.5% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 16.1% | 17.8% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 28.5% | 23.5% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 2.6% | 2.2% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 63.5% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 27.5% | 26.0% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 29.3% | 13.7% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 3.60 | 2.11 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 5.08 | 2.33 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
41.1% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 57 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 26.9% 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 26 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 0.23 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 29% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 0% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 41.1%CMS range 29.6–51.8 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.6%CMS range 6.6–15.1 | 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 | 26.9% | 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 | 11.5% | 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 | 30.8% | 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 | 97.7% | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 2.3% | 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 | 7.0% | 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 | 9.9%CMS range 5.4–16.7 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.96 | 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 119 beds and averages 50.8 residents a day — about 43% occupied, or roughly 68 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 4.08 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.23 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.98 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 3.47 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.32 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.18 to 0.35 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 57% 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 fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. 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.
54 citations, most serious first. The 17 most serious are shown; the remaining 37 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-11-26 · 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
Refer to Event ID M9W912 Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide care and treatment following a fall with injury for one resident (Resident #9) with a personal history of a stroke and who was on Xarelto (anticoagulant or blood thinning medication) of nine sampled residents. The resident complained of right sided rib pain at the time of the fall and continued to complain of pain 9 out of 10 (on a scale from 0 to 10 with ten being the worst pain) to the right side. Approximately 2-1/2 hours after the resident was found, the resident's family member arrived at the facility to check on the resident and requested the resident be re-evaluated by staff due to the resident's severe pain, along with shortness of breath. Approximately 10-3/4 hours after the resident was found, the resident continued to complain of pain of 7 out of 10. Staff described the resident as very tearful and in a lot of pain when repositioned, and the physician was not notified. On 10/22/24, the resident's physician gave orders to send the resident to the emergency room (ER) 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.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-10-04 · 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 record review, the facility failed to provide care and treatment following a fall with injury for one resident (Resident #9) with a personal history of a stroke and who was on Xarelto (anticoagulant or blood thinning medication) of nine sampled residents. The resident complained of right sided rib pain at the time of the fall and continued to complain of pain 9 out of 10 (on a scale from 0 to 10 with ten being the worst pain) to the right side. Approximately 2-1/2 hours after the resident was found, the resident's family member arrived at the facility to check on the resident and requested the resident be re-evaluated by staff due to the resident's severe pain, along with shortness of breath. Approximately 10-3/4 hours after the resident was found, the resident continued to complain of pain of 7 out of 10. Staff described the resident as very tearful and in a lot of pain when repositioned, and the physician was not notified. On 10/22/24, the resident's physician gave orders to send 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.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2024-11-26 · 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
Refer to Event ID M9W912 Based on interview and record, review the facility failed to develop a care plan with interventions to prevent falls for one resident (Resident #9) of nine sampled residents, who was at risk for falls and was admitted to the facility after having falls at home. The resident sustained a fall while at the facility on 10/21/22. Staff failed to complete a thorough post fall assessment or notify the Director of Nursing (DON), as directed by facility policy, at the time of the fall. The facility failed to communicate the resident's fall to the oncoming shift at shift change. The facility failed to communicate pertinent information regarding the fall to the on-call physician, who was not familiar with the resident which delayed evaluation and treatment. As a result of the fall, the resident sustained a large right sided hemothorax (when a collection of blood accumulates in the chest cavity, often caused by trauma or injury, symptoms can include difficulty breathing and pain) with multiple displaced rib fractures (broken ribs where the pieces of bone have moved so…
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.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2024-10-04 · 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 record, review the facility failed to develop a care plan with interventions to prevent falls for one resident (Resident #9) of nine sampled residents, who was at risk for falls and was admitted to the facility after having falls at home. The resident sustained a fall while at the facility on 10/21/22. Staff failed to complete a thorough post fall assessment or notify the Director of Nursing (DON), as directed by facility policy, at the time of the fall. The facility failed to communicate the resident's fall to the oncoming shift at shift change. The facility failed to communicate pertinent information regarding the fall to the on-call physician, who was not familiar with the resident which delayed evaluation and treatment. As a result of the fall, the resident sustained a large right sided hemothorax (when a collection of blood accumulates in the chest cavity, often caused by trauma or injury, symptoms can include difficulty breathing and pain) with multiple displaced rib fractures…
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.
- Actual harm · G2024-02-16 · tag F0740 — failed to provide behavioral / mental-health care — isolatedEnsure each resident must receive and the facility must provide necessary behavioral health care and 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 record review, the facility failed to ensure one resident (Resident #53), in a sample of three residents, who presented with diagnoses of major depressive disorder, anxiety and dementia related psychosis, received the necessary behavioral health care services to maintain the highest practicable physical, mental and psychosocial well-being. The facility failed to report the resident's statements related to direct self harm and suicidal ideation to the resident's physician to further evaluate the resident and ensure the resident's safety. The facility also failed to provide any psychiatric services to the resident after his/her admission from an acute psychiatric hospital unit for geriatric patients. The facility failed to identify the resident's worsening depression and to investigate the root cause of the resident's behaviors, including suicidal thoughts, and to address these appropriately. There was no care plan to direct staff in appropriate interaction and care of this…
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.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2023-12-20 · 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 record review, the facility failed to accurately assess and timely report changes in condition to the resident's physician for one resident (Resident #2), who was admitted to the facility following a fall, in a review of six sampled residents. The day following his/her admission, the resident developed blisters, edema, pain and bruising to his/her left knee. Staff did not consistently assess the resident's skin and his/her condition as the resident continued to have pain requiring a narcotic pain medication and received antibiotic therapy, and did not timely notify the physician of the changes in the resident's condition. The resident requested to see his/her physician (11 days after admission) and was admitted to the hospital with significant swelling from his/her knee to his/her toes, severe pain, and a wound on his/her knee. The facility census was 63. Review of the facility's policy, Resident Examination and Assessment, revised February 2014, showed the following: -The purpose of this…
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.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2023-12-20 · 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 consistently evaluate, implement, and modify interventions, in accordance with current standards of practice and as necessary to reduce the risk of falls, for one resident (Resident #20), in a review of three sampled residents. The facility also failed to safely secure the resident (Resident #20) in the facility van during a transport from the hospital where the resident was evaluated for injuries from a fall. The resident slid out of his/her wheelchair and onto the floor of the facility van. The facility staff did not report, evaluate, or modify interventions to prevent further falls during transportation in the facility van. The resident sustained multiple bruises over his/her face and arms in addition to skin tears with reported pain from his/her falls. The facility census was 63. Review of the facility policy, Falls Clinical Protocol, last revised March 2018, showed the following: -The physician will help identify individuals 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 · Fcited before2026-03-18 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to store, prepare, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Staff failed to ensure food items were sealed, labeled, dated, and stored in sanitary conditions. Staff did not practice proper hand hygiene when handling residents' drinks. The ice machine did not contain an air gap at the drain or backflow prevention device to prevent potential backflow from the drain back into the ice machine. The facility census was 56.1. Review of the facility policy, Food Receiving and Storage, dated 2001, showed the following: -Non-refrigerated foods, disposable dishware and napkins are stored in a designated dry storage unit which is temperature and humidity control, free of insects rodents and kept clean; -Dry foods and goods are handled and stored in a manner that maintains the integrity of the packaging until they are ready to use; -All foods starting refrigerated or freezer are covered, labeled and dated (use by date). Review 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 · E2026-03-18 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — patternHonor the resident's right to manage his or her financial affairs.
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 implement policies and procedures to ensure resident trust accounts were not allowed to go into a negative balance for one resident (Resident #53) and failed to deposit residents' personal funds in excess of $50.00 into an interest-bearing account for two residents (Residents #15 and #2). The facility reported holding funds for nine residents. The facility census was 56. Review of the facility's undated policy, Accounting and Records of Resident Funds, showed the following:-The business office maintains a record of all financial transactions involving the resident's personal funds on deposit with the facility;-Individual accounting ledgers are maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles; -The policy did not address negative balance in the resident trust fund account. Review of the facility's undated Resident Trust Account for Personal Funds Agreement showed the following:-Resident may keep up to $50.00 in a petty cash fund at the facility in the Social Services Department;-Resident…
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 · E2026-03-18 · tag F0568 — patternProperly hold, secure, and manage each resident's personal money which is deposited with the nursing home.
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 maintain a system to ensure residents' money was managed in accordance with proper accounting principles when the facility did not reconcile the residents' petty cash each month. The facility also failed to reconcile the resident trust fund bank account monthly to ensure accurate accounting of funds. The facility census was 59. Review of the undated facility policy, Accounting and Records of Resident Funds, showed the following:-The business office maintains a record of all financial transactions involving the residents' personal funds on deposit with the facility;-Individual accounting ledgers are maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. 1. Review of the facility provided ledgers of residents who held money in the resident trust showed the following:-Nine residents held money in the resident trust fund account;-The list did not include Resident #15;-The list did not include Resident #2;-The list did not include Resident #3;-The list did not include Resident #12;-The list did…
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 · E2026-03-18 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain walls, flooring, resident sleeping rooms, resident restrooms, and shower and toilet rooms to be clean and good repair. The facility census was 56.Observations on 03/16/26 from 10:18 A.M. to 4:23 P.M. and on 03/17/26 from 10:13 A.M. to 3:24 P.M., during the Life Safety Code tour of the facility, showed the following: -In occupied resident room [ROOM NUMBER], ten wooden slats were missing from the closet door; -In occupied resident room [ROOM NUMBER], eight wooden slats were missing from the closet door. The edge of the room door was chipped and a 2-inch piece of plastic was missing from the door covering; -In the bathroom to occupied resident room [ROOM NUMBER], the floor was discolored yellow, and there was brown and black residue around the toilet which had areas of missing caulk; -In occupied resident room [ROOM NUMBER], there were two unfilled holes in the wall above the towel rack by the sink; -In unoccupied resident room [ROOM NUMBER], 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 · E2026-03-18 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to update care plans to reflect current care needs for six residents (Residents #1, #34, #22, #45, #6, and #42), in a review of 18 sampled residents. The facility census was 56. Review of the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual, dated October 2025, showed the following:-The RAI and Care Planning as required at 42 CFR 483.21(b), the comprehensive care plan is an interdisciplinary communication tool;-It must include measurable objectives and time frames and must describe the services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being;-The care plan must be reviewed and revised periodically, and the services provided or arranged must be consistent with each resident's written plan of care. 1. Review of Resident #1's care plan, dated 11/12/25, showed the following:-The resident had hemodialysis (process for removal of waste and excess water from the blood due to…
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 before2026-03-18 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — patternEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
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 one resident (Resident #26) in a review of 18 sampled and three additional residents (Resident #32, #12 and #8), received the prescribed insulin (a hormone used to treat diabetes by controlling blood sugar levels) dosage when staff failed to prime the insulin pen prior to administration per the manufacturer's guidelines. The facility census was 56. Review of the facility's policy, Insulin Pen, revised 08/15/25, showed the following:-Policy: It is the policy of this facility to use insulin pens in order to improve the accuracy of insulin dosing, provide increased resident comfort, and serve as a teaching aid to prepare residents for self-administration of insulin therapy upon discharge; -Procedure: -Attach pen needle: -Prime the insulin pen: Dial 2 units by turning the dose selector clockwise. With the needle pointing up, push the plunger, and watch to see that at least one drop of insulin appears on the tip of the needle. If not,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-03-18 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow current infection control standards for seven residents (Residents #3, #1, #6, #26, #42, #4 and #45), in a review of 18 sampled and three additional residents (Residents #8, #12, and #32). Staff failed to follow enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) by not wearing personal protective equipment (PPE) to prevent infection while providing personal care for Residents #4, #45, #42, #1 and #6, failed to clean a multi-resident use glucometer (machine used to measure blood glucose levels in the blood) and use a barrier during blood glucose finger sticks for Residents #3, #8, #12 and #26, failed to clean insulin pen hubs before attaching a needle for administration of the medication for Residents #12, #26, and #32, and failed to develop a Legionella water management team and conduct meetings to review the monitoring of the facility water system for Legionella. The facility census was 56. Review of the facility's policy for Enhanced Barrier…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-18 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, observation, and record review, the facility failed to notify the physician for one resident (Resident #4), in a review of 18 sampled residents, when the resident had a change in condition and abnormal lab results. The facility census was 56. Review of the facility's policy for lab and diagnostic test results, last revised November 2018, showed the following:-When test results are reported to the facility, a nurse will first review the results.-A nurse will identify the urgency of communicating with the attending physician based on physician request, the seriousness of any abnormality, and the individual's current condition.-The reason for getting a test often affects the urgency of acting upon the result;-Nursing staff will consider the following factors to help identify situations requiring prompt physician notification concerning lab or diagnostic test results: -Whether the physician has requested to be notified as soon as a result is received. -Whether the result should be conveyed to 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 · D2026-03-18 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
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 provide a copy of bed hold policy and written notice of transfer to the resident and/or the resident's representative when three residents (Residents #2, #4, and #56), in a review of 18 sampled residents, were transferred to the hospital. The facility census was 56. Review of the facility's Bed Hold Policy, last revised October 2022, showed the following:-All residents/representatives are provided written information regarding the facility and state bed-hold policies, which address holding or reserving a resident's bed during periods of absence (hospitalization or therapeutic leave). Residents, regardless of payer source, are provided written notice about these policies at least twice, notice well in advance of any transfer (e.g., in the admission packet) and at the time of transfer (or, if the transfer was an emergency, within 24 hours);-The written bed-hold notices provided to the residents/representatives explain in detail the duration of the state…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-18 · tag F0637 — isolatedAssess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
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 significant change in status assessment (SCSA) Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment instrument required to be completed by facility staff, for two residents (Residents #45 and #34), in a review of 18 sampled residents, within 14 days after the facility determined, or should have determined, there had been a significant change in the resident's physical or mental condition which had an impact on more than one area of the residents' health status and required interdisciplinary review and/or revision of the care plan. The facility census was 56. Review of the Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) User's Manual, version 3.0, showed a significant change is a decline or improvement in a resident's status that:-Will not normally resolve itself without intervention by staff or by implementing standard disease-related clinical interventions and is not self-limiting;-Impacts more than one area of 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.
Show the remaining 37 citations
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-12-23 · 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 sanitary practices in the kitchen and ensure all areas of the kitchen were clean. The census was 48. Review of the facility's Sanitation policy, revised November 2022, showed the following:-All kitchens, kitchen areas and dining areas are kept clean, free from garbage and debris, and protected from rodents and insects;-All utensils, counters, shelves and equipment are kept clean;-Service area wiping cloths are cleaned and dried or placed in a chemical sanitizing solution of appropriate concentration;-Kitchen wastes that are not disposed of by mechanical means are kept in clean, leakproof, nonabsorbent, tightly closed containers and disposed of daily. Review of the facility's Food Preparation and Service policy, revised November 2022, showed the following:-Cross-contamination can occur when harmful substances, i.e., chemical or disease-causing microorganisms are transferred to food by hands, food contact surfaces, sponges, cloth towels, or utensils that are not adequately cleaned;-Appropriate measures…
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 · D2025-06-30 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to protect one resident (Resident #1) from physical and verbal abuse. Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) A slapped the resident with an open hand and referred to the resident as a pedophile in the presence of the resident. The facility census was 48.On 06/30/25, the administrator was notified of the past noncompliance which occurred on 6/13/25. On 6/21/25, the administrator became aware of the staff to resident abuse allegation involving Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) A and Resident #1. Upon discovery, the facility suspended CNA A, conducted an investigation, and notified the appropriate parties. All facility staff were educated on the facility abuse policy related to physical and verbal abuse and on the expectations for monitoring for abuse and reporting abuse. The deficiency was corrected on 6/21/25. Review of the facility's abuse policy, last reviewed on 01/31/24, showed the following:-It was the facility's policy to provide protections for the health, welfare, and rights of each resident by developing and implementing…
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 before2024-11-26 · tag F0557 — patternHonor the resident's right to be treated with respect and dignity and to retain and use personal possessions.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Refer to Event ID M9W912 Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain resident dignity and self determination for four residents (Resident #1, #8, #2, and #7) when staff failed to provide grooming assistance to include basic haircuts. The facility census was 51.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-11-26 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Refer to Event ID M9W912 Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide three residents (Resident #7, #8 and #2 ), of nine sampled residents, with assistance with activities of daily living (ADL) when staff failed to check for incontinence. The facility failed to ensure Resident #7's hair was groomed and pulled back out of the resident's face during meals and throughout the day. The facility also failed to ensure Resident #2 received routine showers. The facility census was 51.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-11-26 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — patternProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Refer to Event ID M9W912 Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide sufficient nursing staff to meet residents' needs for five sampled residents (Resident #7, #8, #2, #6, and #1). The facility failed to have adequate staffing to check and provide incontinence care to residents in a timely manner, to provide routine showers to ensure good personal hygiene, to answer call lights in a timely manner and to assist residents out of bed for meals, and ensure all residents were served meals. The facility census was 51.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-10-04 · tag F0557 — patternHonor the resident's right to be treated with respect and dignity and to retain and use personal possessions.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to treat four residents (Resident #2 #1 #12 and #18) with dignity and respect, in a review of 18 sampled residents. Staff did not speak respectfully to residents and did not promptly respond to an incontinent resident when he/she required staff assistance. The facility census was 49. Review of the facility's policy titled Dignity, dated February 2021, showed the following: -Residents are treated with dignity and respect at all times; -Staff speak respectfully to residents at all times; -Demeaning practices and standards of care that compromise dignity are prohibited. Staff are expected to promote dignity and assist residents by promptly responding to a resident's request for toileting assistance; -Staff are expected to treat cognitively impaired residents with dignity and sensitivity; for example: a. Addressing the underlying motives or root causes for behavior; b. Not challenging or contradicting the resident's beliefs or statements. 1. Review 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 · Ecited before2024-10-04 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide 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 record review, the facility failed to provide four residents (Resident #2, #3, #16, and #8), of 18 sampled residents, with assistance with activities of daily living (ADL). Staff did not ensure Resident #2 had glasses to see when eating, left his/her hair wet after bathing, and did reposition or check for incontinence. Staff failed to check Residents #3, #16, and #8 for incontinence and reposition the residents timely. The facility census was 49. Review of the facility's Activities of Daily Living (ADL), Supporting policy, dated March 2018, showed the following: -Appropriate care and services will be provided for residents who are unable to carry out ADLs independently, with the consent of the resident and in accordance with the plan of care, including appropriate support and assistance with: -a. Hygiene (oral care); -b. Mobility (transfer); - c. Elimination (toileting). 1. Review of Resident #2's annual MDS, dated [DATE], showed the following: -The resident had severe…
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 before2024-10-04 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — patternProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
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 provide sufficient nursing staff to meet residents' needs for five sampled residents (Resident #7, #8, #2, #6, and #1). The facility failed to have adequate staffing to check and provide incontinence care to residents in a timely manner, to provide routine showers to ensure good personal hygiene, to answer call lights in a timely manner and to assist residents out of bed for meals, and ensure all residents were served meals. The facility census was 51. Review of the facility policy titled, Staffing, dated October 2017, showed the following: -Our facility provides sufficient numbers of staff with skill and competency necessary to provide care and services for all residents in accordance with the resident's care plan and the facility assessment; -Licensed nurses and certified nursing assistants are available 24 hours a day to provide direct resident care services; -Staffing numbers and the skill requirements of direct care staff 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 · E2024-10-04 · tag F0838 — failed to assess facility resources and resident needs — patternConduct and document a facility-wide assessment to determine what resources are necessary to care for residents competently during both day-to-day operations (including nights and weekends) and emergencies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to review and update the facility wide assessment to determine what resources were necessary to care for residents competently during their day to day operations and emergencies as required. The facility census was 51. Review of the facility policy titled, Facility Assessment, dated October 2018, showed the following: -A facility assessment is conducted annually to determine and update capacity to meet the needs of and competently care for our residents during day-to-day operations. Determining our capacity to meet the needs of and care for our residents during emergencies is included in this assessment; -The team responsible for conducting and reviewing and updating the facility-wide assessment includes the administrator, a representative of the governing body, the medical director, the director of nursing (DON), the infection preventionist and also the director from environmental services, physical operations, dietary services physical operations, dietary services, social services, activity services and rehabilitative…
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 before2024-10-04 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure proper signage on the entrance of the building, notifying visitors of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in the building and failed to post transmission based precaution signage outside of one COVID-19 positive room for (Resident #5) in nine sampled residents. The facility census was 51. Review of the facility policy titled, COVID-19 Prevention, Response and Reporting, dated 5/29/24, showed the following: -It is the policy of this facility to ensure that appropriate interventions are implemented to prevent the spread of COVID-19 and promptly respond to any suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infections; -The Infection Preventionist will assess facility risk associated with COVID-19 through surveillance activities of COVID-19 infection in the community and illness present in the facility; -Threat detected-the facility will respond promptly and implement emergency and/or outbreak procedures; -The facility will establish a process to identify…
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 before2024-02-16 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — widespreadEnsure 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
Based on observations, interviews, and facility document and policy review, the facility failed to follow the prepared menu for residents who received a regular, controlled carbohydrate, renal, or pureed diet from the facility kitchen. Specifically, the facility failed to serve the correct portion size for meat, dessert, pureed entree, pureed vegetables, and pureed beans during the evening meal on 02/13/2024. This deficiency had the potential to affect all residents who received meals from the facility. The facility census was 56. Findings included: A review of a facility policy titled Menu Diet Spreadsheets/Portion Serving Communication Tool, dated 2020, revealed, Diet spreadsheets or similar meal and portion serving communication tools are available to the serving staff for reference and serving guidance. The policy further indicated, Diet spreadsheets are based on the planned menu and reflect serving portions for regular and therapeutic diet orders offered in the community. In an interview on 02/12/2024 at 10:17 AM, Resident #15 stated there was not enough food served at dinner,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-02-16 · tag F0582 — patternGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, interviews, and facility document and policy review, the facility failed to provide written beneficiary notices at least two days before the end of covered services for 3 (Resident #44, #55, and #264) of 3 residents reviewed for beneficiary notifications. The Administrator identified 17 residents who were discharged from Medicare Part A services with benefit day remaining in the last six months. The facility census was 56. Findings included: A review of a facility policy titled, Advanced Beneficiary Notices, reviewed on 01/01/2024, revealed, It is the policy of this facility to provide timely notices regarding Medicare eligibility and coverage. The policy indicated, The current CMS [Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services]-approved version of the forms shall be used at the time of issuance to the beneficiary (resident or representative). Contents of the form shall comply with related instructions and regulations regarding the use of the form. a. For Part A items and services, the facility shall use the Skilled Nursing Facility Advance Beneficiary Notice…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-02-16 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — patternHonor 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
Based on interviews, and facility document and policy review, the facility failed to make efforts to resolve grievances for 2 (Resident #28 and Resident #45) of 2 residents reviewed for grievances and failed to ensure information on how to file a grievance was available to residents and staff. The facility census was 56. Findings included: A review of an undated facility policy titled Grievance revealed, Our facility will help resident [sic], their representatives, other interested family members, or resident advocates file grievances when such requests are made. The policy revealed, 3. Grievances may be submitted orally or in writing. 4. The administrator [sic] has delegated the responsibility of grievance investigations to the Social Service designee. The administrator [sic] will oversee the investigation process completed by the Social Service designee. A review of Resident Council Minutes for the timeframe from July 2023 through January 2024 revealed they discussed the steps to take if someone had something come up missing. There was no documented evidence the facility had…
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 before2024-02-16 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop 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
3. A review of Resident #27's admission Record revealed the facility readmitted the resident on 05/03/2022 with diagnoses that included dementia and psychotic disorder with delusions. A review of Resident #27's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/12/2024, revealed the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 8, which indicated the resident had moderate cognitive impairment. A review of Resident #27's comprehensive care plan revealed a Focus area, initiated on 09/19/2023, that indicated the resident required treatment for behavior management. Interventions dated 09/19/2023 directed staff to review behaviors/interventions and alternate therapies attempted and their effectiveness as per facility policy, and to monitor/record occurrence of for [sic] target behavior symptoms and document per facility protocol. The Focus area did not identify the resident's target behavior symptoms. An observation of Resident #27 on 02/13/2024 at 2:46 PM revealed the resident was in bed and knocking on the wall. 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.
- Potential for harm · E2024-02-16 · 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 observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure oxygen tubing and nasal cannulas were stored in accordance with the facility's policy when not in use for 3 (Residents #24, #44, and #19) of 5 sampled residents reviewed for respiratory care. The facility census was 56. Findings included: A review of a facility policy titled, Oxygen Administration reviewed on 01/01/2024, revealed, Oxygen is administered to residents who need it, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plans, and the resident's goals and preferences. The policy directed staff to e. Keep delivery devices covered in plastic bag when not in use. 1. A review of Resident #24's Face Sheet revealed the facility readmitted the resident on 03/27/2017. According to the Face Sheet, the resident had a diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). A review of an annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) 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 · Ecited before2024-02-16 · 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 observations, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to store refrigerated food items in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Specifically, the facility failed to discard milk after the use-by date and failed to label prepared sandwiches and salad with a date they were prepared or a use-by-date. This deficiency had the potential to affect all residents who received meals from the facility's kitchen. The facility census was 56. Findings included: Review of a facility policy titled, Food Storage (Dry, Refrigerated, and Frozen), with a copyright date of 2020, revealed Food shall be stored at appropriate temperatures and using appropriate methods to ensure the highest level of food safety. The policy specified, a. All food items will be labeled. The label must include the name of the food and the date by which it should be sold, consumed, or discarded. The policy further indicated, c. Discard food that has passed the expiration date, and discard food that has been prepared in the facility after seven days of storing under proper…
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 before2024-02-16 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor 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
Based on observation, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure dignity was provided during care for one (Resident #53) of five sampled residents reviewed for dignity when facility staff failed to cover the resident when direct care was not being provided. The facility census was 56. Findings included: A review of a facility policy titled Dignity, revised in February 2021, revealed, Each resident shall be cared for in a manner that promotes and enhances his or her sense of well-being, level of satisfaction with life, and feelings of self-worth and self-esteem. The policy revealed, 11. Staff promote, maintain and protect resident privacy, including bodily privacy during assistance with personal care and during treatment procedures. A review of a facility policy titled Catheter Care, Urinary, last reviewed by the facility on 01/01/2024, revealed that Steps in the Procedure included 12. Provide privacy. Cover the resident with a sheet, exposing only the perineal area. A review of Resident #53's admission Record revealed the facility admitted…
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 · D2024-02-16 · tag F0636 — isolatedAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, interviews, facility policy review, and review of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) 3.0 User's Manual, the facility failed to complete a comprehensive admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) in the required timeframe for 1 (Resident #165) of 21 sampled residents reviewed for MDS assessments. The facility census was 56. Findings included: A review of a facility policy titled MDS Completion and Submission Timeframes, revised in July 2017, revealed, Our facility will conduct and submit resident assessments in accordance with current federal and state submission timeframes. The policy revealed, The assessment coordinator or designee is responsible for ensuring that resident assessments are submitted to CMS' QIES [Quality Improvement and Evaluation System] Assessment Submission and Processing (ASAP) system in accordance with current federal and state guidelines. Further review revealed, Timeframes for completion and submission of assessments is based on the current requirements published in…
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 · D2024-02-16 · tag F0638 — isolatedAssure that each resident’s assessment is updated at least once every 3 months.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interviews, facility policy review, and review of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) 3.0 User's Manual, the facility failed to complete a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) in the required timeframe for 1 (Resident #1) of 21 sampled residents reviewed for MDS assessments. The facility census was 56. Findings included: A review of a facility policy titled MDS Completion and Submission Timeframes, revised in July 2017, revealed, Our facility will conduct and submit resident assessments in accordance with current federal and state submission timeframes. The policy revealed, The assessment coordinator or designee is responsible for ensuring that resident assessments are submitted to CMS' QIES [Quality Improvement and Evaluation System] Assessment Submission and Processing (ASAP) system in accordance with current federal and state guidelines. Further review revealed, Timeframes for completion and submission 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 · D2024-02-16 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to provide an accurate Minimum Data Set (MDS) to assess relevant care areas for 1 (Resident #40) of 21 sampled residents reviewed for MDS assessments. The facility census was 56. Findings included: A review of Resident #40's admission Record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 01/12/2024 with a diagnosis of functional dyspepsia (indigestion). A review of Resident #40's admission MDS with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/19/2024 revealed Resident #40 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. The MDS revealed the resident had diagnoses that included end-stage renal disease, type 2 diabetes mellitus, peripheral vascular disease, and cerebral infarction (stroke). The MDS did not indicate the resident received dialysis. A review of Resident #40's physician note dated 01/16/2024 indicated the reason for the physician's visit was for a routine adult history and physical. The note revealed under the section titled Plan, the physician documented…
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 before2024-02-16 · 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
Based on record review, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure interventions were developed and implemented in an effort to prevent falls for 1 (Resident #53) of 2 sampled residents reviewed for accidents related to falls. Specifically, Resident #53, who was identified by the facility as a high fall risk, did not have interventions to prevent potential falls initiated until 02/07/2024, after the resident had sustained multiple witnessed and unwitnessed falls. The facility census was 56. Findings included: A review of a facility policy titled Falls - Clinical Protocol, revised in March 2018, revealed, 3. The staff and practitioner will review each resident's risk factors for falling and document in the medical record. The section of the policy titled, Treatment/Management specified, 1. Based on the preceding assessment, the staff and physician will identify pertinent interventions to try to prevent subsequent falls and to address the risks of clinically significant consequences of falling and 2. If underlying causes cannot be readily identified or…
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 before2024-02-16 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, interviews, and facility document and policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff implemented proper hand hygiene practices while providing care to 1 (Resident #19) of 5 sampled residents reviewed for activities of daily living. Specifically, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #21 did not wash her hands and change gloves after the provision of incontinence care prior to leaving the resident's room to retrieve supplies or prior to touching items in the resident's room, including the resident's oxygen nasal cannula and a mechanical lift. In addition, CNA #21 touched a soiled bed pad with her bare hands, and without washing her hands, went through the resident's dresser drawers. The facility census was 56. Findings included: A review of a facility policy titled, Handwashing/Hand Hygiene, revised in August 2019, revealed, 7. Use an alcohol-based hand rub containing at least 62% alcohol; or, alternatively, soap (antimicrobial or non-antimicrobial) and water for the following situations, b. Before and after direct contact with residents and h.…
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 before2023-10-04 · 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, interview and record review, the facility failed to treat four residents (Resident #3, #4, #5 and #6) in a review of six sampled residents, in a manner that promoted and/or enhanced the resident's quality of life by recognizing the resident's individuality, dignity and preferences. The facility failed to protect and promote Resident #4 and #6's wishes to wear pants or incontinence briefs while in bed. Resident #3 and #5 had cognitive impairment and were exposed to any passersby in the hall when their linens were pulled down exposing Resident #3's lower body and Resident #5's perineal area. The facility census was 58. Review of the facility policy titled Dignity, revised February 2021, showed the following: -Each resident shall be cared for in a manner that promotes and enhances his or her sense of well-being, level of satisfaction with life and feelings of self-worth and self-esteem; -Residents are treated with dignity and respect at all times; -The facility culture supports dignity 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 · Fcited before2020-03-03 · 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 and interview, the facility failed to ensure food items were discarded when expired; failed to ensure the ovens were free of a buildup of debris; failed to ensure staff did not touch food with contaminated gloved hands; and failed to air dry serving trays and plate covers prior to meal service. The facility's certified census was 68. 1. Observations on 02/24/20 between 9:52 A.M. and 1:30 P.M., showed the following: -In refrigerator #1 (closest to the service hall entrance from the kitchen), a 1/3 gallon of whole milk with an expiration date of 01/21/20 and one unopened quart container of liquid egg whites with an expiration date of 01/19/20; -In refrigerator #2, two unsealed bags of shredded cheese, a bag of white shredded cheese with a green, mold-like substance dated 1/20, two containers of sour cream with an expiration date of 1/9/20, and a container of sour cream with an expiration date of 2/16/20; -In upright freezer #1 (located in the service entrance hallway), a buildup of food debris and ice on the bottom and a sticky substance on the door and shelves;…
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 · E2020-03-03 · tag F0623 — patternProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify three residents (Resident #56, #53, and #57) and one closed record resident (Resident #69), in a review six residents transferred to the hospital of 18 sampled residents, or their responsible party in writing of transfer to the hospital, including the reason for transfer or discharge, the effective date of transfer or discharge, the resident's appeal rights, contact information for the Ombudsman, and required advocacy groups. The facility also failed to notify the ombudsman of transfer/discharges to the hospital. The facility's certified census was 68. Review of the facility policy Transfer or Discharge Documentation, revised December 2016, showed the following: -Each resident will be permitted to remain in the facility, and not be transferred or discharged unless the transfer or discharge is necessary for the resident's welfare and the resident's needs cannot be met in this facility; -When a resident is transferred or discharged from the facility, the following information will be documented in the medical record:…
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 · E2020-03-03 · tag F0655 — patternCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to develop and implement a baseline care plan to address specific conditions, needs and risks to provide effective person centered care that met professional standards of quality of care within 48 hours of admission to the facility for four residents (Resident #43, #56, #57, and #64) in a sample of five newly admitted residents in a total sample of 18 residents. The facility failed to provide a copy of the baseline care plan to the resident or resident representative within 48 hours. The facility's certified census was 68. Review of the facility policy, Care Plans - Baseline, revised December 2016, showed the following: -Policy statement: A baseline plan of care to meet the resident's immediate needs shall be developed for each resident within 48 hours of admission; -The interdisciplinary team will review the healthcare practitioner's orders and implement a baseline care plan to meet the resident's immediate care needs including but not limited to: initial…
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 before2020-03-03 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive, person-centered care plan for seven residents (Resident #42, #43, #44, #51, #55, #56, and #64) in a sample of 18 residents in conjunction with the residents' comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment completed by facility staff. The facility's certified census was 68. Review of the facility policy, Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered, revised 12/2016, showed the following: -Policy statement: A comprehensive, person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs is developed and implemented for each resident; -The Interdisciplinary Team (IDT), in conjunction with the resident and his/her family or legal representative, develops and implements a comprehensive, person-centered care plan for each resident; -The care planning process will: -Facilitate resident and/or representative involvement;…
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 before2020-03-03 · 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
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility staff failed to follow physicians orders for one resident (Resident #56) for an abductor pillow (a device to be used to avoid dislocation of the resident's hip fracture that required surgery) in a sample of 18 residents. The facility also failed to follow physician orders for tube feeding administration for one resident (Resident #49) in review of 18 sampled residents. The facility's certified census was 68. The facility did not have a policy particular to following physician orders. 1. Review of Resident #56's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment, dated 2/14/20, showed the following: -admission date to the facility 9/21/19; -Diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease; -Severe cognitive impairment; -Inattention and disorganized thinking continuously; -Requires extensive assistance of two staff with bed mobility; -Dependent on staff for transfers; -Limited range of motion in one lower extremity. Review of the resident's Nurses Notes, dated January 2020, showed the following: -Fall 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 · E2020-03-03 · tag F0700 — patternTry 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 record review facility staff failed to assess residents for risk of entrapment, document attempted alternatives prior to installing a bed rail, or follow the manufacturer's recommendations and specifications for installing and maintaining bed rails for 17 residents with side rails (Residents #7, #8, #33, #36, #42, #43, #44, #47, #49, #51, #52, #53, #55, #56, #57, #64, and #270), in a review of 18 sampled residents. The facility identified 40 residents in the facility had bed rails. The facility's certified census was 68. Review of the facility's policy Proper Use of Bed Rails, dated December 2007, showed the following: -To prevent resident injury and serve as an enabler for the resident; -The bed rails are considered a restraint when they are used to limit the resident's freedom of movement; -An assessment must be made to determine the resident's symptoms or reason for using bed rails; -Informed consent for the use of less restricted devices will be obtained from the resident…
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 · E2020-03-03 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — patternHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure a registered nurse (RN) worked for a minimum of 35 hours as the director of nursing (DON). The facility's certified census was 68. Review of the facility's policy Director of Nursing Services, dated August 2006, showed the following: -The nursing services department is under the direct supervision of a RN. -The RN is licensed by this state, and has experience in nursing service administration, rehabilitative and geriatric nursing; -The Director of Nurses (DON) is employed full-time (40-hours per week). 1. Review of the facility's Payroll detail, dated 1/1/20-2/15/20, for the DON showed the following: -Week of 1/5/20-1/11/20: -32 hours as DON; -6.53 hours as a charge nurse; -Week of 1/12/30-1/18/20: -31.3 hours as DON; -21.72 hours as a charge nurse; -Week of 1/19/20-1/25/20: -32 hours as DON; -34.73 hours as a charge nurse; -Week of 1/26/20-2/1/20: -30.48 hours as DON; -12.47 hours as a charge nurse; -Week of 2/2/20-2/8/20: -30.28 hours as a DON; -25.7 hours as a charge nurse; -Week of 2/9/20-2/15/20: -37.17 hours as…
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 · E2020-03-03 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — patternImplement 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 record review the facility failed to ensure four residents (Residents #31, #52, #56, and #57) in a review of 18 sampled residents, with orders for as needed (PRN) psychotropic medications were limited to 14 days except if an attending or prescribing physician believed that it was appropriate for the PRN order to be extended beyond 14 days, then the physician should document their rationale in the resident's medical record and indicate the duration for the PRN order. The facility also failed to ensure residents had an appropriate diagnosis for use of antipsychotic medication and hypnotic medication for one resident (Resident #56). The facility's certified census was 68. 1. Review of Resident #31's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by facility staff, dated 12/24/19, showed the following: -Moderately impaired cognition; -Diagnosis of anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, and dementia; -Minimal depression; -No behavior issues or…
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 before2020-03-03 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — patternEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, facility staff failed to ensure three residents (Resident #38, #57 and #270) in a review of 18 sampled residents, were free from significant medication errors. Staff failed to prime (remove the air) from the insulin pen (prefilled pen of insulin injected under the skin used to treat diabetes dose dialed on the pen and injected through a new sterile needle attached to the pen prior to each administration), needle as instructed by the manufacturer prior to administration of the physician prescribed dose resulting in administration of less than the ordered dose of insulin. The facility's certified census was 68. 1. During an interview on 3/3/20, at 10:31 A.M., the director of nursing (DON) said the facility did not have a policy for insulin pen administration. 2. Review of the manufacturer's recommendations for the Kwikpen, dated September 2018, showed staff are directed to: -Pull off the pen cap; -Wipe the rubber stopper with an alcohol swab, screw on the needle; -Turn the dose selector to select two units; -Hold the insulin pen with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2020-03-03 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based observation, interview and record review the facility failed to remove and destroy outdated medications for one resident (Resident #49) in a review of 18 sampled residents and one additional resident (Resident #65), properly label one insulin pen with a resident name and open date and failed to label seven over the counter medication bottles with open dates. The facility's certified census was 68. Review of the facility policy Administering Medications, revised December 2012, showed the following: -The expiration/beyond use date on the medication label must be checked prior to administering; -When opening a multi-dose container, the date opened shall be recorded on the container; -Insulin pens containing multiple doses of insulin are for single-resident use only; -Insulin pens will be clearly labeled with the resident's name or other identifying information. 1. Observation on 2/28/20 at 5:30 P.M. of the Hummingbird Way medication room showed an expired card of Ondansetron (anti-nausea medication) 4 milligrams (mg), 30 tabs labeled with Resident #49's name and expired 1/20/20 .…
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 before2020-03-03 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — patternEnsure 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow the menu for residents on a mechanical soft diet by not serving the correct amount of mechanical meat as directed by the spreadsheet menu. The facility identified six residents with diet orders for a mechanical soft diet. The facility's certified census was 68. Review of the diet spreadsheet, dated 02/24/20, showed residents on a mechanical soft diet were to receive a #8 scoop of ground deviled pork loin at the noon meal. Observation on 02/24/20 at 12:35 P.M. showed Dietary Aide F served the lunch meal. He/She did not fill the #8 scoop completely when serving the ground pork loin to all residents on a mechanical soft diet. The #8 scoop was approximately half full. During interview on 02/24/20 at 1:27 P.M., Dietary Aide F said he/she did not know why he/she did not serve a full scoop of the ground pork loin. He/She was aware he/she should serve a full scoop to the residents. During interview on 02/24/20 at 2:48 P.M., the dietary manager said she expected staff to serve the proper amount of food at meal…
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 · E2020-03-03 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — patternImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review facility failed to follow their antibiotic stewardship policy and consistently track infections and antibiotic use for four residents (Resident #51, #33, #49, and #55) in a review of 18 sampled residents. The facility's certified census was 68. Review of the facility's policy Antibiotic Stewardship, revised November 2016, showed the following: -Antibiotics will be prescribed and administered to residents under the guidance of the facility's Antibiotic Stewardship Program; -Purpose is to monitor the use of antibiotics for the residents; -If an antibiotic is indicated, prescribers will provide complete antibiotic orders including the following elements: a. Drug name; b. Dose; c. Frequency of administration; d. Duration of treatment (start/stop date, or number of days of therapy); e. Route of administration and; f. Indications for use. Review of the facility's policy Antibiotic Stewardship-Review and Surveillance of Antibiotic Use and Outcomes, revised December 2016, showed the following: -Antibiotic usage and outcome data will be collected 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 · E2020-03-03 · tag F0909 — failed to maintain a comfortable temperature — patternRegularly 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to complete an inspection of bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails as part of a regular maintenance program to identify areas of possible entrapment for eight residents (Residents #56, #42, #43, #44, #47, #8, #64, and #55), of 18 sampled residents. The facility's certified census was 68. Review of the facility's policy Bed Safety, dated December 2007, showed the following: -Facility shall provide a safe sleeping environment for the resident; -To try to prevent deaths/injuries from the beds and related equipment (including the frame, mattress, side rails, headboard, footboard, and bed accessories), the facility shall promote the following approaches; a. Inspection by maintenance staff of all beds and related equipment as part of our regular bed safety program to identify risks and problems including potential entrapment risks; b. Review that gaps within the bed system components are worn and need to be replaced, and components meet manufacturer specifications; c. Ensure that when bed system components are worn…
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 · D2020-03-03 · 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 provide effective call light accommodations for two residents (Resident #33 and Resident #51) in a sample of 18 residents. The facility's certified census was 68. Review of the facility's Answering the Call Light policy, revised October 2010, showed the following: -The purpose of this procedure is to respond to the resident's requests and needs; -General Guidelines: -Explain the call light to the new resident; -Demonstrate the use of the call light; -Ask the resident to return the demonstration so that you will be sure that the resident can operate the system; -Explain to the resident that a call system is also located in his/her bathroom. Demonstrate how it works; -Be sure that the call light is plugged in at all times; -When the resident is in bed or confined to a chair be sure the call light is within easy reach of the resident. 1. Review of Resident #33's annual MDS, dated [DATE], showed the following: -Diagnoses included anxiety,…
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
$250,823 in federal fines across 2 penalties. 2 Medicare payment denials on record.
- $204,432 — penalty dated 2024-10-04
- $46,391 — penalty dated 2023-12-20
- Medicare payment denial — starting 2024-12-28 for 11 days
- Medicare payment denial — starting 2024-02-24 for 48 days
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.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to JUCKETTE FAMILY HOMES — 6 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 1 of 5 | 2.0 | -1.0 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 2.2 | -1.2 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 2.3 | -1.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 1 of 5 | 2.0 | -1.0 vs chain |
The other 5 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.0★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JUCKETTE, JOYCE E | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | 83% | since 01/01/1999 |
| MILLER, MARGARET | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 18% | since 06/10/2005 |
| KIRKSVILLE MANOR INC | Organization | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/22/1972 |
| JUCKETTE, HOLLY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/03/2015 |
| NEUROTH, TERI | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/03/2015 |
| STEELE, LISA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/03/2015 |
| STEELE, RANDALL | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2009 |
| CURANA HEALTH OF MISSOURI-KANSAS LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2023 |
| JUCKETTE MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/14/2025 |
| BIESENTHAL, NICHOLE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/26/2024 |
| ESLINGER, CORY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2024 |
| HUDLEMEYER, TERESA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2021 |
| JONES, MICHAEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2025 |
| MANSOUR, KRISTIANNA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/26/2020 |
| PLOWMAN, AUDREY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/24/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 39 rows in the source record cover these 15 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
3 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $309K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. 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, FY2024). 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 MO
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 Missouri 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 265247. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-18, 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.