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

Rock County Hospital Long Term Care

100 East South Street, Bassett, NE 68714 · Government - County · 30 certified beds · (402) 684-2991 Medicaid only — no Medicare

Call the home — (402) 684-2991 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0609) — cited Aug 2024Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0758)1 actual-harm citation1 Medicare payment denial
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation
  • its payroll-based staffing score sits well above its independent inspection score

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.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 5 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's staffing rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the staffing score rests on the facility's own payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
300 N 2nd St · (402) 336-2900 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
103 W US Highway 20 · (402) 684-2730 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
105 W Legnard St · (402) 684-3781 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
513 Fort St

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-12 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating2★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased24.4%19.0%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight7.3%5.1%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.7%1.4%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection8.8%2.8%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%4.3%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.3%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury1.5%4.5%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened16.6%18.2%16.1%typical
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication7.3%19.3%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%96.1%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers0.8%4.0%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control14.5%25.9%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table0.0%20.7%17.1%check this — see note marked star below the table

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

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.

0.05U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.02hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.03hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.05 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 2% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 2% 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNFnot reported — This nursing home is not required to submit data for the Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNFnot reported — This nursing home is not required to submit data for the Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at dischargenot reported — This nursing home is not required to submit data for the Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program.
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at dischargenot reported — This nursing home is not required to submit data for the Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program.
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at dischargenot reported — This nursing home is not required to submit data for the Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program.
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identifiednot reported — This nursing home is not required to submit data for the Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program.
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — This nursing home is not required to submit data for the Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — This nursing home is not required to submit data for the Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF staynot reported — This nursing home is not required to submit data for the Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program.
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsenednot reported — This nursing home is not required to submit data for the Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program.
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalizationnot reported — This nursing home is not required to submit data for the Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFsnot reported — This nursing home is not required to submit data for the Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program.

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

1.12
RN hours/ resident / day
0.62
LPN hours/ resident / day
4.41
Aide hours/ resident / day
6.14
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.80
RN hoursweekends
Total nursing turnover
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 30 beds and averages 16.7 residents a day — about 56% occupied, or roughly 13 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 6.14 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.12 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 4.41 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 5.36 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 6.45 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.24 to 0.80 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

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

4
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-09-11)
8
at the previous standard inspection (2024-08-20)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

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

  • Actual harm · G2024-08-20 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09(H)(iii)(1) Based on observation, interview, and record review; the facility failed to implement measures to prevent the development of pressure ulcers (injury to skin and underlying tissue caused by prolonged pressure to skin) for Resident 10 prior to the development of pressure ulcers. The sample size was 3 and the facility census was 27. Findings are: Review of the facility policy Pressure Injury Prevention and Management with a review date of 7/2023 revealed the following: -The facility was committed to the prevention of avoidable pressure injuries and the promotion of healing of existing pressure ulcers. -A Pressure Ulcer/Injury referred to localized damage to skin and/or underlying soft tissue usually over a bony prominence or related to a medical or other device. -Avoidable meant the resident developed a pressure ulcer/injury and the facility did not do one or more of the following: evaluate the resident's clinical condition and risk factors, define, and implement interventions that were consistent with the residents needs, 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-06-08 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY LICENSURE REFERENCE NUMBER 175 NAC 12-006.09(l) Based on observations, record review, and interview; the facility failed to identify causal factors for the development and/or revision of fall prevention interventions and to implement fall interventions for 4 (Residents 1, 2, 3, and 4) of 4 sampled residents. The facility census was 20. Findings are: A. Review of the Fall Prevention and Treatment Long Term Care policy dated 6/25revealed the purpose of the policy was to prevent any unintended falls. Each resident was assessed for fall risk and was to receive care and services in accordance with their individualized level of risk to minimize the likelihood of falls. Each resident was to be screened at admission, quarterly and with any significant change of status. The following procedure was identified:-upon admission, the nurse will complete the Morse Fall assessment along with the nurse assessment to determine the resident's level of fall risk. -the nurse would indicate on the resident's care plan what 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has plan of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2025-09-11 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure 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

    Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.11(E)Based on observation, record review and interview; the facility failed to handle food in a manner that prevented potential food borne illness. This had the potential to affect all facility residents. The census was 18. Findings are: Review of the facility policy Proper use of Gloves with a revision date of 7/2013 revealed the purpose was to prevent disease and food borne illness. This included the following procedures: -Washing hands before gloving and when changing to a new pair of gloves. -Putting on new gloves before handling ready-to-eat foods such as sandwiches, and when handling fresh produce.-Prolonged use of a single pair of gloves could result in excess perspiration, which could be ideal for bacterial growth.-Disposable gloves were for one-time use.During observation of food service occurring from the portable steam table in the dining room on 9/9/25 from 11:55 AM through 12:15 PM the following was observed. -Dietary Aid B washed hands, put on gloves, took a food order from a resident while touching the back of the resident's…

    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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-09-11 · tag F0644 — isolated
    Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as 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 Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09A Based on record review and interview; the facility failed to ensure a new Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) screen was completed related to a mental health diagnosis for Resident 3. The sample size was 1 and the facility census was 18. Findings are:Review of the facility policy Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review and admission dated 10/2024 revealed the following:-the review process was designed to identify individuals with Serious Mental Illness (SMI), Intellectual or Developmental Disabilities (IDD), or both, and to ensure they received the necessary specialized services and appropriate placement in accordance with federal and state guidelines,-the facility established a standard process that facilitated comprehensive screening, assessment, and decision-making to determine the eligibility and appropriate level of care for individuals seeking admission to a nursing home,-the discharging hospital or nursing home conducted an 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-09-11 · tag F0699 — isolated
    Provide care or services that was trauma informed and/or culturally competent.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09 Based on interview and record review; the facility failed to ensure Resident 3 received trauma informed care related to a diagnosis of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and to identify triggers and implement approaches to mitigate potential triggers. The sample size was 1 and the facility census was 18. Findings are:Review of the facility policy Trauma Informed Care dated 4/2025 revealed the following:-it was the policy of the facility to ensure residents who were trauma survivors received culturally competent, trauma informed care in accordance with professional standards of practice,-trauma was defined as an event or series of events or set of circumstances experienced by an individual as physically or emotionally harmful or life-threatening, that had lasting adverse effects on the individual's functioning and mental, physical, social, emotional or spiritual well-being,-trauma informed care was defined as organizational structure and treatment framework that…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-11 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.18 Based on record review and interview; the facility failed to implement infection control practices to prevent the potential spread of Covid-19 infection related to testing a symptomatic resident (Resident 4) for COVID-19. The sample size was 2 and the census was 18. Findings are: A. Review of the facility Infectious Patient, Communicable Disease, Pandemic Plan with a revised date of 1/2025 revealed the purpose of the policy was to include plans and actions to respond to the threat of Covid-19 and to prevent transmission. Staff and residents were to be tested for Covid-19 if onset of symptoms develop. B. Review of Resident 4's Nursing Progress Notes revealed the following:-5/21/25 at 7:52 PM the resident had a runny nose and a cough at times. There was no evidence the resident was tested for COVID-19. -5/22/25 at 4:57 AM the resident reported feels like crud with a temperature of 99.1 degrees Fahrenheit. -5/22/25 at 7:04 PM the Director of Nursing (DON) was called, 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-08-20 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09(I)(i)(3)(4) Based on record review and interview; the facility failed to put interventions in place and/or revise interventions to prevent ongoing falls for Residents 8 and 24. The sample size was 4 and the facility census was 25. Findings are: A. Review of the facility policy Fall Prevention and Treatment last approved 1/2024 revealed the following: -upon admission a fall assessment would be completed to determine the resident's level of fall risk, -the nurse would indicate in the resident's care plan what the fall risk was then implement interventions in accordance with the fall risk level, -if the resident was at a high risk for falls, they would be placed on the facilities fall prevention program and additional interventions would be provided as directed by the resident assessment, and -when a resident experienced a fall the facility would assess the resident, notify the physician, family, and Director of Nursing (DON), review the resident's care plan and update…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-08-20 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — pattern
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.12(A)(vi) Based on record review and interview; the facility Pharmacist failed to identify medication irregularities related to a diagnosis for an antipsychotic medication for Resident 15, failed to ensure Resident 22's antibiotic medication had a clinical rationale to support ongoing daily use, failed to ensure a gradual dose reduction was attempted or there was a clinical rationale for continued use of Resident 11's antidepressant medication, and failed to ensure Resident's 8, 24, and 25's as needed antipsychotic medication orders did not exceed 14 days without a providers reassessment of the resident's conditions. The sample size was 7 and the facility census was 27. Findings are: A. Review of the facility policy Use of Psychotropic Drugs with a review date of 8/2023 revealed the following: -Resident were not given psychotropic (mind altering substance that changes brain function and can alter perception) drugs unless the medication was necessary to treat a specific…

    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 · E2024-08-20 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — pattern
    Ensure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Licensure Reference Number 12-006.09(H) Based on record review and interview; the facility failed to ensure antibiotic medication orders for Resident 22 had the required duration of use or a documented rationale for continued daily use in accordance with facility policies and clinical standards. The sample size was 7 and the facility census was 27. Findings are: Review of the facility policy Antibiotic Stewardship-LTC with a revision date of 11/2018 revealed the following: -The facility followed an antibiotic stewardship policy -The purpose of the program was to reduce inappropriate use of antibiotics, improve resident outcomes and lessen adverse events. -The facility tracked antibiotic use daily. -The facility communicated with physician with the use of a quarterly report card. Review of the facility policy Antibiotic Stewardship with a revision date of 3/2024 revealed the following: -The facility had a coordinated program that promoted the appropriate use of antimicrobial agents, improved outcomes, minimized adverse effects, reduced antimicrobial resistance, and decreased 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-08-20 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — pattern
    Implement 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 Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09(H) Based on interview and record review; the facility failed to have a diagnosis for the use of an antipsychotic (medication typically used to manage psychotic disorders) medication for Resident 15, failed to attempt a gradual dose reduction or have a documented contraindication for reducing an antidepressant (medication typically used to treat depression) medication for Resident 11, and failed to ensure PRN (as needed) antipsychotic medications orders were limited to 14 days for Residents 8, 24, and 25. The sample size was 7 and the facility census was 27. A. Review of the facility policy Use of Psychotropic Drugs with a review date of 8/2023 revealed the following: -Residents were not given psychotropic (mind altering substance that changes brain function and can alter perception) drugs unless the medication was necessary to treat a specific condition, as diagnosed and documented in the clinical record, and the medication was beneficial to the resident, 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-20 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.02(H) Based on record review and interview; the facility failed to submit a completed investigation report to the State Agency for a fall for Resident 8. The sample size was 3 and the facility census was 25. Findings are: Review of the facility policy Abuse Neglect and Exploitation last approved 9/23 revealed the following: -when suspicion of abuse, neglect or exploitation, or reports of abuse, neglect or exploitation occurred, an investigation would immediately be warranted, -when abuse, neglect, or exploitation was suspected the nurse would respond to the resident needs and protect them from further incidents; notify the Director of Nursing (DON) and the Administrator; initiate an investigation immediately; notify the physician, the resident's representative and contact the State Agency to report the alleged abuse, -in response to alleged allegations the facility must ensure all alleged violations were reported immediately to the Abuse and Neglect Hotline no later than 2 hours after the allegation was made or no later than 24 hours if 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-20 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop 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

    Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09(F)(iii) Based on observation, record review and interview; the facility failed to review and revise Resident 10's Care Plan addressing pressure ulcer risk prior to the resident developing a pressure injury/s (injury to skin and or underlying tissue caused by prolonged pressure to skin). The sample size was 18 and the facility census was 27. Findings are: Review of the facility policy Pressure Injury Prevention and Management with a review date of 7/2023 revealed the following: -The facility was committed to the prevention of avoidable pressure injuries and the promotion of healing of existing pressure ulcers. -A Pressure Ulcer/Injury referred to localized damage to skin and/or underlying soft tissue usually over a bony prominence or related to a medical or other device. -Avoidable meant the resident developed a pressure ulcer/injury and the facility did not do one or more of the following: evaluate the resident's clinical condition and risk factors, define, and implement interventions that were consistent with the resident's needs,…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-20 · 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

    F. Observation on 8/19/24 at 9:10 AM RN-E obtained Resident 20's medications from the medication cart. RN-E placed the oral medications into a medication cup and obtained a topical medication in a tube and went to the resident room. RN-E donned a gown, gloves, and mask and entered the resident room. Resident 20 was still in bed and RN-E placed the medication cup and the topical medication on the resident's bedside table without a barrier. RN-E administered the resident's oral medications and gave the resident a sip of water. The resident started to spit out the medications and RN-E caught the medications in RN-E's gloved hand. RN-E removed their gloves and discarded, then put on a new pair without performing hand hygiene. RN-E obtained the topical medication from the resident's bedside table and applied the medication. RN-E placed the medication tube back onto the resident's bedside table and removed their gloves and did not perform hand hygiene. RN-E picked up the medication and removed their gown before exiting the resident room. RN-E went back to the medication cart and placed…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.

  • Medicare payment denial — starting 2024-09-13 for 3 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.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
Ownership Data Not Available

The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

What families pay in NE

Paying with Medicaid

CMS lists this home as Medicaid-certified only — it can accept Medicaid for long-term care, but it is not Medicare-certified, so Medicare will not pay for a short rehabilitation (“skilled nursing”) stay here. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Nebraska Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Nebraska
$8,377/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$9,216/mo
Nursing home (private)
$6,350/mo
Assisted living

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

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 28E303. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-09-11, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

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

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

What to do next