Northern Montana Care Center

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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.

48.4% 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 73 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.06 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 3% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 14% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 135 beds and averages 75.1 residents a day — about 56% occupied, or roughly 60 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 4.31 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.05 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.64 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 3.85 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.49 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.18 to 0.74 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 48% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

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

• Potential for harm · E2025-06-30 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — pattern
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1 (#57) of 30 sampled residents were safe from wandering the facility and into 4 other residents' rooms (#s 7, 31, 41, and 64). This deficient practice increased the risk of negative interactions between the residents related to safety and infection control concerns. Findings include: During an interview on 6/28/25 at 3:38 p.m., resident #64 stated resident #57 was often confused and would wander into his room, sometimes at night. Resident #64 stated he did have a history of PTSD, and resident #57 walking into his room made him feel uncomfortable. Resident #64 stated resident #57 would sometimes steal things from his room. Resident #64 stated he was told by staff to put his items away when he left his room to prevent resident #57 from taking any of his items. During an observation on 6/29/25 at 3:21 p.m., resident #57 was in her wheelchair, and she wheeled into resident #7's room when the resident was sleeping. Resident #57 watched resident #7 for approximately 30 seconds, then exited the room. During…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-30 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolated
  Ensure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure there was a physician order and consent signed on in the EHR for a physical restraint, which was a seatbelt used for a resident who used a motorized wheelchair to assist with preventing falls, for 1 (#50) of 30 sampled residents. Findings include: During an observation on 6/28/25 at 5:26 p.m., resident #50 had a seatbelt on while he was sitting in his motorized wheelchair. Review of resident #50's EHR showed no consent or physician order was present for the seatbelt, which restrained the resident, in his motorized wheelchair. Review of resident #50's EHR showed a physician's note, dated 9/6/24, which showed the following diagnoses: bipolar I disorder, intellectual disability, developmental delay, PTSD, hypertension, insomnia, prediabetes, traumatic brain injury, history of institutionalization, aggressive behavior, difficulty with speech, on a combination of antipsychotic drug therapy, and a history of a sacral pressure ulcer. During an interview on 6/30/25 at 8:52 a.m., staff member E stated they were…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-30 · tag F0645 — isolated
  PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a PASARR was completed for 1 (#64) of 30 sampled residents. This deficient practice increased the risk of the resident not being assessed or receiving necessary services related to the resident's mental health diagnosis or PTSD. Findings include: During an interview on 6/28/25 at 3:38 p.m., resident #64 stated he had PTSD from the war. Review of resident #64's EHR showed a diagnosis of PTSD. A request was made on 6/29/25 at 11:57 a.m., for resident #64's Level I and Level II PASARR. During an interview on 6/29/25 at 2:03 p.m., staff member C stated the facility did not have a PASARR for resident #64. Staff member C and staff member A stated they worked with [Entity Name] who filed most of their paperwork, and resident #64's PASARR must have gotten lost in the transfer to [Entity Name].

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-30 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to update individualized resident care plans regarding behaviors and previous trauma, for 2 (#s 61 and 64) of 30 sampled residents. This deficient practice increased the risk for #61 and #64 not having preferences met or known, and a resident's exhibited behaviors continuing without interventions being implemented. Findings include: During an interview on 6/29/25 at 3:49 p.m., staff member F stated resident #61 and resident #64 would have some outbursts or display behaviors at times. Staff member F stated the facility had behavior charting when those events occurred. a. Review of resident #61's EHR showed a nursing note, dated 6/28/25, which showed, Resident was in dining room for breakfast when another resident yelled out then she (resident #61) proceeded to yell at that resident to Shut up and cursing at that resident. then resident was cursing at staff and came out and told this nurse im gonna knock [name] on her ass one day. and continued fussing and…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-08-01 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, staff member G failed to adhere to proper infection control practices related to performing hand hygiene prior to donning gloves and after doffing gloves for 3 (#s 13, 37, and 179) of 5 sampled residents observed for medication administration. Findings include: During an observation on 7/31/24 at 7:28 a.m., staff member G sanitized her hands and donned gloves to administer eye drops to resident #37. Staff member G administered the eye drops to resident #37, then doffed her gloves. Staff member G did not perform hand sanitization after she doffed her gloves or before she donned a new pair of gloves to perform blood glucose monitoring for resident #37. During an observation on 7/31/24 at 7:32 a.m., staff member G administered resident #179's morning medication. Staff member G prepared blood glucose monitoring supplies for resident #179, then donned gloves. Staff member G did not perform hand sanitization prior to donning the gloves. During an observation on 7/31/24 at 7:44 a.m., staff member G gathered supplies to perform blood…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-03-26 · tag F0557 — isolated
  Honor 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

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure dignity and respect were honored for privacy of medical information, for 1 (#1) of 6 sampled residents. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents who were provided incontinence care by facility staff. Findings include: During an interview on 3/23/24 at 11:27 a.m., NF1 stated she had received a call from NF2 with allegations of abuse and neglect. NF1 stated NF2 was upset because resident #1 had her pubic area shaved while she was provided incontinent care by staff members. During an interview on 3/25/24 at 11:50 a.m., NF2 stated resident #1 had dementia and had very poor short and long-term memory loss. NF2 stated she was made aware of the incident, of the resident being shaved, by staff on 3/8/24 when she had come to the facility to visit resident #1. NF2 stated she had asked nursing staff about bruising that was noted to resident #1's arm. NF2 stated she was told the bruising was from a lab draw that morning. NF2 stated, That is when I found out that resident #1 had her pubic…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2023-08-02 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — widespread
  Ensure 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 on observation, interview, and record review, the facility staff failed to remove expired items for disposal for two out of four medication rooms. Findings include: During an observation on 8/2/23 at 8:47 a.m., the following were found in medication room number one: - 1 green tip culture swab with an expiration date of 10/31/21, - 1 red tip culture swab with an expiration date of 12/31/22, - 1 blue tip culture swab with an expiration date of 3/22/23, - 3, 30 gauge, half inch syringes with an expiration date of 5/28/22, -Cavilon barrier film with an expiration date of 07/22, and -1 vial of open PPD solution, with no open or discard date. During an interview on 8/2/23 at 8:50 a.m., staff member E stated the medication aides go through the medication rooms and get rid of the expired medications and supplies. Staff member E stated she was unsure how often the medication room should have been gone through, but thought it was done weekly, on Sundays. During an interview on 8/2/23 at 8:59 a.m., staff member C stated, Medication carts and medication rooms are to be checked monthly 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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-08-02 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolated
  Develop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
  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 pneumococcal vaccine declinations and education were provided and signed for 2 (#s 12 and 46) of 5 sampled residents. Findings include: Review of resident #12's EMR showed the resident had not received the PCV15 or PCV20 pnuemococcal vaccines, which she was due for. There were no declinations or education for the vaccine documented in the resident's chart. Review of resident #46's EMR showed the resident did not have documentation of receiving a pneumococcal vaccine. There were no declinations or education for the vaccine in the resident's chart. During an interview on 8/2/23 at 2:04 p.m., staff members A and C stated they did not have the pneumococcal vaccine declination for resident #12, and would keep looking. Staff members A and C stated the pneumococcal vaccine was not offered yearly to resident's who declined previously. Staff member C stated vaccines were reviewed upon admit, and consents and declinations for vaccines should have been signed then. During an interview on 8/2/23 at 3:39 p.m., staff member C…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 23 rows in the source record cover these 15 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

What families pay in MT