Silver State Pediatric Skilled Nursing Facility
2496 W Charleston Blvd, Las Vegas, NV 89102 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 36 certified beds · (702) 310-3720 Medicare & Medicaid certified
On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (15) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 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 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.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 8.6% | 12.6% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 9.4% | 5.5% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 1.6% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 2.6% | 1.9% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 5.1% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.8% | 0.1% | 0.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 1.7% | 2.0% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 20.5% | 22.2% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 88.5% | 89.6% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 0.0% | 5.4% | 4.7% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 0.0% | 15.5% | 21.2% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 0.0% | 17.1% | 17.1% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.8% | 1.4% | better |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
§ 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.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.87 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 95% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 24% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | not reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | not reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | not reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | not reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | not reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 36 beds and averages 32.4 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 4 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 7.00 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 2.49 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.25 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 7.00 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 7.00 on weekdays — about the same on weekends as weekdays. RN hours go from 2.47 to 2.55 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 43% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
15 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-02-26 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure 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
Based on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure 1) sanitizer test strips were available to measure the concentration of the sanitizing solution of the three-compartment sink, 2) the refrigerator and nourishment room did not contain expired food items and 3) dented cans were discarded. The deficient practice had the potential to compromise food safety and cause foodborne illness.Findings include:1)On 02/24/2026 at 8:30 AM, the Dietary Manager was unable to perform the test strip verification for the three compartment sink because the facility had run out of test strips. The Dietary Manager could not verify the parts per million (ppm) concentration without the required test strips. The Dietary Manager indicated test strip verification for the three compartment sink should have been performed daily.A review of the three compartment sinks sanitation log dated 02/24/2026 showed documentation indicating the test strip verification had been completed that morning. When questioned about the discrepancy, the Dietary Manager acknowledged the entry was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-26 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure physician orders were followed for the use of a helmet device for a resident with plagiocephaly (malformation of cranial bones) for 1 of 12 sampled residents (Resident 22). The deficient practice placed the resident at risk for skin breakdown and discomfort.Findings include:Resident 22 (R22) was admitted [DATE], with diagnoses including respiratory failure of a newborn, laryngomalacia (collapse of floppy tissue above vocal cords) chromosomal abnormality and plagiocephaly.On 02/24/2026 in the morning, R22 was asleep inside a crib wearing a blue helmet device.On 02/26/2026 at 8:25 AM, R22's eyes were opened with blue helmet on while strapped in a bouncy chair. The Registered Nurse (RN) assigned to R22 explained the resident's skull did not form well so the helmet was being used as a supportive device. The helmet was removed for one hour per day where nurses were able to assess the skin underneath. According to the RN,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-26 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
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, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure the resident's tube feeding (TF) bag was labeled with complete and accurate information for 1 of 12 sampled residents (Resident 3). The deficient practice had the potential to result in TF-related complications.Findings include: Resident 3 (R3) was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses including Trisomy nine mosaic syndrome (a rare chromosomal disorder causing developmental, intellectual and physical disabilities), tracheostomy status and gastrostomy status.On 02/24/2026 in the morning, R3 was in the dining area on a stander (a supportive equipment used in physical therapy to help individuals with neurologic or mobility issues) with a physical therapist (PT). The PT indicated R3 received nutrition through a gastrostomy tube (G-tube). A physician order dated 12/11/2025, documented to administer Complete pediatric formula original 1.0 formula, 250 milliliters (ml) at 250 ml per hour four times a day.On 02/24/2026 at 9:34…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-26 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure an inhalation bag for BIPAP (bilevel positive airway pressure machine) use was dated for 1 of 12 sampled residents (Resident 3). The deficient practice placed the residents at risk for compromised quality care. Findings include:Resident 3 (R3) was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses including Trisomy nine mosaic syndrome (a rare chromosomal disorder causing developmental, intellectual and physical disabilities), chronic respiratory failure, tracheostomy status and gastrostomy status On 02/24/2026 in the morning, R3 was in the dining area on a stander (a supportive equipment used in physical therapy to help individuals with neurologic or mobility issues) a white gauze was observed on R3's neck area.A physician order dated 11/14/2025, documented Mode: BIPAP/Bilevel 23/+14 with back up rate of 14 every night shift by respiratory therapy.On 02/24/2026 at 9:34 AM, a ventilator machine labeled RT management only was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-26 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — isolatedKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure the ice machine did not have brown-colored build up and was not overdue for vendor maintenance. This deficient practice may result in contamination of ice intended for consumption.Findings include:On 02/25/2026 at 9:56 AM, the [NAME] indicated the kitchen staff only cleaned and wiped the exterior surfaces of the ice machine and did not clean the interior components. The [NAME] indicated the outside and edges of the ice machine were cleaned daily, but the inside of the machine was not cleaned as part of their routine.On 02/25/2026 at 10:23 AM, the Dietary Manager indicated staff cleaned only the bottom portion of the ice machine and did not clean the top portion. The Dietary Manager explained an outside service provider was responsible for cleaning the upper section of the ice machine. The Dietary Manager could not provide documentation when the last deep cleaning of the interior components was completed. The Dietary Manager was unaware of the schedule or frequency of internal cleanings. A sticker on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-31 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure the area behind the cooking area was maintained clean and food items were labeled with an open date. The deficient practice had a potential for fire hazard, attract pests and track viability for consumption of food products. Findings include: On 01/28/2025 at 8:32 AM during the kitchen tour, the following food items were noted to be opened and partially consumed with no open date: 1) Truvani plant-based protein powder placed at the counter near the stove. 2) Jar of sundried tomato inside the reach-in refrigerator During the tour, the four drawer-base refrigerators used as the base for cook top stoves were noted to have splatters of dried cooking oil. The handles of the drawer base were tacky to touch. The gap between the cook top base, the oven rack and the back splash all the way to the floor had dried residues of cooking oil and noted gray materials had settled onto the floor. On 01/28/2025 at 8:52 AM, the Kitchen Manager confirmed the findings and indicated all food items should have been labeled…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-01-31 · tag F0837 — isolatedEstablish a governing body that is legally responsible for establishing and implementing policies for managing and operating the facility and appoints a properly licensed administrator responsible for managing the facility.
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, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure polices were reviewed, updated, were suited to the resident population, and reflected current facility practices. The deficient practice had a potential for residents to receive care not meeting the expectation of the facility guidelines of care; and impede the uniform training of staff on the correct practices for delivering optimum care to the pediatric resident population. Findings include: The facility policy titled Administrative Management (Governing Body) revised October 2017, documented establishment and annual review of policies and procedures governing facility operations. On 01/29/2025, a review of the facility policy for the use of psychotropic medications revealed the policy provided guidance for the intended use of behavioral purposes and lacked guidance for the secondary indications of the medication for pediatric usage. R21 was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses including muscle spasms and congenital…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-02-16 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure: 1) expired items were not stored in the refrigerator and discarded; and 2) feeding formula and items were appropriately labeled in the nourishment room refrigerator. The deficient practice posed a potential risk to safety and health standards, as it could lead to contamination or inadequate storage conditions. Findings include: On 02/13/2024 at 8:05 AM, a kitchen tour was conducted with one cook on duty. The refrigerator was inspected, and the following were observed: -expired ham in the refrigerator labeled to be discarded on 02/08/2024. -thawed or spoiled chopped vegetables in the freezer On 02/13/2024 at 3:40 PM, the cook confirmed the ham stored in the refrigerator was opened a few days ago and labeled to be discarded on 02/08/2024. The cook indicated was responsible for ensuring the items in the kitchen were not expired or spoiled. 2) On 02/13/2024 at 8:20 AM, the nourishment refrigerator stored the following: -unlabeled, partially consumed feeding bottle with approximately 150 milliliters (ml)…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-02-16 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — patternEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
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, record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure care and management orders were obtained, clarified, and transcribed for residents receiving gastric tube feeding (TF) for 6 of 12 sampled residents (Residents 16, 18, 1, 2, 10, and 20). This deficiency could lead to potential significant risks, including increased susceptibility to infections, dehydration, malnutrition, fluid overload, and gastrostomy tube (GT) dysfunction. Findings include: Resident 16 (R16) R16 was admitted on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE], with diagnoses including dysphagia (difficulty swallowing) and gastrostomy status. On 02/13/2024 at 1:12 PM, R16 was in the crib, the head of bed (HOB) was not elevated, and Elecare TF was infusing at 150 milliliters (ml) per hour. A Physician order dated 02/06/2024, documented administering Elecare 22 kilocalories (kcal) to give 150 ml over 30-60 minutes. A physician order dated 10/01/2023, documented enteral feeding every shift for prophylaxis and to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-16 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, record review and document review, the facility failed to implement care plan interventions for monitoring side effects for psychotropic and diuretic medication for 2 of 12 sampled residents (Residents 8 and 9). The deficient practice had the potential for adverse effects of medication for the residents of the facility. Findings include: Resident 8 (R8) R8 was admitted on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including diffuse traumatic brain injury and epilepsy. The facility policy titled, Using the Care Plan (revised August 2006), documented the care plan would be used to develop the resident daily care routines and would be available to all staff with responsibilities to care for the resident. A physician order dated 08/03/2023 documented to administer Diazepam (sedative/hypnotic) Solution 1 Milligram/Milliliter (MG/ML), give 1.5 ml via Gastrostomy Tube (G-Tube) every 8 hours for muscle spasms. The medical record revealed a care plan was established regarding the use of Diazepam…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 5 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-16 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, record reviews, and document review, the facility failed to ensure the following: 1) The clonidine patch was removed timely as ordered, or the physician was notified of the delay for 1 of 12 sampled residents (Resident 20). 2) The bowel protocol was administered as ordered for 1 of 12 sampled residents (Resident 18). 3) An external cream was timely applied as ordered for 1 of 12 sampled residents (Resident 12). These deficient practices could have led to potential risks, such as unintended overdose, adverse reactions, or inadequate management of the resident's medical condition. Findings include: 1) Resident 20 (R20) R20 was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses including hypertension. On 02/15/2024 at 8:15 AM, a Registered Nurse (RN) prepared the medications, excluding the Clonidine transdermal patch. An RN indicated the Clonidine patch was not administered due to its unavailability and would follow up with the pharmacy. The previous Clonidine patch applied on 02/01/2024 had not…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-16 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
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, interviews, and document review, the facility failed to ensure that medications were available during medication administration and administered timely as ordered. The deficient practice resulted in delays in treatment and compromised the overall effectiveness of the medication regimen. Findings include: Resident 20 (R20) R20 was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses including hypertension. A Physician order dated 12/17/2023, documented Clonidine Transdermal Patch 0.2 milligrams (mg)/24 hours to be applied transdermally every 7 days for hypertension at 8:00 AM. On 02/15/2024 at 8:15 AM, a Registered Nurse (RN) prepared the medications except for the Clonidine transdermal patch. An RN indicated the Clonidine patch was not administered due to its unavailability and would follow up with the pharmacy. Clonidine was last applied on 02/01/2024. The Medication Administration Record dated 02/15/2024, documented the Clonidine patch was not administered due to its unavailability. On 02/16/24 at 2:31 PM,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-16 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, record review, and document review the facility failed to ensure consent was obtained for use of psychotropic medications for 2 of 12 sampled residents. The deficient practice had the potential for unnecessary medication administration. Findings include: Resident 8 (R8) R8 was admitted on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including diffuse traumatic brain injury and epilepsy. A physician order dated 08/03/2023 documented to administer Diazepam (sedative/hypnotic) Solution, 1 milligram per milliliter every 8 hours for muscle spasm. The medical record lacked documented evidence a consent form was completed for psychotropic medication use. Resident 9 (R9) R9 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including generalized epilepsy, chronic respiratory failure. A physician order dated 05/05/2023 documented to administer Clobazam suspension 2.5 milligrams per milliliter, give 2 milliliters two times a day for seizures. The medical record lacked documented evidence a consent form was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-16 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, record reviews, and document reviews, the facility failed to ensure their medication error rate was below five percent when three errors were identified with 28 opportunities observed, calculating an error rate of 10.71 percent. Failure to follow physician orders and timely administer medications posed a potential risk of injury or harm to the resident. Findings include: Resident 20 (R20) R20 was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses including hypertension. A Physician order dated 12/17/2023, documented Clonidine transdermal patch weekly of 0.2 milligrams (mg) to be applied transdermally at 8:00 AM every 7 days for hypertension, write the date on the patch applied and remove it per schedule. On 02/15/2024 at 8:15 AM, during the medication pass, a Registered Nurse (RN1) prepared the medications except for the Clonidine transdermal patch. RN1 indicated the Clonidine patch was not administered due to its unavailability and would follow up with the pharmacy. The previous Clonidine…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-16 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and document review, medications were not labeled with the date of opening in the medication cart and medication room. The deficient practice posed a potential risk of compromised patient safety and medication efficacy due to the lack of accurate information on the duration of use and potential expiration. Findings include: 1) On 02/15/24 at 8:41 AM, during medication pass administration the Miralax bottle, which contained approximately 300 grams of medication, was not labeled with the open date. An RN confirmed the Miralax bottle was unlabeled and indicated it should have been labeled when it was opened. 2) On 02/15/2024 at 9:30 AM, the medication room had an opened 1 liter bottle of inhalation water, not labeled with the date when it was opened and stored together with the active supply. The Unit Manager (UM) confirmed the inhalation water was opened and should have been discarded because it should have been used within 24 hours. On 02/16/2024 at 2:56 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) indicated all medications should have been dated when opened…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CP MANAGEMENT, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | 100% | since 03/11/2025 |
| SOUTHWEST HEALTH SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 45% | since 06/06/2018 |
| NARAN, JAIVADAN | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | 5% | since 06/06/2018 |
| ZEITER, JAMES | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 45% | since 06/06/2018 |
| NARAN, HANSA | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 06/06/2018 |
| MATHIS, DANIEL | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/06/2018 |
| PURECARE LIVING LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/04/2025 |
| CARMONA, JENNIFER | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/01/2022 |
| GARG, RUCHI | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2023 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 17 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
3 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
What families pay in NV
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 Nevada Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 295108. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-26, 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.