Gordon Countryside Care
500 East 10th Street, Gordon, NE 69343 · Government - Hospital district · 40 certified beds · (308) 282-0806 Medicaid only — no Medicare
On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (31% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 5 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 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 held steady at 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
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 | 17.0% | 19.0% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 9.0% | 5.1% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.9% | 1.4% | 0.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.8% | 2.8% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 5.5% | 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 | 5.0% | 4.5% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 16.0% | 18.2% | 16.1% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 7.2% | 19.3% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 96.1% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 0.0% | 4.0% | 4.7% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 33.9% | 25.9% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 14.9% | 20.7% | 17.1% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.92 | 1.81 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.47 | 1.92 | 1.80 | better |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 40 beds and averages 29.7 residents a day — about 74% occupied, or roughly 10 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.30 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.20 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.10 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 3.62 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.58 on weekdays — 21% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.34 to 0.84 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 31% is below the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
12 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · D2025-09-23 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09(B) Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure accuracy of the Minimum Data Set (MDS, a federally mandated comprehensive assessment tool used to determine a resident's functional capabilities and helps nursing home staff identify health problems) related to an active diagnosis for Resident 14 and weight loss for Resident 1. The sample size was 12 and the facility census was 33.Findings Are: A record review of the Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument 3.0 User's Manual (RAI Manual, a document published by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to facilitate accurate and effective resident assessment practices in long-term care facilities) dated October 2024 revealed in Chapter 3 coding instructions for Active Diagnoses that diseases should be coded that have a documented diagnosis in the last 60 days and have a direct relationship to the resident's current functional status, cognitive status, mood or behavior status,…
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 · D2025-09-23 · 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
Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09(H)(iv) Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to follow their bowel protocol to prevent constipation for 1 (Resident 4) of 5 sampled residents. The facility census was 33.Findings Are: A record review of facility policy Bowel Management Policy dated 8/1/2024 revealed all residents will have a bowel management plan tailored to their individual needs, preferences, and medical conditions. In the Documentation section the policy states staff are to document absence of bowel movements for 3 days or more and initiate appropriate action. In the Intervention Protocol for Constipation section the policy states that on Day 1 staff are to monitor and encourage natural bowel movement and offer fluids and dietary fiber. On Day 2, staff are to administer prescribed stool softener or laxative. On Day 3, staff are to reassess and consider use of a suppository if no bowel movement, and on Day 4+ staff are to notify the physician and consider enema or other medical interventions. A record review of Resident 4's quarterly Minimum Data Set…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-23 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Licensure Reference 175 NAC 12-006.09(I) Based on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure developed interventions were implemented to prevent falls for 1 (Resident 19) of 3 sampled residents. The facility identified a census of 33.Findings are: A record review of the facility's policy, Falls - Clinical Protocol (dated March 2018) revealed the facility would monitor and document a resident's response to interventions intended to reduce falls or their consequences. A record review of Resident 19's undated Care Plan Report revealed Resident 19 was at risk for falls due to deconditioning, knee pain, and occasional incontinence. Additionally, it revealed on 8/29/2025, the resident had fallen when attempting to get up from their bed unassisted and on 9/16/2025 had fall from their bed and received a bruise to the center of their forehead. On 9/16/2025, an intervention was added to place a fall mat beside the bed when the resident was in bed. An observation on 9/18/2025 at 11:00 AM revealed Resident 19 had been resting in bed. Resident 19's floor mat had…
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 before2025-09-23 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.11(D) Based on record reviews, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure staff followed proper glove use of hand hygiene practices prior to food preparation or between tasks in accordance with the food code and Center for Disease Control (CDC) guidelines during meal service to prevent the potential for cross-contamination. This had the potential to affect 1 resident who resided within the facility. The facility identified with a census of 33. Findings are: A review of the Nebraska food code (last revised 2017, 3.301.11, Section ( A3 ) and (F)) revealed staff are required to perform hand hygiene during food preparation, as often as necessary to remove soil and contamination and to prevent cross contamination when changing tasks. Before donning (put on) gloves to initiate a task that involves working with food. A CDC guideline titled Clinical Safety: Hand Hygiene for Healthcare Workers (dated 2/27/2024) revealed gloves are to be changed between tasks and after contact with potentially contaminated surfaces or residents. - An…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-01-08 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.04(F)(i)(5) Based on record review and interviews; the facility failed to notify the family or responsible party of a change in condition for 2 (Resident 1 and Resident 2) of 3 sampled residents. The facility identified a census of 30. The findings are: A record review of an undated policy titled Notification of Changes stated the facility will notify resident representative or responsible party regardless of competency level since the resident may not be able to notify them themselves. A. A record review of an admission Record indicated the facility admitted Resident 1 on 3/21/24. Under the Contacts section, the Emergency Contact section listed 2 people with their phone numbers. A record review of Resident 1's Progress Notes with a date of 10/16/24, written by Registered Nurse (RN-A) indicated that Resident 1 had no improvement to to their right lower extremity with a marked increase in redness and swelling. The physician was notified and provided an order to transfer Resident 1 to the hospital as a direct admit for intravenous…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-07-31 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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 175 NAC 12- 006.11(E) Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews; the facility failed to ensure foods were disposed or consumed prior to best-by and use by dates, store foods at least six inches off the floor as required, and to implement hand hygiene practices as required to prevent the potential for cross contamination and foodborne illness. This had the potential to affect all 26 residents who resided within the facility. Findings are: A. A record review of a facility policy Food Storage with a last reviewed date of January 2021, indicated date marking should be visible on foods to indicate the date by which ready to eat foods should be consumed or discarded and that all foods will be consumed by their safe use by dates or discarded. An initial kitchen tour observation on 7/29/2024 at 9:50 AM revealed the following: -In the dry food storage area: -An opened bag of French-Fried Onions that had been opened, but no open date or use by date. -Five cans of Whole Oysters with best if…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-07-31 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Licensure Reference 175 NAC 12- 006.18(B) Based on observations, interview, and record review; the facility failed to disinfect multi-use equipment during medication administration for 3 (Residents 1, 16, and 23) of 3 sampled residents and implement infection control practices during wound to prevent the potential for cross-contamination for 1 (Resident 23) of 1 sampled resident. Findings are: A. A record review of a facility policy Cleaning of Patient Care Equipment with a last reviewed date of 7/20/2021 indicated patient care equipment should be cleaned after each use. A continuous observation on 7/30/2024 from 7:37 AM to 8:04 AM revealed Medication Aide (MA)-B had taken a pair of tweezers from the side of the medication cart from a graduated cylinder to pull a piece of plastic from Resident 23's medication cup, touching Resident 23's medication in the cup with the tweezers. MA-B did not disinfect the tweezer prior to use or after use. At 7:39 AM, MA-B had taken the pair of tweezers back out of the side of the medication cart to pull a piece of plastic from Resident 16'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 · Dcited before2024-07-31 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09(I) Based on observations, record review, and interviews; the facility failed to ensure 1 (Resident 18) of 2 sampled residents' oxygen concentrator was turned off when not in use and unattended. The facility census was 26. The Findings Are: A record review of facility policy Oxygen Administration with revision date of October 2010 revealed that the facility would instruct the resident, their family, visitors, and roommate (if any) of the oxygen safety precautions. The policy also stated that the facility would provide the resident with a written copy of the Oxygen Safety Handout. A record review of undated facility provided document Using Oxygen Safely, revealed instruction to Turn off your oxygen when you're not using it. A record review of Resident 18's Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated comprehensive assessment tool used for care planning, dated 7/2/2024, revealed that the resident had diagnoses of non-Alzheimer's dementia, pulmonary hypertension due to lung diseases and hypoxia (An absence of enough oxygen in the tissues to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-31 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure 1 (Resident 8) of 2 sampled residents was free from unnecessary medications related to a) the long-term use of an antibiotic medication which did not specify a duration and b) the use of an antibiotic which had no supporting documentation for clinical use based on laboratory results. The facility census was 26. The Findings Are: A record review of facility policy Antibiotic Stewardship Program with revision date of 3/4/24 revealed that all prescriptions for antibiotics would specify the dose, duration, and indication for use. The policy also stated that the facility would monitor resident response to antibiotics, and laboratory results when available, to determine if the antibiotic was still indicated or adjustments should be made. A. A record review of Resident 8's facility admission orders dated 10/25/23, revealed Resident 8 was admitted to the facility with an order for nitrofurantoin (an antibiotic used to treat urinary tract infections (UTI)) 100 milligrams (MG) at bedtime for UTI prevention. A record review…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-31 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Licensure Reference 175 NAC 12-002.10 Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews; the facility failed to ensure medications were administered at the right time for 2 (Residents 1 and 15) of 6 sampled residents and to ensure the medication error rate was less than 5%. The medication error rate was 5.4% (37 medications administered with 2 medication errors.) The facility census was 26. Findings are: A record review of a facility policy Administering Medications with a revision date of April 2019 indicated medications are to be administered within one hour of their prescribed time unless otherwise specified and the individual administering the medication is to check the label to verify the right time before administering the medication. A record review of Resident 15's Medication Administration Record with a date of July 2024 indicated an order for Basaglar insulin (a medication used to treat hyperglycemia) to be administered at 9:00 AM with no special instructions related to the administration time. An observation on 7/30/2024 at 7:29 AM revealed Registered Nurse (RN)-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 · Fcited before2023-07-25 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility staff failed to ensure cleaning agents were not next to food, failed to ensure high risk food preparation splashing did not contaminate clean dishes and equipment to prevent the potential food contamination. This had the potential to affect all 25 residents who resided at the facility. The facility identified a census of 25 residents at the time of the survey. Findings are: An initial tour of the kitchen on 7/19/2023 at 1:25 PM revealed the handwashing sink was on the middle island countertop where the dietary staff prep the food and there were three trays filled with clean cups that were on the counter, directly behind the faucet of the handwashing sink. There were clean dishes pitchers, cups and pan sitting on the counter directly to the left of the handwashing sink as well. There was no guard in-between the clean dishes and the handwashing sink. An observation of lunch meal preparation on 7/25/2023 at 9:26 AM revealed Cook-B preparing BBQ chicken, au gratin potatoes,…
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 · D2023-07-25 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolatedProvide or obtain dental services for each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12.006.14 Based on record review, observations, and interviews, the facility staff failed to ensure 1(Resident 2) of 3 sampled residents received routine dental services. The facility staff identified a census of 25 residents at the time of the survey. Findings are: An interview with Resident 2 on 7/19/2023 at 2:42 PM revealed Resident 2 was concerned about their teeth. Resident 2 explained the facility staff had transported them to a dentist who Just broke my teeth instead of pulling them. Resident 2's teeth were sore, and they were concerned about an infection. Resident 2 said they can barely eat as they cannot chew. Resident 2 had reported their concerns to Social Services Coordinator (SSC)-A who arranges appointments, however, Resident 2 did not have a scheduled dental appointment. Resident 2 indicated Resident 2 was told there was nothing they (the facility) could do. An observation of Resident 2's mouth on 7/19/2023 at 2:42 PM revealed the bottom front to the bottom right…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership Data Not Available |
The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
What families pay in NE
CMS lists this home as Medicaid-certified only — it can accept Medicaid for long-term care, but it is not Medicare-certified, so Medicare will not pay for a short rehabilitation (“skilled nursing”) stay here. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Nebraska Medicaid page.
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 28E257. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-09-23, 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.