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

Accura HealthCare of North Platte

2900 West E Street, North Platte, NE 69101 · For profit - Corporation · 71 certified beds · (308) 534-2200 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (308) 534-2200 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0758)
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • 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
Worth asking about
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
  • nursing-staff turnover (65%) 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.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 2 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1001 Deerwood Dr · (308) 532-8783 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1845 W A St · (308) 532-5539 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Focus 300.8 mi
204 N Hayes Ave · (804) 222-4181 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Kriz Park0.4 mi
Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 2 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 1 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 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 improved from 1 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased29.3%19.0%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight8.5%5.1%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder1.0%1.4%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.1%2.8%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.6%4.3%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained1.0%0.3%0.1%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury2.6%4.5%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened44.6%18.2%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication21.0%19.3%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.1%96.1%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers3.0%4.0%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control30.7%25.9%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table28.1%20.7%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%2.0%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine94.2%75.9%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission21.0%20.7%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit13.2%11.4%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.341.811.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.951.921.80worse

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.

44.0% 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 154 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

44.0%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.7%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
48.0%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.32U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.13hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.15hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.03hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 48.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 73 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.32 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 52% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 14% 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF44.0%CMS range 36.1–52.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.7%CMS range 7.2–13.210.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge48.0%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge53.4%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge46.6%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 stay1.9%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.1%CMS range 4.2–10.87.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.231.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.74
RN hours/ resident / day
0.39
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.22
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.35
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.44
RN hoursweekends
65.1%
Total nursing turnover
54.5%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 71 beds and averages 55.8 residents a day — about 79% occupied, or roughly 15 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 3.35 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.74 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.22 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.17 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.42 on weekdays — 7% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.86 to 0.44 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 65% is well above the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-06-04)
2
at the previous standard inspection (2025-04-03)

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

14 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · E2026-06-04 · tag F0923 — pattern
    Have enough outside ventilation via a window or mechanical ventilation, or both.
    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 12-006.17(E)(v) Based on observations and interview, the facility failed to ensure resident bathrooms were well-ventilated for resident rooms on the 100 and 200 halls for 14 sampled residents. The facility identified a census of 55 residents. An observation on 6/4/26 at 10:30 AM in the bathroom of resident room [ROOM NUMBER] revealed the ceiling exhaust vent was not moving any air, as evidenced by no movement of a single ply of a toilet tissue square held up to the vent. No residents were assigned to room [ROOM NUMBER] at that time. An observation on 6/2/2026 at 11:00 AM in the bathroom of resident room [ROOM NUMBER] revealed the ceiling exhaust vent was not moving any air. room [ROOM NUMBER] was occupied by Resident 14. An observation on 6/2/2026 at 11:05 AM in the bathroom of resident room [ROOM NUMBER] revealed the ceiling exhaust vent was not moving any air. room [ROOM NUMBER] was occupied by Resident 46. An observation on 6/4/2026 at 11:10 AM in the bathroom of resident…

    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.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-06-04 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolated
    Provide 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

    Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09 Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure pre-and post-dialysis assessments were completed as required for one (Resident 30) of one sampled resident. The facility identified a census of 55. A record review of Resident 39's admission Record dated 6/4/2026 revealed an admission date of 5/4/2026. The admission record also revealed the following relevant diagnoses:-End stage renal disease-Malignant neoplasm of left kidney, except renal pelvis-Secondary malignant neoplasm of left kidney and renal pelvis-Dependence on Renal Dialysis-Acquired absence of kidney Record review of Resident 39's Physician's Orders revealed the following:-Assess dialysis site every (q) shift, Assess thrill/bruit (medical terms used to describe the signs of turbulent blood flow, usually related to a narrowed artery or an abnormal connection between an artery and a vein). Chart + if present and - if absent. Notify the dialysis center if absent. Assess access site and document N for normal, B for signs and symptoms (s/sx) bleeding, or I for s/sx…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-04 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY L:icensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.18(B)Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 1-005.06 Based on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure catheter bags were maintained in a manner to prevent the potential for cross contamination and/or infection for two (Residents 4 and 13) of three sampled residents. The facility identified a census of 55. Findings are: Record reviews of facility policies related to catheters (including infection control and catheter care) revealed no evidence of an expectation to ensure catheter bags were maintained in a manner to prevent the potential for cross contamination and/or infection. An interview with Infection Preventionist (IP) on 6/03/2026 at 3:14 PM confirmed that catheter bags were to be hung from the side pocket of the recliner when a resident was in their recliner. IP confirmed that when residents were in bed, the catheter bags were to be hung from the side of the bed. A. Record review of Resident 4's admission Record dated 6/4/2026 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-03 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — pattern
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09(H)(iv)(5) Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to follow their bowel protocol to prevent constipation (a condition characterized by infrequent or difficult bowel movements, resulting in hard, dry, and difficult-to-pass stools) for 3 (Residents 9, 11, and 16) of 6 sampled residents. The facility identified a census of 56. Findings are: A record review of the facility's Bowel Movement Needs List with a date of 5/10/2023 revealed that the night shift nurse is to record all residents who have not had a bowel movement in the last 2, 3, 4, or 5 days and give this list to the next shift. Interventions, assessments, and results will be initiated and recorded by the day and night shift nurses. A record review of an undated facility document, Accura HealthCare Bowel Protocol revealed the following: - Day 3 - MiraLAX 17 grams (g) with morning medications and prune juice at breakfast. - Day 4 - Milk of Magnesia with morning medications. - Day 5 - rectal…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-04-03 · tag F0623 — isolated
    Provide 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

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide a written notice of discharge as required to 1 (Resident 112) of 1 sampled resident or their representative. The facility census was 56. Findings Are: A record review of Resident 112's Progress Notes revealed that on 3/2/25, Resident 112 was sent by the facility to the emergency department due to adverse behaviors toward another resident. Resident 112 was admitted to the hospital due to delirium and hypoxia. Further review of Resident 112's Progress Notes revealed that on 3/3/25, the facility notified Resident 112's child that the facility would not be admitting the resident back to the facility from the hospital due to the potential for putting other residents in harm's way. The notes revealed Resident 112's child voiced understanding and declined a bed hold. A record review of Resident 112's electronic medical records revealed no evidence that a written notice of discharge had been given to the resident or the resident representative. An interview on 4/1/25 at 3:10 PM with the SSD confirmed that a written notice…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-04-03 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record reviews and interview, the facility failed to ensure the physician had documented a clinical rationale for not taking action regarding the pharmacist's identified medication irregularity as required of 1 (Resident 11) of 5 sampled residents. The facility identified a census of 56. Findings are: A record review of the facility's undated policy Medication Regimen Review Policies and Procedures defined Medication Regimen Review (MRR) as a thorough evaluation of the medication regimen of a resident by a consultant pharmacist, with the goal of promoting positive outcomes and minimizing adverse consequences associated with medication. The review includes preventing, identifying, reporting, and resolving medication-related problems, medication errors, or other irregularities, and collaborating with other members of the interdisciplinary team. Additionally, the policy revealed a report of the MRR with any irregularities will be sent to the Director of Nursing (DON), the Medical Director, and the Attending Physician. The policy did not include information regarding 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2024-03-21 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.11E Based on observation, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure food was labeled and dated to prevent the potential of food borne illness. This had the potential to affect all residents who consumed food from the kitchen. The facility census was 60. Findings are: A. An observation on March 18, 2024, at 10:45 AM during the initial walk through of the kitchen walk through revealed: - One open plastic bag of spaghetti with no listed expiration date or open date. The bag of spaghetti was within a box which also did not contain an opened or expiration date. - One open plastic bag of elbow macaroni with no expiration date or open date. The bag of elbow macaroni was within a box which also did not contain an opened or expiration date. - One open plastic bag of long grain rice with no expiration date or open date. The long grain rice was within a box which also did not contain an opened or expiration date. - One bottle of soy sauce was open without an opened date or expiration date. An observation on March 18, 2024, at 10:45 AM…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2024-03-21 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespread
    Dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12.006.18A Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure garbage was stored in a manner to prevent harborage and feeding of pests by failing to ensure trash receptacles were covered and not open. This had the potential to affect all the facility's residents. The facility identified a census of 60 at the time of survey. An observation on March 18, 2024 at 10:45 AM of the facility outside of the back entry to the kitchen revealed the following: - 1 trash receptable which had the back of the receptable open with no coverings and trash was visible inside, - 1 trash receptable which had the front and the back of the receptable open with no coverings and trash was visible inside. Interview with Dietary superviosor (DS) on March 20, 2024, at 10:45 AM confirmed the lids the 2 trash receptables were uncovered with trash inside. The DS confirmed the facility had called the trash company but was unaware of a delivery date to replace the coverings.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-03-21 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolated
    Provide activities to meet all resident's needs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09D5b Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to provide activities of choice to 1 (Resident 9) of 1 sampled residents. The facility identified a census of 60. The findings are: A record review of Resident 9's Medical Diagnosis revealed the facility had admitted Resident 9 on 10/12/2019 with diagnoses of: major depressive disorder, Dementia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, insomnia, retention of urine, and constipation. A record review of Resident 9's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS, a standardized assessment tool that measures health status in nursing home residents), dated 2/26/2024, revealed Resident 9 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15/15, which revealed the resident was cognitively intact. The MDS also indicated Resident 9's activity preference for doing things with groups of people was very important and doing Resident 9's activity preference for doing favorite activities and going outside was somewhat important. A record review of Resident 9's Care Plan 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-21 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09 Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to follow physician's orders regarding daily weights for 1 (Resident 36) of 1 sampled resident. The facility census was 60. The Findings Are: A record review of Resident 36's admission record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a primary diagnosis of pneumonia, unspecified organism. A record review of Resident 36's undated Care Plan revealed the resident had a diagnosis of congestive heart failure and had an intervention in place for weight monitoring. A record review of Resident 36's Physician's Orders revealed an order for daily weights to be obtained on the day shift related to their diagnosis of Unspecified Diastolic (Congestive) Heart Failure. The order also stated to give PRN (as needed) Lasix if the resident had a weight gain of 4 to 5 pounds, and to call the Primary Care Provider (PCP). The start date for this order was 12/21/2023. A record review of Resident 36'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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-03-21 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09D2b Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to provide treatment of a pressure ulcer for 1 (Resident 9) of 4 sampled residents. The facility identified a census of 60. The findings are: A record review of Resident 9's Medical Diagnosis revealed the facility had admitted Resident 9 on 10/12/2019 with diagnoses of: major depressive disorder, Dementia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and Diabetes Mellitus. A record review of Resident 9's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS, a standardized assessment tool that measures health status in nursing home residents) dated 2/26/2024, revealed Resident 9 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15/15, which revealed the resident was cognitively intact. The MDS also indicated Resident 9 was at risk for pressure ulcers with a pressure ulcer present. A record review of Resident 9's Weekly Skin Assessment with a date of 3/5/2024 revealed Resident 9 had an unstageable pressure sore to the right great toe. A record review of Resident 9's Care Plan…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-03-21 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09D6 (7) Based on observation, record review and interview; the facility staff failed to change oxygen tubing for 2 (Resident 10 and 49) of 2 sampled residents and failed to change the nebulizer mask with tubing for 1 (Resident 49) of 1 sampled resident which had the potential to cause infection. The facility census was 60. Findings are: A. A record review of Resident 10's Medical Diagnosis printed 3/18/2024 revealed Resident 10 was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of: congestive heart failure (CHF-the heart does not pump blood as well as it should), obstructive sleep apnea (intermittent airflow blockage during sleep), morbid obesity, pulmonary hypertension (a type of high blood pressure that affects the arteries in the lungs and the right side of the heart), paranoid schizophrenia (a mental disorder in which the person has irrational thoughts, delusions and hallucinations). A record review of Resident 10's Clinical Physician Orders printed 3/18/2024…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-03-21 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.10 Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure an as needed antipsychotic medication was limited to 14 days and had a physician documented rationale for continuance. This affected 1 (Resident 114) of 6 sampled residents. The facility identified a census of 60. The findings are: A record review of Resident 114's Face Sheet revealed the facility admitted Resident 114 on 2/28/2024 with diagnoses of: altered mental status, adult failure to thrive, hallucinations, Dementia with moderate behavioral disturbance, and cognitive communication deficit. A record review of Resident 114's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS, a standardized assessment tool that measures health status in nursing home residents) dated 3/9/2024, revealed Resident 114 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 4/15, which revealed the resident had severe cognitive impairment. The MDS also indicated Resident 114 had physical (hitting, kicking, grabbing, etc.) and verbal (threatening, screaming, cursing, etc.) behavioral symptoms 4 to 6…

    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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-21 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.17D Based on observation, record review and interview; the facility failed to ensure hand hygiene was performed to prevent the spread of infection or prevent cross contamination during and after incontinence care with appropriate change of gloves for 1 (Resident 49) of 1 sampled resident. The facility census was 60. Findings are: An observation on 3/20/2024 at 11:00 AM of personal cares were completed on Resident 49 by NA-D (nursing assistant) and NA-F revealed the following: Resident 49 was lying on [gender] back in bed. NA-D performed hand hygiene (HH) with soap and water at the resident's sink for 20 seconds. NA-F performed HH for 30 seconds with soap and water at the sink. Both nursing assistants applied gloves and the privacy curtain was pulled. NA-D began to pull the covers down the resident. NA-F pulled the window blinds. NA-D undid the tabs on the incontinence brief and removed the pillow from under the resident's legs. NA-D then pulled multiple incontinence wipes from the package and set them on top of the package. NA-D then wiped…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to ACCURA HEALTHCARE — 41 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 4 of 52.5+1.5 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.6+1.4 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 53.1-1.1 vs chain
Quality measures 2 of 52.8-0.8 vs chain
The other 40 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.5★, per CMS)
1 of 5Aberdeen Health And RehabAberdeen, SD 1 of 5Accura HealthCare of TekamahTekamah, NE 1 of 5Accura Healthcare of CarrollCarroll, IA 1 of 5Accura Healthcare of MarshalltownMarshalltown, IA 1 of 5Accura Healthcare of Newton East, LLCNewton, IA 1 of 5Accura Healthcare of O'NeillO' Neill, NE 1 of 5Accura Healthcare of Pleasantville, LLCPleasantville, IA 1 of 5Accura Healthcare of ShenandoahShenandoah, IA 1 of 5Green Lea Senior LivingMabel, MN 1 of 5Lake Andes Senior LivingLake Andes, SD 1 of 5Shell Rock Senior LivingShell Rock, IA 2 of 5Accura Healthcare of Cascade LLCCascade, IA 2 of 5Accura Healthcare of CrestonCreston, IA 2 of 5Accura Healthcare of FranklinFranklin, NE 2 of 5Accura Healthcare of Knoxville, LLCKnoxville, IA 2 of 5Accura Healthcare of Lake City, LLCLake City, IA 2 of 5Accura Healthcare of MuscatineMuscatine, IA 2 of 5Accura Healthcare of OnawaOnawa, IA 2 of 5Accura Healthcare of Spirit LakeSpirit Lake, IA 2 of 5Sterling Park Health Care CenterWaite Park, MN 2 of 5Woodlyn Heights Healthcare CenterInver Grove Heights, MN 3 of 5Accura Healthcare of Ames, LLCAmes, IA 3 of 5Accura Healthcare of Aurelia, LLCAurelia, IA 3 of 5Accura Healthcare of Cherokee, LLCCherokee, IA 3 of 5Accura Healthcare of FullertonFullerton, NE 3 of 5Accura Healthcare of Pomeroy, LLCPomeroy, IA 3 of 5Accura Healthcare of StantonStanton, IA 3 of 5Accura Healthcare of ToledoToledo, IA 3 of 5Meadow ManorGrand Meadow, MN 3 of 5Prairie View Senior LivingTracy, MN 3 of 5Traditions Memory Care of NewtonNewton, IA 4 of 5Accura Healthcare of Le MarsLe Mars, IA 4 of 5Accura Healthcare of MilfordMilford, IA 4 of 5Accura Healthcare of New HamptonNew Hampton, IA 4 of 5Accura Healthcare of Ogden, LLCOgden, IA 4 of 5Accura Healthcare of Sioux City, LLCSioux City, IA 4 of 5Faulkton Senior LivingFaulkton, SD 5 of 5Accura HealthCare of HartingtonHartington, NE 5 of 5Accura Healthcare of BancroftBancroft, IA 5 of 5Karlstad Healthcare Center INCKarlstad, MN

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
AVIV HEALTHCARE OF THE MIDWEST LLCOrganizationDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2025
AVENUE94 LLCOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 04/01/2025
AVIV HEALTHCARE HOLDINGS LLCOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 04/01/2025
KIMMONS HEALTHCARE INVESTMENTS LLCOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 04/01/2025
KTL ENTERPRISES LLCOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 04/01/2025
LITTLE RIVER INVESTMENTS LLCOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 04/01/2025
ZRR OPCO LLCOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 04/01/2025
ALLEN, BRADYIndividualINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2025
KLEINSASSER, MEGANIndividualINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2025
LENEAVE, TEDIndividualINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2025
TOTI, LISAIndividualINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2025
ACCURA MANAGEMENT CONSULTING SERVICES LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2025
ARROWSMITH, KIRSTENIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2025
GLASER, KRISTOPHERIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2025
SWANSON, JONIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2025
VIERRA, BRAIDYNIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2025
AVIV FINANCING II LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2025
AVIV HEALTHCARE PROPERTIES OPERATING PARTNERSHIP I LPOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2025
IOWA LINCOLN COUNTY PROPERTY LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2025
OHI HEALTHCARE PROPERTIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIPOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2025
OMEGA HEALTHCARE INVESTORS INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 36 rows in the source record cover these 21 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

13 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$7.4M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+7.4%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$376K
Related-party expense5% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 53%Medicare 24%Other / private 23%

This home reported $376K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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

$298per resident / day
operating cost
$9,059per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$322per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Nebraska Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Nebraska
$8,377/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$9,216/mo
Nursing home (private)
$6,350/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 285165. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-06-04, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next