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

St. Joseph's Villa, Inc.

927 Seventh Street, David City, NE 68632 · Non profit - Corporation · 58 certified beds · (402) 367-3045 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0609) — cited Sep 20241 immediate-jeopardy citation$27,115 in federal fines1 Medicare payment denial
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
  • the CMS record shows $27,115 in federal fines (most recent 2024-09-26)
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)

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.

2/5
CMS overall
2 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 2 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 2 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
336 S 9th St · (402) 367-3193 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
422 N 5th St · (402) 367-3068 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
634 E St · (402) 367-3015 · Call to confirm hours
Park
721 Kansas St · (402) 367-3135 · 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 2 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 1 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 1 to 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating2★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased29.4%19.0%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight3.5%5.1%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%1.4%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.6%2.8%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms1.1%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 injury5.7%4.5%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened16.5%18.2%16.1%typical
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication20.8%19.3%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine93.9%96.1%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.0%4.0%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control32.1%25.9%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table16.3%20.7%17.1%typical
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication2.3%2.0%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine89.5%75.9%79.4%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days0.721.811.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.681.921.80typical

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.

9.9%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
34.8%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.08U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.03hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.04hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.01hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 34.8% 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 23 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 0.08 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 4% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 0% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNFnot 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 SNF9.9%CMS range 6.3–15.910.7%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 discharge34.8%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 discharge17.4%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 discharge26.1%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 dischargenot 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 stay4.2%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 worsened0.0%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 hospitalizationnot 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 SNFs0.621.02Oct 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

0.42
RN hours/ resident / day
0.51
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.87
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.79
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.21
RN hoursweekends
52.9%
Total nursing turnover
57.1%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 58 beds and averages 54.9 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 3 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 3.79 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.42 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.87 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 3.27 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.01 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.50 to 0.21 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 53% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

6
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-08-12)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2024-09-04)

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.

  • Immediate jeopardy · J2024-10-24 · tag F0678 — failed to provide CPR when needed — isolated
    Provide basic life support, including CPR, prior to the arrival of emergency medical personnel , subject to physician orders and the resident’s advance directives.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12.006.09 Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure Resident 1's wishes were followed for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) and train agency staff on code status and the facility's CPR policy and procedures. The facility census was 44. The facility Administrator was notified on [DATE] at 6:04 PM of an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) which began on [DATE]. The IJ was removed on [DATE], as confirmed by surveyor onsite verification. Findings are: A record of the facility's undated Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation policy revealed it was the policy of this facility to adhere to the residents' rights to formulate (create) advanced directives (a resident's medical care choice). The facility will follow current American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines regarding CPR. If the resident experiences cardiac arrest (sudden, sometimes temporary stopping of the heart), facility staff will provide basic life support, including CPR, prior to the arrival of Emergency Medical…

    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 · Fcited before2025-08-12 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number: 175 NAC 12.004.02 Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff performed proper hand hygiene during food preparation and between glove changes, ensure expired foods were discarded, ensure food brought in by family was labeled and dated, and ensure staff food was stored separately from residents' food in the unit refrigerators to prevent potential foodborne illness. This had the potential to affect all 52 residents in the facility who consume food prepared in the kitchen.A.An observation during the initial kitchen tour on 8/6/2025 from 8:20 AM to 9:25 AM revealed the following:One box of thickened hot cocoa mix with expiration date 5/4/2025.Two bottles of honey thickener with expiration date 6/6/2025.Upright freezer with an open bag of chicken strips not dated or sealed.In the dry storage, two totes of Panko breadcrumbs opened 5/6/2025 with no expiration date found, and six boxes of chicken noodle soup with expiration date of 4/2025.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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-12 · 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)The facility failed to put in new interventions in the comprehensive care plan to prevent falls for 2 (Resident 2 and Resident 6) out of 3 sampled residents. The facility census was 52.Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09(F) A record review of the admission Record revealed Resident 2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Adult failure to thrive (a collection of symptoms that include weight loss, decreased appetite, fatigue, and cognitive decline), Diarrhea (frequent, loose, or watery bowel movements), Constipation (a condition where bowel movements are infrequent or difficult to pass, often characterized by hard, dry stools), Urinary tract infections (an infection in any part of the urinary system), insomnia (trouble falling asleep, staying asleep (usually through the night), or waking up too early in the morning), Arial fibrillation (a heart condition where the heart beats irregularly and rapidly), and Hypothyroidism (when your thyroid…

    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 · D2025-08-12 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY License Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09 (H)(iv)(5)The facility failed to monitor bowel status and administer PRN meds to prevent constipation for three residents (Resident 2, 41 and 52) out of six sampled residents. The facility census was 52.Findings: A. A record review of Resident 41’s “Minimum Data Set” (MDS)(this comprehensive assessment evaluates each resident's functional capabilities) dated 4/28/2025 revealed a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score of 13 which indicated the resident’s cognitive function is considered intact and Resident 41 was dependent for toileting. A record review of Resident 41’s “Care Plan” dated 8/6/2025 revealed a diagnosis of constipation without interventions associated with prevention of constipation. A record review of Resident 41’s “Bowel Monitoring Form” dated 4/1/2025-8/12/2025 revealed no bowel movements documented 4/13/2025-4/18/2025 (six days no bowel movement), 5/3/2025-5/8/2025 (six days no bowel movement), 5/25/2025-6/4/2025 (11 days no bowel movement),…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-12 · 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 12-006.09(I)Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement interventions (action taken to improve the situation) to prevent potential falls for 1 (Resident 42) of 3 sampled residents. The facility census was 52.Findings are: A record review of the facility's Fall Prevention Program dated 02/28/2025 revealed that when a resident had a fall, the facility would review the resident's care plan and add an intervention before the end of the shift. The resident's risk factors and environmental hazards would be evaluated when developing the resident's care plan and interventions would be monitored for effectiveness. The care plan would be revised as needed. A record review of Resident 42's Clinical Census dated 08/11/2025 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE].A record review of Resident 42's Medical Diagnosis dated 08/11/2025 revealed the resident had diagnoses of Paranoid Schizophrenia (delusions and seeing things), Morbid…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-12 · 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 Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09(H)(vi)(3)(g)Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1 (Resident 53) of 1 sampled resident's oxygen order was followed. The facility census was 52.Findings are:A record review of the facility's Oxygen Concentrator policy dated 8/11/2025 revealed oxygen was to be administered under order of the physician. The nurse would verify the orders for the flow rate and turn the unit on to the desired flow rate.A record review of the facility's Oxygen Administration policy dated 8/11/2025 revealed oxygen was administered consistent with professional standards of practice. Oxygen was administered under the orders of a physician.A record review of Resident 53's Clinical Census dated 08/11/2025 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE].A record review of Resident 53's Medical Diagnosis dated 08/11/2025 revealed the resident had diagnoses of Chronic Respiratory Failure (long term breathing disorder resulting in low oxygen),…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-12 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.18(B) Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.18(D) The facility failed to sanitize the blood glucose monitoring machine prior to and after obtaining a blood sugar on three (Resident 41, 43. and Resident 50) out of three sampled residents, perform proper hand hygiene while administering medications, keep Resident 53's oxygen nasal cannula off the floor and concentrator filter clean to prevent potential cross contamination. The facility census was 52. Findings are: Findings: A. A record review of the Facility’s “Glucometer Disinfection” policy dated 19/2000 with a review date of 6/2025 revealed: The facility will ensure blood glucometers will be cleaned and disinfected after each use and according to manufacturer's instructions for multi-resident use. If the manufacturers are unable to provide information specifying how the glucometer should be cleaned and disinfected, the meter should not be used for multiple patients. The glucometers should be disinfected with a wipe…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-26 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.02(H) Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to report a fall resulting in serious bodily injury to the state agency within the required time frame for 2 residents (Resident 1 and Resident 4) of 3 residents sampled, and the facility failed to ensure the written investigations were submitted within five working days for 2 residents (Resident 1 and Resident 2) of 3 residents sampled. The facility census was 54. Findings are: A record review of the facility's Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation policy dated 03/21/2024 revealed that facility procedures include reporting of all alleged violations to the state agency and/or Adult Protective Services (APS) immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation is made, if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury. Further review of the policy revealed the Administrator would report the results of the investigation when final within 5 working days of the…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-09-04 · 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 12-006.18(B) Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.18 (D) Based on record review, observatations and interview, the facility failed to provide Enhanced Barrier Precautions(EBP, involves wearing specific personal protective equipment (PPE), such as gowns and gloves, during high-contact care activities) to Residents 13, 14, 21, 25, 41 and 50, and the facility failed to provide storage/cleaning to the respiratory equipment to prevent cross contamination for Residents 41 and 28 and the facility failed to perform hand hygiene cares for wound care and catheter cares for Resident 14 and Resident 25 to prevent cross contamination for 4 sampled residents out of 24 sampled residents. The facility census was 47. Findings are: A. A record review of Resident's on Enhanced Barrier Precautions with no dated noted provided by the facility upon entry revealed that Resident 13, 50, 14, 41, 25 ,21 were on the list for Enchanced Barrier Precautions. An observation on 08/28/24 at 09:22 AM…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-04 · tag F0636 — isolated
    Assess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09B Based on record review, observation, and interview, the MDS (Minimum Data Set, a federally mandated assessment used for care planning) did not reflect the use of a C-PAP (continuous positive airway pressure, a machine that treats sleep-related breathing disorders by keeping airways open during sleep) for 1 (Resident 28) of 12 sampled residents. The facility census was 47. Findings are: A record review of the admission Record with a list of diagnosis of a printed date of 8/29/24 revealed diagnosis of Paranoid Schizophrenia (is characterized by paranoia, delusions, and hallucinations), Chronic Respiratory Failure with Hypercapnia(a condition that occurs when the body has too much carbon dioxide (CO2) in the blood and can't get rid of it.), Morbid (severe) obesity with Alveolar Hyperventilation(A decrease in the body's ability to ventilate), obesity (an excessive accumulation of body fat that can negatively impact health), obstructive sleep apnea (a sleep condition that…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-04 · tag F0645 — isolated
    PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record reviews and interview, the facility failed to ensure that PASARR (readmission Screening Resident Reviews) for individuals with a mental disorder or intellectual disability were accurately completed to determine if a Level 11 PASARR review was warranted for 1 (Resident #28) of 12 sampled residents. The facility census was 47. Findings are: A record review of Resident 28 admission MDS (Minimum Data Set, a federally mandated comprehensive assessment tool used for care planning), dated 7/17/24, revealed that Resident 28 had diagnoses including Schizophrenia (a serious mental illness that affects a person's thoughts, feelings, and behaviors). Further review revealed that Resident 28 had not been evaluated by Level 11 as indicated with a serious mental illness( health conditions involving changes in emotion, thinking or behavior (or a combination of these) diagnosis. A record review of the current PASRR evaluation dated 7/1/24 revealed that Section 111 PASRR Conditions:1. Mental Illness or suspected Mental Illness (all that apply) was answered No mental health diagnosis is…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-04 · 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 Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09D6(7) Based on interviews, record reviews, and observations, the facility failed to obtain a physician order for 1 (Resident 25) of 1 sampled resident continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP, is a machine that uses mild air pressure to keep breathing airways open while you sleep). The facility census is 47. Record review of Resident 25's admission Record revealed Resident 25 admitted on [DATE]. Record review of MDS (Minimum Data Set, a comprehensive assessment of each resident's functional capabilities) dated 6/6/24 revealed in Section C: Resident 25's BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status, a test used to get a quick snapshot of a resident's cognitive function, scored from 0-15, the higher the score, the higher the cognitive function) scored 14. Section O revealed using a non-invasive ventilator. Record review on 8/28/24 revealed there was no order for a CPAP. Record review of a Physician referral form dated 8/31/24 revealed diagnosis for CPAP is Obstructive Sleep…

    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 · Fcited before2023-10-05 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.11E Based on observation, interview, and record review; the facility failed to properly store food and failed to keep a clean environment in the kitchen to prevent the potential for cross contamination and food borne illness. This had the potential to affect 40 of 40 residents that ate food prepared in the facility kitchen. The facility census was 40. Findings are: Observation on 10/2/23 from 8:25 AM to 9:00 AM during initial kitchen tour revealed the following: -dust on top of ice machine -white build up inside of ice machine -plastic bag of powdered sugar opened -opened plastic bag with dark brown sticky substance on it with opened package of sugar free lemon gelatin dessert mix - dark brown crumbs on tray holding packages of sugar free lemon gelatin dessert mix -food particles and dust behind stoves/ovens and metal rack for tray -dirt build up around baseboard throughout main kitchen and dishwashing areas -splattered dried food on back wall and lower cupboards in prep area Observation on 10/3/23 from 2:33 PM to 2:45 PM during final…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-10-05 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    LICENSURE REFERENCE NUMBER 175 NAC 12-006.17D Based on observation, record review and interview; the facility staff failed to perform hand hygiene to prevent the spread of infection and prevent cross contamination during peri-care for Resident 7 and wound care for Resident 3. This affected 2 of 3 sampled residents. Facility census was 40. Findings are: A. Observation on 10/3/2023 at 12:05 PM of peri-care completed on Resident 7 by Medication Aide (MA)-D and Nursing Assistant (NA) -C, with Director of Nursing (DON) present, revealed the following: Resident 7 was placed on the bed pan. At this time, MA-D applied soap to their hands, lathered for 7 seconds, then rinsed the soap off with water. NA-C applied soap to their hands, lathered for 15 seconds, then rinsed soap off of their hands with water. NA-C and MA-D applied gloves. Resident 7 was positioned to their right side and the bedpan removed by MA-D, along with the protective dressing to Resident 7's coccyx. MA-D and NA-C did not remove their soiled gloves and hand hygiene was not completed. MA-D performed peri-care, applied cream…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

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

Fines & penalties

$27,115 in federal fines across 1 penalty. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.

  • $27,115 — penalty dated 2024-09-26
  • Medicare payment denial — starting 2024-11-15 for 3 days

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to RURAL HEALTH DEVELOPMENT — 9 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 2 of 53.8-1.8 vs chain
Health inspection 2 of 53.6-1.6 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 53.7-0.7 vs chain
Quality measures 2 of 53.6-1.6 vs chain
The other 8 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.8★, 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 / managerTypeRoleSince
ROSS, MATTHEWIndividualINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/17/2025
PYTLIK, FRANCESIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 07/01/2003
KOBZA, LAURAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 12/08/2015
ADAMY, MICHAELIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 02/14/2017
BIRKEL, SUSANIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 10/12/2021
HOEFT, JACKIEIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 10/12/2021
JAKUB, JEANNEIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 10/12/2021
MEISTER, GARYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 10/01/2023
MORAVEC, ALLENIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 12/13/2016
POLACEK, KENNETHIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 12/13/2016
RURAL HEALTH DEVELOPMENT INC.OrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/25/2025
DARO, ROBERTIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/21/2025
ROSS, RONIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/14/2008
SHANNON, CHRISTINAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/17/2025
LEPANT, VICKIIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 07/14/2008

CMS files one row per role, so the 22 rows in the source record cover these 15 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.

1 organizational owner 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.

$5.0M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-36.3%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 49%Medicare 3%Other / private 48%

A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$482per resident / day
operating cost
$14,656per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$354per 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 285249. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-12, 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