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

Brookestone Village

4330 South 144th Street, Omaha, NE 68137 · Non profit - Corporation · 140 certified beds · (402) 614-4000 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (402) 614-4000 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0610) — cited Feb 2026
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

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
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (34% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed

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.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
3730 S 149th St Ste 102 · (866) 776-6782 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
14303 U St · (402) 895-0181 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Pharmgate0.5 mi
14040 Industrial Rd · (402) 330-6000 · Call to confirm hours
Park
(402) 444-5900 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
13831 Industrial Rd · (402) 502-7344

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 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 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 held steady at 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating5★
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 increased17.0%19.0%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight1.2%5.1%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%1.4%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.4%2.8%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.3%4.3%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.3%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury4.1%4.5%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened20.6%18.2%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication6.0%19.3%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%96.1%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers3.1%4.0%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control30.0%25.9%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table8.1%20.7%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.9%2.0%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.4%75.9%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission16.7%20.7%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit6.6%11.4%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.401.811.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.631.921.80better

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.

65.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 430 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

65.9%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
7.1%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
42.9%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.47U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.20hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.20hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.07hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 42.9% 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 275 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 0.47 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 78% 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF65.9%CMS range 62.0–69.051.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF7.1%CMS range 5.1–8.810.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge42.9%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 discharge49.5%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 discharge31.6%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 identified99.3%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 stay0.7%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 worsened1.9%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 hospitalization6.1%CMS range 4.2–9.67.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.931.02Oct 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

1.03
RN hours/ resident / day
0.57
LPN hours/ resident / day
3.23
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.84
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.86
RN hoursweekends
33.7%
Total nursing turnover
35.5%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 140 beds and averages 129.4 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 11 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.84 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.03 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.23 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 4.31 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.05 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.10 to 0.86 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 34% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

5
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-02-24)
1
at the previous standard inspection (2024-10-16)

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.

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

  • Potential for harm · D2026-03-24 · tag F0551 — isolated
    Give the resident's representative the ability to exercise the resident's rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that 1 (Resident 1) of 3 sampled residents' representative's preference of female caregivers only was honored. The facility census was 130. Findings are:A record review of the facility's Resident Rights dated 05/19 revealed the resident had the right to designate a legal representative who can make choices about care and to make choices about aspects of your life in the facility that are significant to the resident. The resident had the right to choose activities, schedules, health care and health providers.A record review of Resident 1's Clinical Census dated 03/23/2026 revealed that Resident 1 was admitted to the facility 12/12/2025. A record review of Resident 1's Medical Diagnosis dated 03/23/2026 revealed the resident had diagnoses that included Major Depressive Disorder and Cognitive Communication Deficit (problems communicating caused by a cognitive impairment).A record review of Resident 1's Physician's Order Sheet And Progress Notes dated 03/20/2021 revealed the physician documented the resident had…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-02-24 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.18Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a staff member wore a face shield or goggles in a droplet/contact isolation room, failed to restrict sharing of communal food items, and failed to ensure a staff member disinfected goggles between resident rooms in droplet/contact isolation to prevent cross contamination. The facility staff identified a census of 122.Findings are:Record review of an e-mail from an Infection Preventionist at the Nebraska Infection Control Assessment and Promotion Program (ICAP) to the Infection Preventionist and Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) A at the facility dated February 18, 2026, at 3:20 PM revealed the following list of immediate prevention actions to follow regarding a Norovirus (a highly contagious virus that causes gastroenteritis, leading to vomiting, diarrhea, and stomach cramps) outbreak : -Ill residents should be isolated in contact precautions (gown, gloves, and mask and protective…

    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 · D2026-02-24 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    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 report and investigate an allegation of abuse for Resident 22 within the required timeframe. The facility claimed a census of 122. A record review of the facility's undated Abuse and Neglect Prevention Standard, revised 1/2023, revealed the following Required Elements:It is the responsibility of all team members to immediately report any act of witnessed, suspected, or reported abuse to the Administrator or their supervisor.InvestigationAll allegations of abuse and/or neglect will be investigated and reported in accordance with the state and federal laws.In the situation of an allegation of abuse, the following people will be notified immediately: Administrator, Director of Nursing (DON), and Social Services.The suspected team member(s) will be suspended immediately while an in-depth, documented investigation is conducted.ProtectionResidents will be protected from harm during an investigation.Team members suspected of abuse will be immediately…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-24 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1 (Resident 129) of 1 Care Plan included a Risk for Elopement along with goals and interventions. The facility identified a census of 122 A record review of the Elopement (a patient or resident leaving a nursing home without authorization, supervision, or proper discharge) Risk Manual (the facility system to identify residents who are at risk for elopement) on the Lakeview unit revealed a resident sheet for Resident 129 containing an up-to-date picture and Resident 129's description details. A record review of the [NAME] Health Services Operating standards manual revealed the following: Elopement Prevention and Management Standard Resident Risk Review.All resident will be evaluated prior to admission for concerns related to elopement risk and resident safety. Appropriate placement of the resident is of utmost importance. Ongoing review will occur with all residents to ensure proper placement and a safe environment.…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-02-24 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09(H)(iii)(1) Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement interventions to prevent pressure injury for 1 (Resident 58) of 1 sampled resident. The facility census was 122. Findings are:A record review of the facility's Skin and Wound Management Standard with a revised date of 04/2019 revealed each resident would be assessed for their risk for developing a pressure ulcer/injury and each high-risk area would have an individualized care plan to address each risk area, and interventions implemented immediately to avoid development of a pressure ulcer. A record review of Resident 58's Clinical Census dated 02/24/2026 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] to room [ROOM NUMBER]-A and transferred to room [ROOM NUMBER]-A on 01/27/2026. A record review of Resident 58's Order Summary Report dated 02/24/2026 revealed the resident had diagnoses of Nondisplaced Intertrochanteric Fracture of the Right Femur (right hip…

    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 · D2026-02-24 · 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

    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 (Resident 144 and 147) of 2 sampled resident's oxygen (o2) orders contained a dosage (settings) and ensure 1 (Resident 160) of 2 sampled residents had a Positive Airway Pressure (PAP) device order. The facility census was 122. Findings are:A.A record review of the National Library of Medicine's undated Nursing Skills, Chapter 11 Oxygen Therapy revealed that oxygen was considered a medication and required a prescription. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK593208/ A record review of the National Library of Medicine's undated Nursing Skills, Basic Concepts of Administering Medications revealed that according to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, all orders for the administration of drugs and biologicals must contain the following information: - Drug name - Dose, frequency, and route - Name/Signature of the prescriber - Specific instructions for use, when…

    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 before2024-10-16 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Reference Number 175 12-006.09 (F)(III) Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to update the Comprehensive Care Plans (CCP) related to wound care for Residents 7 and 88, anti-anxiety medication use for Resident 87 and targeted behaviors and interventions for Resident 69. The sample size was 5 and the facility census was 132. Findings are: A review of the facility's CCP policy dated [DATE] revealed it is the policy of the facility to develop and implement a comprehensive person centered care plan for each resident, consistent with resident rights, that includes measurable objectives and timeframe's to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the resident's comprehensive assessment. It further confirmed that the comprehensive careplan will be reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each comprehensive, quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS-a comprehensive assessment of each resident's functional capabilities…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2023-08-16 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12.006.11E Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food was stored in the facility's refrigerators and freezers in a sealed container that was labeled and dated. This had the potential to affect all 130 resident that consumed food from the kitchen. The total census was 130. Findings are: A record review of the facility's Dietary Storage Policy and Procedure dated 08/2023 revealed the facility staff should store food in covered containers or wrap securely and clearly label and date each item. An observation on 08/09/2023 at 07:35 AM revealed the following items were in the facility's reach-in freezer and were unsealed and not labeled or dated: • 2 bags of onion rings • 2 bags of French fries • 1 bag of carrots • 1 bag of waffle fries • 1 bag of hamburger patties • 1 bag of an unknown substance • 1 bag of cookies An observation on 08/09/2023 at 07:35 AM revealed the following items were in the facility's walk-in refrigerator and were opened and did not have an open date: • 1 container of pickles • 1 container…

    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 · Ecited before2023-08-16 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Licensure Number 175 NAC 12-006.17D The facility failed to ensure that staff performed hand hygiene between Residents 9, 59, 77, 87, 91, 95, and 103 during dining and failed to ensure that staff performed hand hygiene when providing wound care to one (Resident 6) of two sampled residents. The total facility census was 130. Findings are: A. A record review of the facility's Hand Hygiene (washing) Policy dated 08/19/2022 revealed that according to the World Health Organization, 5 key moments in patient (resident) care during which hand hygiene should be performed is before touching a patient (resident), before a clean procedure, after touching a patient (resident), after body fluid exposure risk, and after touching a patient's (resident's) surroundings. A record review of the Dietary Handwashing Policy and Procedure dated 10/2017 revealed the staff should wash hands after handling soiled equipment or supplies, after touching bare body parts, and after engaging in other activities that contaminate hands. An…

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

    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 VETTER SENIOR LIVING — 22 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 5 of 54.2+0.8 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 53.9+0.1 vs chain
Staffing 5 of 54.3+0.7 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 53.8+1.2 vs chain
The other 21 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.2★, per CMS)

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

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
VETTER SENIOR LIVINGOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL100%since 12/23/2016
MEREDITH, ABIGAILIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 10/02/2020
SCHINDLER, LINDSEYIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/01/2020
STUHR, BRIANIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 06/15/2017
VANEKEREN, GLENNIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 06/15/2017
VETTER, ELDORAIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 06/15/2017
VETTER, JACKIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 06/15/2017
VSL VETTER HEALTH SERVICES LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/01/2017

CMS files one row per role, so the 19 rows in the source record cover these 8 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

2 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.

$20.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+4.4%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$957K
Related-party expense5% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 28%Medicare 19%Other / private 54%

This home reported $957K 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 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$427per resident / day
operating cost
$12,971per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$446per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in NE

Paying with Medicaid

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

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

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

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 285242. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-24, 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