Falls City Care Center
2800 Towle Street, Falls City, NE 68355 · For profit - Corporation · 101 certified beds · (402) 245-5252 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- 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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 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 | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 2 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 2 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 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.
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 | 26.4% | 19.0% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.7% | 5.1% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.4% | 1.4% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.1% | 2.8% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 1.1% | 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 | 4.6% | 4.5% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 21.7% | 18.2% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 21.0% | 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 | 4.1% | 4.0% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 30.0% | 25.9% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 29.1% | 20.7% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 2.0% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 68.2% | 75.9% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 17.1% | 20.7% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 9.0% | 11.4% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.37 | 1.81 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.06 | 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.
40.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 94 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 27.3% 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 44 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 0.06 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 2% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 10% 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 | 40.9%CMS range 33.1–49.0 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | worse than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.7%CMS range 8.0–15.9 | 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 | 27.3% | 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 | 25.0% | 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 | 25.0% | 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 | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 2.0% | 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 | 4.1% | 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 | 7.6%CMS range 4.3–14.4 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.87 | 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 101 beds and averages 55.2 residents a day — about 55% occupied, or roughly 46 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 2.36 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.16 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.35 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 2.22 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 2.42 on weekdays — 8% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.16 to 0.16 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 36% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
14 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-25 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.02(H)Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to report an allegation of abuse to the State Agency within the required timeframe for Resident 2. This affected 1 of 3 residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 56.Findings are:A record review of the facility's Abuse Prevention Plan last revised February 2023 revealed that the Administrator (ADM), Director of Nursing (DON), or Nursing Supervisor would make sure that a report was filed and an initial investigation begun immediately. The policy also stated that any allegations of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown origin and misappropriation of resident property should be reported to the State Agency immediately, within two hours if the event that caused the allegation included abuse or there was serious bodily harm, and within 24 hours if abuse was not involved and there was no serious bodily harm.A record review of Resident 2's Order Summary dated 06/25/2026 revealed the facility admitted the resident on 12/01/2025, and 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 · D2026-06-25 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.02(H)Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to investigate an allegation of abuse for Resident 2. This affected 1 of 3 residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 56.Findings are:A record review of the facility's Abuse Prevention Plan last revised February 2023 revealed that the facility would investigate all incidences such as falls, bruises, medication errors, and resident complaints.A record review of the facility's Skin Program Policy last revised March 2019 revealed that when a bruise or a skin tear was noted, a thorough assessment or comprehensive wound assessment sheet should be completed and documented.A record review of Resident 2's Order Summary dated 06/25/2026 revealed the facility admitted the resident on 12/01/2025, and the resident did not have a diagnoses of dementia (a term for several diseases that affect memory, thinking, and the ability to perform daily activities).A record review of Resident 2's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS-a comprehensive assessment of each resident's functional…
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 · F2025-06-05 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — widespreadProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
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(D) The facility failed to provide a minimum of three nurse aides on each shift per the facility assessment and to ensure call lights were answered to meet the needs of the residents. This had the potential to affect all residents that resided in the facility. The total facility census was 49. Findings are: A record review of the Facility Assessment dated 07/01/2024 revealed the facility has an average daily census of 55 that requires 1-3 licensed nurses, 3-9 nurse aides, and 1-3 other nursing personnel. A record review of the facility's Posted Daily Staffing dated 05/04/2025 revealed three licensed nurses and no nurse aides on the day shift. A record review of the facility's Posted Daily Staffing for May 1st- May 31st, June 1, 2, and 3, 2025 revealed two nurse aides staffed on the night shift. A record review of the facility's Schedule Sheet dated May 2025 revealed two NA's scheduled for night shift every night. A record review of the facility's Past Calls for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-05 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY B. An observation on 06/02/25 at 10:42 AM revealed Resident 10 laying in bed with hair that appeared oily and shiny. During an interview on 06/02/25 at 10:43 AM Resident 10 revealed that (gender) cannot remember the last time (gender) had a bath or washed (gender) hair. An observation on 06/04/25 at 2:28 PM revealed Resident 10 lying in bed with hair that appeared oily and shiny. During an interview on 06/04/25 at 2:29 PM Resident 10 confirmed (gender) would like a bath at least once a week but cannot remember the last time (gender) took a bath or washed (gender) hair. Record review of Resident 10's admission Record revealed that the resident was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Record review of Resident 10's Significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS-a comprehensive assessment of each resident's functional capabilities used to develop a resident's plan of care) dated 5/11/2025 revealed that the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS - a test used to get a quick snapshot of 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-05 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.05(B) Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice of Non-Coverage (SNF ABN-a form that lists the items or services that the facility expects Medicare will not pay for, along with an estimate of the costs for the items and services and the reasons why Medicare may not pay) and the Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC, a required notice allowing the resident to appeal the facility decision to end Medicare Part A coverage) was given to a beneficiaries at least two days prior to the end of covered services which affected 1 (Resident 9) of 4 sampled residents. The facility census was 49. Findings are: A review of the SNF (Skilled Nursing Facility) Beneficiary Protection Notification Review form completed by the facility for Resident 9 revealed that the resident's Last Covered Day (LCD) for Medicare Part A services was 04/30/2025, and the facility initiated the discharge from Medicare Part A services when benefit days were not exhausted. A further review of the form…
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 · D2025-06-05 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.05(E)(i) Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the individualized care plans covered the psychotropic (affects mental status) medication and discharge planning for 2 (Residents 26 and 48) of 4 sampled residents. The facility census was 49 Findings are: A record review of the facility's Care Planning policy and procedure with the revision date of 03/2019 revealed individual resident-centered care planning begins when the resident is admitted and doesn't end until the resident is discharged . The goal for the care plan is directly related to the resident's discharge plan. The physician's orders which include the resident medications are part of the care plan. Care plans should be updated between care conferences to reflect current care need of the individual resident as changes occur. A. A record review of Resident 26's Clinical Census dated 05/13/2025 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] A record review of Resident 26's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-05 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09(F)(iii) Based on record review and interview the facility failed to update the Comprehensive Care Plan (CCP - written instructions needed to provide effective and person centered care of the resident that meet professional standards of quality care) to accurately reflect the fall interventions for 1 (Resident 10) of 3 sampled residents. The facility census was 49 at the time of survey. Findings are: Review of the facility's policy titled Fall Prevention and Response Policy dated revised April 2025 revealed that when a fall occurs the care plan will be updated with any new or updated fall interventions. Review of the facility's policy titled Care Planning dated revised March 2019 revealed that careplanning is constantly in progress and it begins the moment the resident is admitted to the facility and doesn't end until discharge or death. Record review of Resident 10's admission Record revealed that the resident was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Record…
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 · D2025-06-05 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
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 175 NAC 12-006.09(H)(i)(3) Licensure Reference 175 NAC 12-006.09(H)(iv)(3) Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to provide timely repositioning and incontinence care for 1 (Resident 2) of 2 sampled residents for dependent cares. The facility census was 49 at the time of survey. Findings are: Record review of facility policy titled Repositioning Policy and dated [DATE] revealed that repositioning is critical for a resident who is immobile or dependent upon staff for repositioning, for residents who are in bed should be on a every 2 hour repositioning schedule or alternate schedule based on resident assessment, and residents with a stage 1 or above pressure ulcer the every 2 hour repositioning schedule maybe inadequate. An observation on 06/02/25 at 10:02 AM revealed Resident 2 lying in bed on (gender) back with eyes closed and curtains closed and lights off. An observation on 06/03/25 9:13 AM revealed Resident 2 lying in bed on (gender) back with eyes…
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 before2025-06-05 · 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 12-006.18(D) Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to use proper hand hygiene (cleaning) and use of personal protective equipment (PPE) when providing wound care for one (Resident 8) of two sampled residents. The facility census was 49. Findings are: A record review of the Handwashing/Hygiene policy and procedure with revision date of 01/2020 revealed hand hygiene needs to be completed before and after direct physical contact with a resident, before and after handling any dressing, and objects soiled during or after resident care. Hand hygiene should have been completed immediately after or as soon as possible following contact of such body areas with blood or other potentially infectious material. The use of gloves does not replace handwashing/hand hygiene. A record review of Glove Use with Resident Cares: Policy and Purpose with revision date of 03/2019 revealed the purpose was to provide guidelines for the use of gloves for resident and employee protection. The staff should remove soiled undergarments following…
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 · F2024-05-23 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespreadHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.04C2 Based on record interview and record review; the facility failed to ensure sufficient staffing related to 8-hour daily RN (Registered Nurse) coverage, this had the potential to affect all residents who reside in the facility. The facility identified a census of 52. Findings are: A record review of the staffing schedules for 5/1/24 through 5/20/24 revealed no 8-hour RN coverage on 5/12/24 and 5/16/24, but did reveal there was only 4 hours of RN coverage on 5/12/24. An interview with the facility Administrator on 05/23/24 at 8:07 AM confirmed that after pulling timecards it was found that the facility did not have RN coverage on 5/6/24 and 5/12/24 and only 4 hours of RN coverage on 5/11/24. A record review of the documents titled Facility Assessment Tool (used to determine what resources are necessary to care for residents competently during both day-to-day operations and emergencies) dated 6/5/23 revealed the following guidance related to RN coverage: Staffing plan 3.2 Federal law requires nursing homes to have sufficient staff to meet…
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 · F2024-05-23 · tag F0947 — failed to train nurse aides adequately — widespreadEnsure nurse aides have the skills they need to care for residents, and give nurse aides education in dementia care and abuse prevention.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.04 Based on record review and interviews; the facility failed to ensure that 5 of 5 reviewed nursing assistants (NA's) had completed 12 mandatory education hours annually, this had the potential to affect all residents who reside in the facility. The facility identified a census of 52. Findings are: A record review of the continuing education hours for 5 employees hired more than one year ago revealed that the following staff had received or completed the following education hours; -NA-K had 6.7 hours of continuing education completed in the last 12 months. -NA-L had 0.50 hours of continuing education completed in the last 12 months. -NA-M had 5.05 hours of continuing education completed in the last 12 months. -NA-N had 0.50 hours of continuing education completed in the last 12 months. -NA-O had 1.75 hours of continuing education completed in the last 12 months. An interview with the facility Administrator on 05/21/24 at 3:20 PM confirmed that Nursing Assistants who had been employed in the facility for more than 1 year had not completed 12…
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 · D2024-05-23 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12.006.09D2 Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1 (Resident 47) of 3 sampled resident's wound care was completed as ordered by the provider. The total facility census was 52. Findings are: A record review of Resident 47's Clinical Census dated 05/22/2024 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A record review of Resident 47's Medical Diagnosis dated 05/22/2024 revealed the resident had diagnoses of Type 2 Diabetes Mellites With Diabetic Chronic Kidney Disease (uncontrolled blood sugars that resulted in kidney disease), Secondary Malignant Neoplasm of Bone (bone cancer) Weakness, and lung disorders. A record review of Resident 47's Minimum Data Set (MDS, a comprehensive assessment used to develop a resident's care plan) dated 05/02/2024 revealed the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS, a score of a residents cognitive abilities) of 12 of 15 which indicates the resident was moderately…
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 before2024-05-23 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12.006.17B Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12.006.17D Based on observations, interviews, and record review; the facility failed to ensure all infection control measures were followed during wound care for 1 (Resident 47) of 3 sampled residents, ensure 1 (Resident 54) of 1 sampled resident's nebulizer kit (used to deliver liquid medication to the lungs) and mask were cleaned after each treatment, and failed to perform hand hygiene between gloves changes while providing catheter cares for 1 (Resident 41) of 1 sampled resident. The total facility census was 52. Findings are: A. A record review of the facility's Handwashing/Hygiene policy with a revision dated of Jan. 2020 revealed hand hygiene needed to be completed before donning (putting on) and after removal of gloves. A record review of Resident 47's Clinical Census dated 05/22/2024 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A record review of Resident 47's Medical Diagnosis dated 05/22/2024 revealed 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 · D2023-05-24 · tag F0923 — isolatedHave enough outside ventilation via a window or mechanical ventilation, or both.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 12-007.04D Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the ventilation systems were operational in 2 (room [ROOM NUMBER] and room [ROOM NUMBER]) occupied resident's bathrooms on the 300 hallway of the facility. The facility identified a census of 55. Findings are: Observation on 5/22/23 at 9:00 AM of room [ROOM NUMBER]'s bathroom revealed the vent did not draw a 1 square ply of toilet paper when tested for ventilation. Observation on 5/22/23 at 9:10 AM of room [ROOM NUMBER]'s bathroom revealed the vent did not draw 1 square of ply of toilet paper when tested for ventilation Interview on 5/23/23 at 10:54 AM with Maintenance Director revealed room [ROOM NUMBER] and 304 bathroom ventilation systems were not functioning. Interview on 5/23/23 at 10:54 AM with the Administrator confirmed the ventilation system was not functioning in room [ROOM NUMBER] and 304 bathrooms.
“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 LANTIS ENTERPRISES — 5 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 | 2 of 5 | 1.6 | +0.4 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.2 | +0.8 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 2.8 | -1.8 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 2 of 5 | 1.6 | +0.4 vs chain |
The other 4 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.6★, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| KISMET HD LLC | Organization | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 09/01/2018 |
| KISMET HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 09/01/2018 |
| LANTIS, CAMMY | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/01/2018 |
| LANTIS, MARY | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/01/2018 |
| LANTIS, TRAVIS | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 09/01/2018 |
| RINARD, SANDRA | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 09/01/2018 |
| SOULEK, WENDY | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/01/2018 |
| MOORE, MICHAEL | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/01/2018 |
| LANTIS ENTERPRISES, INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 09/01/2018 |
| TRAMP, ALLAN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2020 |
| YOUNG, CHRISTOPHER | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/31/2022 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 23 rows in the source record cover these 11 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.
3 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.
This home reported $602K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 12% 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 285114. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-06-05, 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.