Heartland Ridge Care Center
5431 South 16th Street, Lincoln, NE 68512 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 47 certified beds · (531) 739-3200 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- 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
- a high number of inspection citations overall (21) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (78%) runs well above the national median (45%)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
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 | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 2 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 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.
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 | 28.6% | 19.0% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 7.7% | 5.1% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 1.4% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 2.8% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 4.2% | 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 | 0.0% | 4.5% | 3.3% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 14.3% | 19.3% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.8% | 4.0% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 27.5% | 25.9% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 31.8% | 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 | 94.7% | 75.9% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 18.7% | 20.7% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 14.1% | 11.4% | 12.0% | worse |
* 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.
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.
55.2% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 325 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 63.8% 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 127 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 1.55 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 99% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% 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 | 55.2%CMS range 50.0–60.6 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.1%CMS range 7.7–12.6 | 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 | 63.8% | 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 | 56.7% | 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 | 61.4% | 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 | 97.0% | 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 | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this 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 | 99.2% | 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 | 3.5% | 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 | 1.2% | 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 | 7.8%CMS range 5.5–10.8 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.09 | 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 47 beds and averages 24.3 residents a day — about 52% occupied, or roughly 23 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 5.12 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.06 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.78 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 4.71 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.29 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.10 to 0.98 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 78% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
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.
21 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 11 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-05-22 · 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 12.006.11(E) Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to complete hand hygiene (the practice of keeping your hands clean) between glove changes and after hands were soiled while preparing food in the kitchen. The facility failed to wash dirty vegetables prior to use. The facility failed to ensure facial hair was completely covered. This had the potential to affect 30 of 30 residents that resided at the facility. The total facility census was 30. Findings are: A. A record review of Section 3-304.15 of the Nebraska Food Code dated 03/08/2012 revealed that If used, SINGLE-USE gloves shall be used for only one task such as working with READY-TO-EAT or with raw animal FOOD, used for no other purpose, and discarded when damaged or soiled, or when interruptions occur in the operations. Record review of the undated facility Hand Hygiene policy revealed that the use of gloves does not replace hand hygiene. If your task requires gloves, perform hand hygiene prior to donning gloves, and immediately after removing gloves. 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 · E2025-05-22 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 1-005.06(D) Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that staff followed principles of infection control and prevention related to hand hygiene, use of personal protection equipment (PPE), and cleaning and storage of respiratory equipment. This affected 6 residents (Residents 13, 14, 20, 21, 129, and 136) of 9 sampled for infection control practices. The facility census was 30. Findings are: Review of the facility's policy for Hand Hygiene undated with copyright 2024 from the Compliance Store revealed that hand hygiene should be performed under the conditions listed in, but not limited to, the attached hand hygiene table. The policy further revealed that use of alcohol-based hand rub (ABHR) was preferred in most situations, but soap and water should be used if hands were visibly dirty, before eating, and after using the restroom. For hand hygiene using ABHR, staff should apply ABHR and rub hands together until they feel dry, which…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-05-22 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — patternKeep all essential equipment working safely.
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 12.006.19(A)(i) Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that the ventilation (the provision of fresh air to a room, building, etc.) systems were operational in 7 resident bathrooms (rooms 501, 502, 503, 507, 508, 509, and 510) of the occupied resident bathrooms. The facility census was 30. Findings are: An observation on 05/19/2025, 05/20/2025, 05/21/2025, and 05/22/2025 revealed foul odor in room [ROOM NUMBER]. An observation on 05/19/2025 between 9:36 AM-10:13 AM revealed bathroom vents were not operational in rooms 501, 502, 502, 507, 508, 509, and 510 when holding a tissue to the vent system. Record review of the undated facility Fresh Air Vents form revealed that the bathroom vents were checked on 300, 400, and 500 hallways and in good working order in March, April, and May 2025. No specific rooms were noted on the form. Record review of the facility Maintenance Checklist dated 09/4/2024, 11/19/2024, and 03/12/2025 showed that 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 · D2025-05-22 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a notice of transfer was provided to 1 (Resident 27) of 1 sampled resident and the resident's representative in a language they could understand upon emergent transfer from the facility. The total facility census was 30. Findings are: A record review of the facility's Transfer and Discharge (including AMA (against medical advice) policy dated 01/2025 revealed the facility's transfer/discharge notice would be provided to the resident and resident's representative in a language and manner in which they could understand. The notice would include the specific reason and basis for transfer or discharge. The notice must be provided at least 30 days prior to a transfer or discharge of the resident except when an immediate transfer is required by the resident's urgent medical needs. In that case, the notice must be provided to the resident and the resident's representative as soon as practicable before the transfer or discharge. In an emergency transfer…
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 · D2025-05-22 · 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)(iii) Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS)(a comprehensive assessment used to develop a resident's care plan) dated 05/06/2025 included 1 (Resident 6) of 1's documented behaviors. The total facility census was 30. Findings are: A record review of the Centers for Medicare and (&) Medicaid Services' Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) 3.0 User's Manual, Version 1.18.11 dated October 2023, Section E: Behaviors revealed: The items in this section identify behavioral symptoms in the last seven days that may cause distress to the resident, or may be disruptive to facility residents, staff members or the care environment. E0200 Steps for Assessment included medical record review for the 7-day look back, interview staff, family and friends who had frequent contact with the resident and observe the resident in different situations for the 7-day lookback period. Coding…
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 · D2025-05-22 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide 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 2 (Residents 129 and 13) of 2 sampled residents had a valid non-invasive ventilator (a machine used to deliver positive pressure to the airway) provider order. The total facility census was 30. Findings are: A record review of the Sleep Foundation's article Do You Need a Prescription For a Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP)(a machine used to treat sleep apnea) Machine? dated 12/28/2022 revealed, the Food and Drug Administration classified a CPAP machine as a Class II medical device and requires a prescription. The prescription should indicate the type of unit and pressure setting. https://www.sleepfoundation.org/cpap/do-you-need-a-prescription-for-a-cpap-machine A record review of ResMed's Diagnosed with sleep apnea? Getting Started on Continuous Positive Airway Pressure dated 02/26/2020 revealed that before starting a CPAP the resident would receive a prescription…
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 · D2025-05-22 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
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) Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to assess the resident's fistula (A port used for dialysis -a process of filtering the blood), and obtain vital signs following dialysis for 2 (Resident 7 and 9) of 2 sampled residents. The total facility census was 30. Findings are: A record review on 05/21/25 at 12:45 PM of the policy Hemodialysis with date implemented on 04/2022 and reviewed/revised on 01/2025 revealed: This facility will provide the necessary care and treatment, consistent with professional standards of practice, physician orders, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences to meet the special medical, nursing, mental, and psychosocial needs of residents receiving hemodialysis. Purpose: The facility will ensure that each resident has ongoing assessment and oversight which included monitoring of the resident's condition during and after treatments received at a certified dialysis…
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 · D2025-05-22 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.10 (D) Based on observation, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure they had a medication error rate of less than 5%. Observations of 36 medications administrations revealed 3 errors, for a medication error rate of 8.33%. This affected 2 residents (Resident 20 and Resident 13) of 5 residents sampled. The facility census was 30. Findings are: A. A record review of Resident 20's admission Record printed 05/21/2025 revealed the resident had been admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses of a fractured pelvis, falls, pain, an irregular heartbeat, high blood pressure, and prostate cancer. A record review of Resident 20's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS-a comprehensive assessment of each resident's functional capabilities) dated 05/21/2025 revealed it was not completed, but Section C Cognitive Patterns was complete and showed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS- a test used to get a quick snapshot of a resident's cognitive function, scored…
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 · F2024-06-13 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — widespreadEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
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(B)(ii) Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure 3 nurse aides (NA) and 1 medication aide (MA)(NA-C, NA-E, NA-F, MA-D) of 6 sampled have the competencies required to care for residents' needs. The facility census was 34. Findings are: Record review of 3 NA's personnel files revealed competencies were not compeleted this past year. The 3 NA's without competencies with their hire date are: -NA-C was hired on 11/18/2022, -NA-E was hired on 10/26/2018, -NA-F was hired on 04/26/2023, -MA-D was hired on 06/21/23. In an interview with the Administrator on 6/12/24 at 3:00 PM revealed that the facility does not have current policy or recent plan on when staff should complete their Relias education. In an interview with the Administrator on 6/13/24 at 7:15 AM revealed that MA-D and NA-C did not attend the Old [NAME] Rehabilitation fair that was held in December 2023. In an interview with the Administrative Assistant on 6/13/24 at 11:05 AM revealed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-06-13 · tag F0801 — widespreadEmploy sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
175 NAC 12-006.04(H)(ii)(1) Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the Dietary Manager (DM) had the required credentials. This had the potential to affect 33 of 34 residents who ate food prepared in the kitchen. The facility census was 34. Findings are: During an initial tour of the kitchen on 06/10/2024 from 7:15 AM to 7:33 AM, the DM revealed that [gender] had not completed the requirements to be a Certified Dietary Manager (CDM), but were enrolled in the course. An interview on 06/11/2024 at 12:15 PM with the DM revealed the facility had a consulting dietitian who worked for the facility part-time. The DM revealed they had a ServSafe certification for Food Protection Manager. A review of the ServSafe Certification provided by the DM revealed an examination date of 07/11/2023 and an expiration date of 07/11/2028. Review of the ServSafe website revealed the ServSafe Manager certification course was 8-10 hours long. https://www.servsafe.com/Administrators/Online-Course-Best-Practices An interview on 06/13/2024 at 10:34 AM with the DM confirmed 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.
Show the remaining 11 citations
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-06-13 · 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
Liscensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.11E Based on observations, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure hair was covered during food preparation and cooking. This had the potential to affect 33 or 34 residents who ate food prepared in the dining room. The facility census was 34. Findings are: An observation on 06/11/2024 at 7:03 AM revealed [NAME] A in the kitchen with a hair net and baseball cap on. [NAME] A had a short beard, and was not wearing a beard net. An observation on 06/11/2024 from 9:56 AM to 11:30 AM revealed [NAME] A preparing and cooking food for lunch. [NAME] A was not wearing a beard net during this time. An observation on 06/11/2024 at 11:56 AM revealed [NAME] A preparing deli sandwiches and salads for the meal alternate selections. [NAME] A was not wearing a beard net during this time. During an interview on 06/13/2024 at 10:34 AM The Dietary Manager confirmed that [NAME] A should have been wearing a beard net during food preparation and cooking. A review of the facility policy titled Food Safety Requirements implemented 9/2022 revealed:…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-06-13 · 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 12-006.04B(ii) Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure 3 nurse aides(NA) and medication aide (MA) (NA-C, MA-D, NA-F) of 6 sampled had at least 12 hours of continuing education in a year. The facility census was 34. Findings are: Record review of 6 sampled staff personnel files revealed 3 NA's (nurses aide) did not have their 12 hours of continuing education done as required. The 3 NA's without the education, hire dates, and hours of education completed are the following: -NA-C was hired on 11/18/2022 has had no hours completed for the past year. -MA-D was hired on 06/21/2023 and has completed 1.5 hours of education. -NA-F was hired on 04/26/2023 and has completed 4 hours of education. In an interview with the Administrative Assistant (AA) on 6/12/24 at 2:27 PM revealed that NA-C, MA-D and NA-F did not complete 12 hours of education on Relias within this past year. In an interview with the Administrator on 6/12/24 at 3:00 PM revealed that NA-C, MA-D and NA-F did not complete 12 hours of education on Relias within this…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-13 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide a written notice of transfer to Resident 20 and/or their representative upon transfer to the hospital. This affected 1 of 2 residents sampled for hospitalizations. The facility census was 34. Findings are: A review of Resident 20's admission Record printed 06/11/2024 revealed Resident 20 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses of: peripheral vascular disease (PVD-a systemic disorder that involves the narrowing of blood vessels away from the heart, such as in the legs and feet), high blood pressure, diabetes mellitus type 2 (a long-term medical condition in which your body doesn't use insulin properly, resulting in unusual blood sugar levels), and end stage renal disorder (ESRD-a medical condition in which a person's kidneys cease functioning on a permanent basis). A review of Resident 20's Progress Notes revealed that the resident went to the emergency room on [DATE] for treatment of wounds on the left foot and was subsequently…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-13 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide a notification of the facility policy for bed hold to Resident 20 and/or their representative upon transfer to the hospital. This affected 1 of 2 residents sampled for hospitalizations. The facility census was 34. Findings are: A review of Resident 20's admission Record printed 06/11/2024 revealed Resident 20 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses of: peripheral vascular disease (PVD-a systemic disorder that involves the narrowing of blood vessels away from the heart, such as in the legs and feet), high blood pressure, diabetes mellitus type 2 (a long-term medical condition in which your body doesn't use insulin properly, resulting in unusual blood sugar levels), and end stage renal disorder (ESRD-a medical condition in which a person's kidneys cease functioning on a permanent basis). A review of Resident 20's Progress Notes revealed that the resident went to the emergency room on [DATE] for treatment of wounds on the left…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-13 · tag F0887 — isolatedEducate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to offer the COVID-19 vaccination and failed to provide education regarding the risks and benefits of receiving the COVID-19 vaccination to Resident 5 and Resident 16 and/or their representatives. This affected 2 of 5 residents sampled for COVID-19 vaccination status. The facility census was 34. Findings are: A review of the facility's undated policy titled Covid-19 Vaccination revealed: -It is the policy of this facility to minimize the risk of acquiring, transmitting, or experiencing complications from COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) by educating and offering our residents and staff the COVID-19 vaccine. -27. The resident's medical record will include documentation of the following: a. Education to the resident or resident representative regarding the risks, benefits, and potential side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine; b. Each dose of the vaccine administered to the resident, or; c. If the resident did not receive the COVID-19 vaccine due to 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-17 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.04C3a(6) Based on record review and interviews; the facility failed to notify the resident's physician of discharge to another facility for 1 (Resident 1) of 1 resident sampled. The facility census was 30. Findings are: A record review of Resident 1's admission Record revealed that Resident 1 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of Sepsis (a serious condition in which the body responds improperly to an infection), Dysphagia(difficulty swallowing), Gastro-esophageal Reflux Disease(A digestive disease in which stomach acid or bile irritates the food pipe lining), Pulmonary embolism(A condition in which one or more arteries in the lungs become blocked by a blood clot), Depression(It involves a depressed mood or loss of pleasure or interest in activities for long periods of time), Acute respiratory failure with hypoxia( a condition where you don't have enough oxygen in the tissues in your body). A record review of Resident 1's Progress Note indicated that Resident 1 was…
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 · D2024-04-17 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.02(8) Based on record review and interview; the facility failed to notify APS (Adult Protective Services ) within 2 hours of serious bodily injury from a fall for 1 (Resident 3) of 3 sampled residents and failed to submit an investigation to the State Agency within 5 working days of a serious bodily injury from a fall for 1 (Resident 3) of 3 sampled residents and an investigation for an injury of Unknown Origin for 1 (Resident 2) of 3 sampled residents. The facility census was 30. Findings are: A. A record review of Resident 3's Medical Diagnosis revealed Resident 3 was admitted on [DATE] with the diagnoses of end stage renal disease (the kidneys no longer work requiring dialysis), chronic pancreatitis (inflammation of the pancreas), severe protein-calorie malnutrition, and weakness. A record review of Resident 3's Progress Note dated 4/7/2024 revealed the resident was sent to the emergency room at 6:15 AM following a fall in [gender] bathroom. The resident returned 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 · D2024-04-17 · tag F0622 — isolatedNot transfer or discharge a resident without an adequate reason; and must provide documentation and convey specific information when a resident is transferred or discharged.
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(5) Based on record review and interviews the facility failed to complete a discharge summary for 1 (Resident 1) of 3 sampled residents. The facility census was 30. Findings are: A record review of Resident 1's admission record revealed Resident 1 was admitted on [DATE] with the admitting diagnosis of sepsis( a serious condition in which the body responds improperly to an infection). A record review of Resident 1 Progress notes dated 9/24/23 revealed that Resident 1 was discharged on 9/22/23 to another Nursing home. A record review of Nursing Assessments revealed that there was no discharge summary initiated on or before 9/22/23. An interview on 4/17/24 at 1:30 PM with Social Services (SS)-C confirmed that [gender] starts a discharge plan on admission which consist of goals for Resident 1 wanting to return home. SS-C confirmed that a discharge summary had not been done on discharge for Resident 1 and that a discharge summary should of been done. An interview on 4/17/24…
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 before2023-06-21 · 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 12-006.11C Based on observation, interview, and record review; the facility failed to ensure the kitchen was maintained in a clean and sanitary manner, the facility failed to ensure hair restraints were being worn, and facility failed to ensure hand washing was being completed by facility staff to prevent potential cross contamination. This had the potential to affect all 35 residents who received food from the facility kitchen. The facility identified a census of 35 at the time of survey. Findings are: Observation on 6/14/23 at 7:25 AM of the main kitchen revealed the steam table had food crumbs and debris along the entire length of the steam table approximately 3 feet long. The steam table also revealed brownish/blackish residue the entire length of the steam table approximately 3 feet long. Observation further revealed two counter tops which were the length of two walls had toast and crumbs of food throughout the entire length of the countertop. Observation revealed that breakfast had not been started at this time. Observation on 6/15/23 at 7:25…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-06-21 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide 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 12-006.09D3(5) LICENSURE REFERENCE NUMBER 175 NAC 12-006.09D9 Based on interview, observation, and record review, the facility failed to ensure bowel care was monitored and protocol provided for Resident 6, 13 and 22; in addition, the facility failed to follow fluid restriction for Resident 29. The sample size was 4. The facility identified a census of 35. Findings Are: A. Record review of the facility policy titled Order Summary related to bowel care revealed facility staff are to chart bowel movements and initiate bowel protocol as applicable for no bowel movement (BM) in 3 or more days. The policy revealed the facility staff were to document any refusal of protocol and/or use of alternate intervention(s). The policy revealed the following was the BM protocol (if a resident has not had a BM in the given days); - 3 days (of a resident not having a bowel movement) the facility staff were to administer MOM (Milk of Magnesia) or Prune Juice, - 4 days (of a resident not having a bowel movement) the facility staff were to administer a suppository, - 5…
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 · D2023-06-21 · 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 residents were free from unnecessary medications related to antibiotic use for Resident 13. The sample size was 1. The facility identified a census of 35. Findings Are: Record review revealed Resident 13 had an order for Cephalexin 500mg qid (4 times daily) x 7 days for possible infection ordered on 6/11/23. Record review of the Progress Notes dated 6/11/23 for Resident 13 read as follows; Resident 13 had a medium emesis this AM and had several loose stools. Resident 13 refused to work with therapy and was shivering when PTA (Physical Therapy Aide) was talking to [gender]. Resident 13 had a tachy (elevated pace) pulse. Resident's 13 daughter came to the faciltiy prior to dinner and was concerned about Resident 13 not feeling well and inquired if Resident 13 could have a urinary tract infection. Resident 13's urine in foley bag and urine was odorous, cloudy, dark yellow with sedimentation. The Doctor had seen Resident 13 on 6/11/23 afternoon and ordered a one time dose of Rocephin (an injectable antibiotic) now,…
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.
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 $157K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. 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 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 285299. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-05-22, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.