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

Brookestone Acres

4715 38th Street, Columbus, NE 68601 · Non profit - Other · 80 certified beds · (402) 942-9260 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (402) 942-9260 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0758)
Insights

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

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (26% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
3763 39th Ave Ste 600 · (402) 564-9610 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
4306 38th St · (402) 562-8627 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
3318 23rd St · (402) 563-1884 · Call to confirm hours
Park
(402) 562-4271 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 3 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 5 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 4 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased17.8%19.0%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight1.5%5.1%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.6%1.4%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.7%2.8%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.5%4.3%6.5%better
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 injury4.1%4.5%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened22.7%18.2%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication20.1%19.3%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%96.1%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers6.3%4.0%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control26.8%25.9%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table14.9%20.7%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.4%2.0%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine94.9%75.9%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission16.8%20.7%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit14.8%11.4%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.111.811.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.591.921.80better

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.

63.8% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 216 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

63.8%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
8.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
65.6%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.34U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.19hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.12hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.02hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 65.6% 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 93 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 0.34 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 57% 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 SNF63.8%CMS range 57.5–68.751.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF8.2%CMS range 5.7–11.210.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge65.6%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge63.4%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge62.4%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge98.3%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay1.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened10.7%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.8%CMS range 4.0–11.17.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.921.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

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

Staffing

0.65
RN hours/ resident / day
0.68
LPN hours/ resident / day
3.16
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.49
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.32
RN hoursweekends
26.3%
Total nursing turnover
20.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 80 beds and averages 75.3 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 5 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. 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 4.49 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.65 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.16 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 3.73 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.80 on weekdays — 22% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.78 to 0.32 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 26% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-09-11)
2
at the previous standard inspection (2024-08-29)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

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

  • Potential for harm · D2025-09-11 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09(F)(iii) Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to complete the care plan (a comprehensive, written document that outlines the personalized healthcare needs, goals, and interventions for a resident, based on a thorough assessment of the medical, functional, and psychosocial status) and to conduct the interdisciplinary care conference on three residents (Resident 1, 21, and 46) out of three residents sampled. The facility census was 74. Findings are: During an interview on 9/09/2025 at 2:15 PM the administrator confirmed the facility is behind on care plan conferences but the facility had an active Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) in place due to past non-compliance with the resident care conferences. During an interview on 09/09/2025 at 3:54 PM the Social Services (SS) confirmed that the care conferences have been behind. The facility started a plan on 8/1/2025 to get the care conferences caught up. A. During an interview on 9/8/25 at 1:24 pm…

    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 F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY The facility failed to ensure physician orders for CPAP ( Continuous Positive Airway Pressure) devices included the required pressure setting for Residents 53 and 60.F695 - Respiratory CareLicensure Reference Number: 175 NAC 12-006.09(H)(vi)(3)(g) Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that physician orders for Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) therapy (a type of non-invasive ventilator that delivers pressurized air through a mask to keep the airway open during sleep) included complete and specific settings (pressure, ramp time, humidity, or other specifications) for 2 of 2 sampled residents (Resident 53 and Resident 60) in a facility census of 74. This failure had the potential to result in inadequate or unsafe respiratory care delivery.A.A record review of resident 53's Care Plan (a detailed document that outlines the specific healthcare needs, goals and interventions for the resident) dated September 9, 2025 revealed an intervention listed as CPAP as ordered…

    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 before2024-08-29 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    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 12-006.09D(l)(i)(3) Based on observations, record review, and interviews; the facility failed to implement, to revise and/or develop new interventions to prevent further falls for 2 (Residents 14 and 41) of 4 sampled residents. The facility census was 75. Findings are: A. Review of the facility Fall Prevention/Management Standard with a revised date of 1/2024 revealed the following guidelines: -residents were to be reviewed during the pre-admission/admission process to identify and determine risk for falls. -when a resident was identified at risk for falls, the care plan was to reflect the potential for injury/safety risk. Approaches/interventions were to be implemented and maintained related to identified areas of risk. All team members were to be knowledgeable of the resident's fall interventions. -falls were to be investigate as they occurred, and the staff were to collect factual evidence related to the fall event using the Root Cause Analysis process. The Root Cause…

    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 before2024-08-29 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    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

    Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09D Based on record review and interview; the facility failed to have a diagnosis for the use of an antipsychotic (a drug or substance that affects how the brain works) medication and to attempt a gradual dose reduction (GDR) and/or have a documented contraindication for use of the antipsychotic medication for 1 (Resident 50) of 5 sampled residents. The facility census was 75. Findings are: A. Review of the Psychoactive Medication and Medication Regimen Review Management Standard dated 6/2024 revealed the following: -residents were not given psychotropic 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 demonstrated by monitoring and documentation of the resident's response to the medication. -psychotropic medications included antipsychotics, antidepressants, anti-anxiety, and hypnotics. -attending physicians assumed leadership in medication management by developing, monitoring, and modifying regimens 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-08-03 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    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 12-006.17 Based on observations, record review and interview, the facility failed to wear personal protective equipment (PPE) and clean reusable equipment in accordance with facility policy to prevent the potential spread of Covid-19. The sample size was 22 and the facility census was 57. Findings are: A. Review of the facility policy Cleaning, Storage, and Maintenance dated 2/2019 revealed the following related to cleaning and disinfecting of mechanical lifts/sling pads (an assistive device used to transfer a person safely from one location to another): -When handling contaminated slings, disposable protective gloves shall be used. Additional PPE should be used when appropriate. -Slings must be laundered when used for residents on isolation precautions. -Disinfect all surfaces that come in direct contact with the resident's skin with a [NAME] Health Services (VHS) approved disinfectant between each resident use. B. Review of the facility policy Covid-19 Guidelines dated…

    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 · D2023-08-03 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
    Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09 Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to notify the provider for a condition change for 1 resident (Resident 39). The sample size was 1 and the facility census was 57. Findings are: A. Review of Resident 39's Nursing Progress Notes dated 5/25/23 at 1:37 PM revealed the resident was being monitored for a potential Urinary Tract Infection (UTI) related to symptoms of aggression, very odorous urine and the resident was more lethargic (a state of fatigue involving a lack of energy and motivation for physical and mental tasks). Review of Resident 39's record Monitoring for Suspected Urinary Tract Infections dated 5/25/23 through 5/28/23 revealed the following regarding the resident's urinary status: -on 5/25/23, the urine was cloudy with a foul odor, had symptoms of lethargy, malaise (a general feeling of discomfort, illness or uneasiness) and a change in mental status; -on 5/26/23, the urine had a foul odor and symptoms of malaise and lethargy 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-03 · tag F0623 — isolated
    Provide 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.02(1) Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to submit transfer and discharge notifications to the State Ombudsman (an official appointed to investigate individuals' complaints and serves as a consumer advocate) as required for Resident 9. The facility census was 57. Findings are: Review of Resident 9's Census List revealed the resident was discharged to the hospital on 4/19/23, 5/22/23, and 6/24/23. Review of Resident 9's Medical Records revealed no evidence the State Ombudsman was notified of any discharges from 4/19/23 through 6/24/23. During an interview on 8/2/23 the Social Services Director confirmed the facility did not notify the State Ombudsman of Resident 9's hospital discharges.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-03 · tag F0625 — isolated
    Notify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.05(1) Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide Resident 9 or the resident's representative, bed hold information when the resident was transferred to the hospital. The sample size was 22 and the facility census was 57. Findings are: Review of the undated facility Notice of Bed Hold Policy revealed the facility advised the resident and or family of the bed hold policy, in writing within 24 hours of an emergency transfer to inform them of the bed hold rate (daily cost/rate for the type of room being held for the resident). Review of Resident 9's Census List revealed the resident was transferred to the hospital on 4/19/23, 5/22/23, and again on 6/24/23. Review of Resident 9's medical record from 4/19/23 through 6/25/23 revealed no evidence the resident or the resident's representative were notified of the facility bed hold policy. During an interview on 8/1/23 at 3:15 PM the Director of Nursing confirmed the facility had no documented evidence that Resident 9 or their representative were provided with the required…

    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 · D2023-08-03 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09B1 Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident 4's Minimum Data Set (MDS-federally mandated comprehensive assessment used to develop resident care plans) was coded to reflect the resident's health status. The sample size was 22 and the facility census was 57. Findings are: Review of Resident 4's Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR-federally required screening required for all individuals being considered for nursing facility admission, to determine if the person has or was suspected of having a mental illness, intellectual disability, or related disorder, and used to ensure that individuals were not inappropriately placed in nursing homes for long term care) dated 2/25/20 revealed the resident had a level 2 (extended) assessment completed and the facility needed to document this by marking yes to question 1500A on the MDS indicating the resident had a serious mental illness, developmental disability, or related disorder.…

    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 · D2023-08-03 · tag F0661 — isolated
    Ensure necessary information is communicated to the resident, and receiving health care provider at the time of a planned discharge.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    License Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09C3 Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to complete a discharge summary for Resident 56. The sample size was 3 and the facility census was 57 residents at the time of the survey. Findings are: Record review of Resident 56's Progress Note dated 6/26/2023 at 9:15 PM, revealed the resident had been transferred to the hospital. Review of Resident 56's records revealed there was no discharge summary. An interview with the Administrator on 8/2/2023 at 8:00 AM, revealed Resident 56 had discharged to the hospital on 6/26/2023 and did not return to the facility. An interview with the Administrator on 8/2/2023 at 8:27 AM confirmed the facility did not do a discharge summary for Resident 56. An interview with the Director of Nursing on 8/2/2023 at 10:31 AM revealed the facility had a process they followed for discharges and a discharge summary needed to be completed within 30 days. The DON confirmed a discharge summary had not been completed for Resident 56.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-08-03 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    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 12-006.09D7 Based on observation, interview, and record review: the facility failed to implement interventions to protect from a potential burn from a hot liquid spill for Resident 10. The sample size was 5 and the facility census was 57. Findings are: Review of the Hot Liquid Management Guidelines policy dated 3/2016 revealed if residents were assessed at high risk upon admission, readmission, quarterly and with a significant change the following elements were to be implemented: - reduce the temperature of the hot liquid, - use adaptive equipment/clothing as necessary, - update the care plan, - place hot items towards the center of the table but within a comfortable reaching distance for the resident, - remind residents that you have served them a hot beverage, and - residents with hot liquids should not be left unsupervised. Review of Resident 10's Hot Liquid Screening form on admission dated 2/20/23 revealed therapist recommendations for cool hot liquids and all drinks would…

    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 before2023-08-03 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    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

    Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09D Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident 9's antipsychotic (medication that works by altering brain chemistry to help reduce psychotic symptoms like hallucinations (seeing things not present), delusions (fixed and firm belief not supported by evidence), and disordered thinking) medication had an appropriate indication for use. The sample size was 5 and the facility census was 57. Findings are: Review of Resident 9's Minimum Data Set (MDS-federally mandated comprehensive assessment used to develop resident care plans) dated 7/4/23 revealed 1.) diagnoses of hypertension, urinary tract infection, diabetes, anxiety, and depression. 2.) the resident received extensive assistance with bed mobility, transfers, toileting, and dressing, 3) the resident was frequently incontinent of bladder, received anti-anxiety and antidepressant medication 5 of the previous 7 days, and had no indication of hallucination, delusion, disordered thinking, or insomnia (inability to sleep). Review of Resident 9's Progress revealed…

    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 · D2023-08-03 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    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

    Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.10B1 Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure 1 resident (Resident 13's) medications were properly secured. The sample size was 1 and the facility census was 57. Findings are: A. An observation of Resident 13 on 07/31/23 revealed the following: -At 10:30 AM the resident was seated in [gender] room alone and had a small, clear plastic cup with multiple medications inside on a table. -At 10:35 AM there were 8 loose medications sitting on top of the resident's table. The resident asked this surveyor what the brown and white capsules (3 of them) were and was unsure if [gender] should take them due to an upcoming medical procedure. -At 10:55 AM Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN)-A, was asked to assist the resident with the medication concern and LPN-A informed the resident the 3 brown and white capsules were Budesonide capsules and were prescribed for [gender] lungs to help with breathing. The resident stated [gender] thought the medication was to stop diarrhea and did not want to take it, if that was 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · C2025-09-11 · tag F0732 — widespread
    Post nurse staffing information every day.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that the posted Daily Nurse Staffing Form had an accurate census. This had the potential to affect all the residents in the facility. The facility census was 74 at the time of survey. Findings are:During an observation on 9/8/25 at 9:42 AM revealed the posted Daily Nurse Staffing Form near the front door stated the average census was 78.During an interview on 9/8/25 at 10:10 AM the Administrator (Adm) confirmed the current facility census was 74.During an observation on 9/9/25 at 8:32 AM revealed the posted Daily Nurse Staffing Form near the front door stated the average census was 78.During an interview on 9/9/25 at 10:10 AM the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) confirmed the current facility census was 74.During an observation on 9/10/25 at 8:32 AM revealed the posted Daily Nurse Staffing Form near the front door stated the average census was 78.During an interview on 9/10/25 at 10:10 AM the Adm confirmed the current facility census was 75.During an interview on 09/10/2025 at 10:19 AM 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.

    Nursing and Physician Services 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.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to VETTER SENIOR LIVING — 22 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 5 of 54.2+0.8 vs chain
Health inspection 5 of 53.9+1.1 vs chain
Staffing 5 of 54.3+0.7 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 53.8+0.2 vs chain
The other 21 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.2★, 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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
VETTER SENIOR LIVINGOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL100%since 12/23/2016
SCHMID, RAVENIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 09/20/2021
STUHR, BRIANIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 06/15/2017
VANEKEREN, GLENNIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 06/15/2017
VETTER, ELDORAIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 06/15/2017
VETTER, JACKIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 06/15/2017
ZARUBA, DALEIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/01/2017
VSL VETTER HEALTH SERVICES LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/01/2017

CMS files one row per role, so the 19 rows in the source record cover these 8 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.

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.

$9.4M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-2.5%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$508K
Related-party expense5% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 27%Medicare 26%Other / private 47%

This home reported $508K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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

$395per resident / day
operating cost
$12,009per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$386per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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 NE

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the 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 285291. 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