Emerald Nursing & Rehab Cozad
318 West 18th Street, Cozad, NE 69130 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 67 certified beds · (308) 784-3715 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- a high number of inspection citations overall (18) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (65%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- about 18% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 1 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 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 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 3 to 1 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 16.7% | 19.0% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.5% | 5.1% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 2.2% | 1.4% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 2.3% | 2.8% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.8% | 4.3% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.3% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.9% | 4.5% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 17.6% | 18.2% | 16.1% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 24.6% | 19.3% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 96.1% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 6.7% | 4.0% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 17.1% | 25.9% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 32.2% | 20.7% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 12.2% | 2.0% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 80.0% | 75.9% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 15.4% | 20.7% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 3.0% | 11.4% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.39 | 1.81 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 3.34 | 1.92 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
Met the expected recovery: 55.0% 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 20 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 0.24 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 31% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 9% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.2%CMS range 6.8–16.3 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 55.0% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 50.0% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 45.0% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 11.5% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.94 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 67 beds and averages 38.7 residents a day — about 58% occupied, or roughly 28 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 3.50 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.43 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.24 is below 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 3.12 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.66 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.47 to 0.35 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 65% is well above the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
18 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 8 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-11-13 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09(I)(i)Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure that post fall procedures were followed for 1 of 4 sampled residents (Resident 1). The facility census was 36.Findings are:Record review of the facility policy titled Falls Management dated 1/2024 revealed that in the event of a fall a complete head to toe assessment must be performed. Obtain vital signs. The nurse will complete documentation to include vital signs. Contact the physician and family and document in the medical record, including time and person spoken with. The resident fall will be documented for 24 hours for post fall monitoring. Record review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) (a mandatory comprehensive assessment tool used for care planning) for Resident 1 dated 11/4/25 revealed that Resident 1 admitted into the facility on [DATE]. The MDS revealed that Resident 1 had two falls with no injury, and one fall with injury since the previous MDS assessment (dated 9/19/25). Record review…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2025-07-22 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — widespreadEnsure 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 12-006.12(D) Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews; the facility failed to store medications in a sanitary manner which had the potential to affect all residents, and failed to label medications with an opened and/or expiration date for 1 resident (Resident 10) of 4 sampled residents. The facility census was 37.A.In an observation completed on 07/17/2025 at 11:00 AM of the facility medication storage room the following was observed:-In a refrigerator kept in the medication storage room there was a clear plastic bin on the top shelf of the refrigerator labeled insulin containing 5 clear Ziplock bags with insulin (an injectable medication) in them. In the same refrigerator on the bottom shelf were multiple white plastic containers with the manufacturer label attached Ensure (a liquid supplement that is drank).-On the counter of the room there were multiple open boxes containing dressing supplies.-On the counter there were 3 plastic, green lidded bins with opened and partially used medications belonging to multiple residents. In an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-07-22 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide 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 12-006.04(A)(ii) Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 1-005.06(E)&(D) Based on record review, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure health history screenings were completed and reviewed prior to starting employment for 2 of 5 staff reviewed. The facility failed to follow contact precautions for 1 resident (Resident 17), the facility failed to complete hand sanitization for 5 (Residents 28, 35, 20, 26, and 12) of 5 sampled residents during medication administration, and failed to ensure proper hand hygiene was completed after providing care to 1 resident (Resident 3). The facility identified a census of 37. Findings are: A. A record review of a facility policy titled, Infection Prevention and Control Program with a revision date of 01/2024 revealed a policy statement of, It is a policy of this facility to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, and sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-07-22 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — patternEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.10(D)Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to have a medication error rate of less than 5%. This affected 3 residents (Residents 12, 20, and 35) of 5 sampled residents. The facility census was 37. Findings are:Record review of an undated facility document titled Medication Administration revealed medications will be administered to the right resident in the correct dose by the correct route in the correct strength and the correct medication.In an observation completed on 07/17/2025 at 8:15 AM Medication Aide (MA)-J was observed to prepare Resident 35 medication which included Omeprazole (a medication used to reduce the amount of acid produced in the stomach), 20 milligrams (mg) tablet with instructions for the medication to be given 60 minutes before meals.In an observation completed on 07/17/2025 at 8:20 AM, Resident 35 was observed to be sitting at the dining table taking bites of hot cereal from a bowl sitting on the table. The resident was also to be observed with 1/2 a piece of toasted bread on the plate…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-07-22 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — patternEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.11Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to follow the dietary menu to ensure that residents received the required serving size for 6 (Residents 31, 36, 17, 7, 3, and 13) of 6 residents observed. This prevented residents from receiving the required amount of food to meet their nutritional needs. The facility census was 37.Findings are:Record review of the facility policy titled Menus and Adequate Nutrition dated 1/2024 revealed that the purpose is to assure that menus are developed and prepared to meet resident choices and resident's nutritional needs using established guidelines. The facility will ensure that menus are followed. Observation on 7/17/25 at 11:47 AM in the facility kitchen revealed that Dietary Cook-E (DC-E) removed clear wrap from the pans of food items in the steam table to begin serving meals. DC-E placed a gray #8 (4 ounce) scoop into the pan of pureed lasagna (pureed is a cooked food item that has been ground with a blender into a smooth consistency for residents with difficulty chewing or…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-22 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolatedProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09(H)(iv)(2)Based on record review, observation, and interview the facility failed to provide a meaningful activity program for 1 (Resident 35) of 1 sampled residents. The facility census was 37.Findings are:Record review of an undated facility document titled Resident admission Agreement revealed the facility would provide an activities program including, but not limited to, a planned schedule for recreational, motivational, social, and other activities to make the resident's life more meaningful.Record review of a facility document titled Memory Care Unit (MCU) May Calendar revealed for the month of May 2025 an activity of coloring was provided 16 of the 31 days, an activity of story time was offered 5 of the 31 days, an activity involving crafts were offered 2 out of 31 days, and there were no scheduled activities listed on Saturdays and Sundays. There were no listed activities related to religious services or church.Record review of a facility document titled MCU June Calendar revealed for the month of June 2025 an activity of coloring…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-06-13 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.18 Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure exhaust fans in 4 (Rooms 101, 103, 105, and 107) of 18 sampled resident bathrooms were operational and ensure the cleanliness of the laundry area of the facility which had the potential to affect all of the residents residing in the facility that have laundry done by the facility. The facility stated census was 43. Findings are: A. Review of a facility supplied document labeled Regular Maintenance and Safety Inspection dated 06/13/2024 revealed instructions for monthly verification of the operation of all exhaust fans. In an observation completed on 06/13/2024 at 8:58 AM it was observed that the exhaust fans in the bathrooms of rooms 101, 103, 105, and 107 did not pull up a single ply piece of tissue. In an interview conducted on 06/13/2024 at 8:58 AM with the Maintenance Supervisor (MS), and the Housekeeping Supervisor (HS), it was confirmed that the exhaust fans in rooms 101, 103, 105, and 107 could not pull up a single ply piece of tissue indicating they were not…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-06-13 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — patternImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09D Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to implement nonpharmacological interventions prior to the use of as needed psychotropic medications and re assess the use of psychotropic medications for 3, (Resident #10, #34, and #21) of 4 sampled residents. The facility states census was 43. Findings are: Review of a facility supplied document titled Mood and Behavior Policy and Procedure dated 01/2024 revealed, #5 Mood and Behavior Tracking documentation will be completed to identify interventions attempted and outcomes of approaches. A. Review of an admission Record revealed the facility admitted resident #10 on 02/22/2024 with diagnoses that included Dementia, which is the impaired ability to remember, think, or make decisions that interfere with doing everyday activities, pain to the left and right leg, and Osteoporosis which is a condition where bones become weak and brittle. The comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS), which is mandatory comprehensive assessment tool that measures the health status of nursing…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-13 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Licensure Reference Number 175NAC 12-006.05(12) Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to treat 2 residents (Resident #10 and Resident #34) of 5 sampled residents with dignity. The facility stated census was 43. Findings are: Review of a facility supplied document labeled Residents Rights not dated revealed the resident has the right to privacy and to be treated with respect and dignity. Review of a facility supplied document labeled Skills Check Perineal Care which is the cleansing of the genital and rectal areas of a person's body, and not dated, revealed to gather equipment, and explain the procedure and screen the resident for privacy. A. Review of an admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #10 on 02/22/2024 with diagnoses of: Dementia (the impaired ability to remember, think, or make decisions that interfere with doing everyday activities), pain to the left and right leg, and Osteoporosis (a condition where bones become weak and brittle). The comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS), which is mandatory comprehensive assessment tool…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-13 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Licensure Reference Number: 175 NAC 12-006.09D Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure follow up was completed for 1 sampled Resident (Resident 21) with abnormal blood glucose readings in accordance with physician orders. Sample size was 1. Facility census was 44. Findings are: A. Record review of Resident 21's Minimum Data Set (MDS-a federally mandated comprehensive assessment used to develop the resident care plan) dated 04/12/2024 revealed the following: -resident admission date was 10/09/2020. -diagnoses of type 1 diabetes mellitus with unspecified complications (an autoimmune condition in which your immune system mistakenly attacks insulin-producing cells, which turns off insulin production). -cognitive score of 15/15, revealed no cognitive impairment. -resident receives orders for insulin 7 out of 7 days. Record review of Resident 21's Care Plan (CP-a written interdisciplinary comprehensive plan detailing how to provide quality care for a resident) revealed the following: -resident is appropriate for long term care related to the need for 24/7…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 8 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-13 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09D7b(3) Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that interventions to prevent resident falls were in place for 2 residents (Resident 14 and 36). This had the potential to allow residents to experience falls with injury. The facility census was 43. Findings are: A. Record review of the facility policy titled Falls Management dated 1/2024 revealed that the facility will assess and review resident risk factors for falls and injuries after a fall. The facility will communicate interventions to the care giving teams. Post fall, the facility will adjust/add interventions on the plan of care (care plan-a written interdisciplinary comprehensive plan detailing how to provide quality care for a resident). The facility will update and communicate interventions. Record review of the admission Record for Resident 14 dated 6/11/24 revealed that Resident 14 admitted into the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included dizziness, severe obesity, and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-13 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.10D Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5% (2 errors out of 40 opportunities resulting in an error rate of 5.0%) affecting 1 Resident (Resident #2), of 6 sampled residents. The facility stated census was 43. Findings are: Review of a facility policy titled Medication Administration dated 05/2017 revealed Purpose to administer the following right medication, dose, dosage form, documentation, route, resident, and time. #7 read the Electronic Medication Administration Record (EMAR) for the ordered medication, dose, dosage form, route, and time. #9 verify the pharmacy prescription label matches the EMAR. #14 document the administration of the medication on the EMAR as soon as the medications are given to the resident. In an observation on 06/12/2024 at 9:29 AM during medication administration by Licensed Practical Nurse E (LPN-E) to resident #2 the following was observed: LPN-E prepared each of the residents' medications by comparing the pharmacy label on the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-13 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.17D Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to esure hand wasing for 20 seconds and complete hand sanitization while performing personal cares for 1 (Resident #34) of 5 sampled residents. Facility stated census of 43. Findings are: Review of a facility policy titled Infection Control Standard Precautions Handwashing, dated 01/2024 revealed #7 use an alcohol-based hand rub or soap and water for the following situations: before and after direct contact with residents, before performing and non-surgical invasive procedures, before moving from a contaminated body site to a clean body site during resident care, after contact with blood or bodily fluids, after handling contaminated equipment or supplies, and as the final step after removing and disposing of personal protective equipment (gloves). Washing hands, #2 rub hands together vigorously for at least 20 seconds. Review of an admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #34 on 08/04/2023 with diagnoses that include Dementia, which is the impaired…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2023-04-04 · tag F0801 — widespreadEmploy sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
LICENSURE REFERENCE NUMBER 175 NAC 12-12-006.04D2a Based on observation, interviews, and record review; the facility failed to ensure the facility DM (Dietary Manager) had the credentials to be a dietary manager or have a registered dietitian (RD)working full time. This had the potential to affect all of the residents in the facility. The facility identified a census of 62 at the time of survey. Findings are: Interview with the facility DM (Dietary Manager) on 4/03/23 at 2:30 PM revealed they were not a certified dietary manager and had not completed a formal education program to meet the requirements for a DM. The DM revealed they did not monitor the resident weights as the DM was not certified. The DM was observed working in the kitchen at that time. Interview with the DON (Director of Nursing) on 4/4/23 at 8:34 AM revealed the RD came to the facility once a month. Review of the facility policy Weight Monitoring dated 5/17 revealed the following: Weight analysis will be completed by the Registered Dietician or designee: The interdisciplinary team including the Registered…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-04-04 · tag F0623 — patternProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Licensure Reference Number 175NAC 12-006.05(5) Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that the ombudsman (a state appointed advocate for residents of nursing homes) was notified of resident transfers for 3 of 3 residents (Residents 10, 15, and 9). The facility census was 42. Findings are: A. Record review of the undated facility admission Packet revealed that the Resident will receive written notice of the Facility's plan to discharge or transfer the Resident and the reasons such discharge or transfer is necessary in accordance with the requirements of state and federal law. The facility must allow representatives of the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman (the ombudsman) to examine a resident's medical record in accordance with State Law. Record review of the progress note for Resident 10 dated 3/7/23 at 8:57 AM revealed that Resident 10 had been running a temperature and was slow to respond throughout the night. Resident 10 was not responding verbally. Resident 10 was being sent to the hospital. Resident 10 was transported from the facility to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-04-04 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Licensure Reference Number 175NAC 12-006.11E Based on observation, record review, and interview; the facility failed to ensure that staff served food in a manner to prevent the potential for cross contamination and foodborne illness for 8 residents (Residents 30, 25, 22, 96, 18, 2, 15, and 3). The facility census was 42. Findings are: Record review of the facility policy titled Infection Prevention and Control Program dated 5/20/17 revealed that it is the policy of the facility to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. The section titled hand hygiene protocol revealed that all staff will wash their hands between resident contacts and after handling contaminated objects. Record review of the Nebraska Food Code, Effective date 7/21/16, 81-2,272.10* (Replaces 2013 Food Code 3-301.11 (B), (C), (D) and (E) Preventing Contamination from Hands) * revealed: (3) Except when washing fruits and vegetables, food employees shall minimize bare hand and arm contact with exposed food.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-04 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
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 12-006.09D8b Based on interview and record review; the facility failed to implement interventions to prevent significant weight loss for Resident 6. This affected 1 of 3 sampled residents. The facility identified a census of 42 at the time of survey. Findings are: Interview with Resident 6's family member on 3/29/23 at 12:54 PM revealed Resident 6 had lost weight. Review of Resident 6's SCSA (Significant Change in Status) MDS (Minimum Data Set-a comprehensive assessment used to develop a resident's care plan) dated 3/17/23 revealed an admission date of 9/7/22. Resident 6 had a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 0 which indicated severe cognitive impairment. Resident 6 required limited assistance from staff for eating. Resident 6 had a height of 63 inches and a weight of 115 pounds. Resident 6 had weight loss and was not on a prescribed weight loss regimen. Mechanically altered diet was received while a resident. Interview with the MDS (Minimum Data Set)…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-04 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY LICENSURE REFERENCE NUMBER 175 NAC 12-006.09D Based on interview and record review; the facility failed to monitor for potential adverse side effects of a blood thinner including ensuring medical provider ordered laboratory tests were performed as ordered for Resident 6. This affected 1 of 5 sampled residents. The facility identified a census of 42 at the time of survey. Findings are: Review of Resident 6's SCSA (Significant Change in Status) MDS (Minimum Data Set-a comprehensive assessment used to develop a resident's care plan) dated 3/17/23 revealed an admission date of 9/7/22. Resident 6 had a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 0 which indicated severe cognitive impairment. Anticoagulant (blood thinner) was received 7 days of the 7 day MDS look back period. Review of Resident 6's Order Summary Report dated 3/30/2023 revealed the following orders: PT/INR (A prothrombin time (PT) test measures how long it takes for a clot to form in a blood sample. An INR (international normalized ratio) is a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to EMERALD HEALTHCARE — 14 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 1 of 5 | 1.3 | -0.3 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 1.5 | +0.5 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 1.8 | -0.8 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 2.0 | +1.0 vs chain |
The other 13 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.3★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| JW NEBRASKA OPERATIONS, LLC | Organization | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 11/01/2023 |
| YCNE OPERATIONS, LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 11/01/2023 |
| REISMAN, ADINA | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 11/01/2023 |
| WALDEN, JACOB | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2023 |
| BANK OF OKLAHOMA | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/09/2025 |
| EMERALD HEALTHCARE LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/17/2017 |
| EVOLVE THERAPY SERVICES LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/09/2025 |
| LIMESTONE FISCAL SERVICES LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/09/2025 |
| MERCH PAY INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/09/2025 |
| NEXUS SERVICE GROUP LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/09/2025 |
| SAUL N FRIEDMAN & COMPANY | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/09/2025 |
| ZIMMET HEALTHCARE SERVICES GROUP LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/09/2025 |
| FLEISCHMANN, DAVID | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/17/2022 |
| FRANKLIN, BRENDA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 10/30/2020 |
| FRIEDRICHSEN, NATASHA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 08/23/2022 |
| GOFF, KILEY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2019 |
| GOPIN, BRIAN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2019 |
| SATTAR, ARIF | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2019 |
| CHAFETZ, YISROEL | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2023 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 34 rows in the source record cover these 19 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
10 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.
About 74% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $953K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 18% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in NE
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.
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 285093. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-22, 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.