Mt Angel Health And Rehabilitation

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

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.

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.

60.6% 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 103 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 53.7% 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 67 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 0.55 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 85% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 9% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 93 beds and averages 74.0 residents a day — about 80% occupied, or roughly 19 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 5.23 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.76 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.51 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 4.68 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.45 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.86 to 0.51 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 60% is well above the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

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.

22 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 10 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2024-09-19 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to prevent an avoidable fall related to fall safety for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#1) reviewed for accidents. Resident 1 fell out of bed and sustained a right shoulder fracture. Findings include: Resident 1 was admitted to the facility in 7/2024 with diagnoses including quadriplegia (paralysis that affects all a person's limbs and body from the neck down) and a Stage 4 (full thickness skin loss) pressure injury. The admission MDS dated [DATE], revealed Resident 1 was cognitively intact. A care plan dated 7/25/24, revealed Resident 1 was limited in performing ADLs and was encouraged to perform as much of her/his ADLs as their condition allowed. Staff were to follow the most recent instructions and posted wall signs for mobility, transfers, exercises, and restorative programs. A revision on 7/27/24, revealed Resident 1 had half siderails on both sides of her/his bed to assist with repositioning and bed mobility. Two undated bedside care plans revealed the…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Actual harm · Gcited before2024-04-03 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from sexual abuse by another resident for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#1) reviewed for sexual abuse. This resulted in Resident 1 experiencing psychosocial harm and increased distress. Findings include: Resident 1 was admitted to the facility in 3/2024 with diagnoses including dementia, mood disturbance, anxiety and developmental disorder of speech and language. A 3/22/24 Cognitive Loss and Dementia CAA revealed Resident 1 required one-step cueing for tasks, time to process cues and communication, and 24-hour supervision for safety. Resident 1 required a floor alarm because the resident did not remember to use the call light. Staff were to provide simple direct communication and interpret Resident 1's tone of voice and facial expressions. Resident 2 was admitted to the facility in 3/2024 with diagnoses including stroke and encephalopathy (damage or disease that affects the brain). Resident 2's care plan, initiated on 3/26/24, revealed Resident 2 had a…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-06-05 · tag F0730 — pattern
  Observe each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure CNA staff annual performance reviews were completed for 3 of 3 sampled CNA staff (#s 11, 12, 23) reviewed for sufficient and competent nurse staffing. This placed residents at risk for a lack of competent staff. Findings include: A review of personnel records on 6/5/26 indicated the following employees did not receive their annual performance evaluations: -Staff 11 (CNA), hire date was 12/2019 and a performance review was not completed.-Staff 12 (CNA), hire date was 8/2013 and a performance review was not completed.-Staff 13 (CNA), hire date was 1/2019 and a performance review was not completed. On 6/4/26 at 4:00 PM, Staff 1 (Administrator) and Staff 2 (DNS) confirmed annual performance reviews were not completed for Staff 11, Staff 12 and Staff 13.

  Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-06-05 · 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

  Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to properly disinfect a shared glucometer for 1 of 3 facility staff (#5) reviewed for infection control. This placed residents at risk for exposure to blood-borne pathogens. Findings include: The 12/2025 facility Glucometer Disinfection Policy indicated to disinfect after each individual patient use with EPA disinfectant wipes. A 2017 Evencare G2 glucometer Manufacturer Manual indicated, Disinfect common use glucometers with the use of approved disinfectant wipes. The glucometer was to be wiped with the disinfecting wipe and left wet for two minutes to ensure disinfection. Resident 81 was admitted to the facility in 11/2025 with diagnoses including diabetes.On 6/3/26 at 11:33 AM, Staff 5 (LPN Resident Care Manager) was observed to return to the medication cart after checking Resident 81's CBG, and place the glucometer in the drawer. Staff 5 did not disinfect the glucometer. On 6/3/26 at 11:51 AM, Staff 5 stated she used alcohol pad wipes to clean the glucometers after she checked residents CBG.…

  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 · D2026-06-05 · 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

  Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility to revise a resident's care plan for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#3) reviewed for hospice. This placed residents at risk for unmet hospice needs. Findings include: Resident 3 was admitted to the facility 2024 with diagnoses including dementia, bipolar and heart failure.The 8/14/25 Significant Change MDS indicated Resident 3 was on hospice status.Review of Resident 3's care plan referred to hospice and/or end of life in the following manner:-For ADL care hospice helped with bathing, dated 2/13/26. -For psychosocial well-being hospice was identified as one service to provide consultation, date initiated 7/3/25. -For activities, hospice was identified and indicated the resident often declined, date initiated 2/19/26. -Use of anti-anxiety medication related to end of life, dated 9/12/25. The Care Plan did not indicate Resident 3's terminal illness as a focus area with interventions including hospice services or interventions related to end of life.On 6/4/26 at 9:30 AM Staff 2 (DNS) stated her expectation was for a terminal…

  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 · Dcited before2026-06-05 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to implement bowel care interventions for 2 of 5 sampled residents (#s 12 and 19) reviewed for medications. This placed residents at risk for constipation. Findings include: 1. Resident 12 admitted to the facility in 2025 with diagnoses including chronic pain and heart failure. The facility's revised 3/31/26 bowel care policy indicated the following for patients not on a daily senna bowel medication: -If no BM in two days, Miralax was to be given. -If no BM on day three, Miralax was to be repeated, and provider was to be notified. -If no BM on day four, suppository was to be administered, and provider was to be notified. -Results from all treatment were to be monitored and recorded. Review of Resident 12's 5/26/26 physician orders indicated the following bowel medications: -Lactulose as needed for constipation -Bisacodyl suppository as needed for constipation -Milk of Magnesia as needed for constipation -Docusate as needed for constipation -Senna as needed for constipation -Miralax as needed for no BM in 2…

  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 · D2026-06-05 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide services to prevent further decrease in ROM for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#17) reviewed for positioning. This placed residents at risk for decrease in range of motion. Findings include:Resident 17 was admitted to the facility in 2/2018 with diagnoses including osteomyelitis (inflammation in the bones).The 2/18/26 Quarterly MDS indicated the resident had a BIMS score of 00 indicating Resident 17 was severely cognitively impaired. The MDS indicated Resident 17 was unable to make daily decisions and was dependent on staff to complete daily activities including to apply splints. The MDS indicated Resident 17 had bilateral upper and lower ROM impairments. The 3/19/26 Care Plan indicated Resident 17 wore a left-hand carrot splint and a right-hand palm guard. During interviews on 6/3/26 at 11:24 AM and 6/4/26 at 10:56 AM, Resident 17's hands were observed to be curled up into a fist. Resident 17 was unable to extend her hand. Resident 17 was not wearing her/his hand splint and the splint 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-20 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolated
  Protect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
  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 it was determined the facility failed to protect residents' right to be free from misappropriation of property by staff for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#4) reviewed for misappropriation of property. This placed residents at risk for financial loss. Findings include: Resident 4 admitted to the facility in 3/2024 with diagnoses including diabetes. A 5/22/25 Facility Reported Incident revealed Resident 4 was admitted to the hospital on [DATE] and passed away at the hospital on 5/21/25. On 5/21/25 Staff 7 (RN) locked up Resident 4's personal belongings including credit cards and debit cards in the narcotic box in the medication cart. On 5/22/25 Staff 7 discovered Resident 4's credit and debit cards were no longer in the medication cart. A 5/29/25 Investigation Report revealed: -Staff 7 wrapped Resident 4's six bank, credit, and debit cards in a piece of notepad paper and placed them in the very back of the narcotic lock box on 5/21/25. -Staff 6 (Former LPN) replaced Staff 7 at 4:00…

  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 · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-14 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure physician orders were followed for 1 of 6 sampled residents (#10) reviewed for medications. This placed residents at risk for adverse medication side effects. Findings include: Resident 10 readmitted to the facility in 2023 with diagnoses including dementia and schizoaffective disorder. a. The 3/6/24 medication error investigation indicated the following: -On 3/6/24 at 4:32 PM Staff 14 (RN) administered the following medications (in error) to Resident Resident 10: -clonazepam 0.5 mg (anticonvulsant medication) -Depakote 200 mg (anticonvulsant medication) -docusate sodium 100 mg (bowel medication) -gabapentin 400 mg (mood stabilizer medication) -metoprolol 12.5 mg (blood pressure medication) -levothyroxine 200 mcg (thyroid medication) -clozapine 100 mg (antipsychotic medication) On 3/6/24 the physician was notified of the medication error. On 2/13/25 at 10:18 AM Staff 14 stated she worked on 3/6/24. She stated she prepared another resident's medications and administered them to Resident 10 by…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-09-19 · 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 Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to identify and reflect risk factors in the care plan related to pressure ulcers for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#2) reviewed for pressure ulcers. This placed residents at risk for pressure injuries and skin breakdown. Findings include: Resident 2 admitted to the facility in 8/2023 with diagnoses including a colostomy (redirects the colon to an opening in the abdominal wall, called a stoma, which is attached to a colostomy bag to collect bowel movements) and cellulitis of the abdomen. The admission MDS dated [DATE], revealed Resident 2 was cognitively intact. A care plan dated 8/8/23, revealed Resident 2 had a colostomy, impaired skin integrity, a wound around the stoma, nonhealing skin graft to the buttocks, and history of pressure injury. Staff were to monitor the ostomy appliance and belt for moisture and tightness twice daily, encourage the resident to loosen her/his belt when lying down, and monitor for signs and symptoms of infection.…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-22 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident was free from verbal abuse for a resident-to-resident altercation for 1 of 4 sampled residents (#8) reviewed for abuse. This placed residents at risk for isolation. Findings include: Resident 8 admitted to the facility in 2021 with diagnoses including depression. Resident 6 admitted to the facility in 2022 with diagnoses including bipolar and personality disorder. On 11/29/23 a facility investigation indicated an incident of resident-to-resident verbal abuse. Resident 6 came out of her/his room into the common area after Resident 8 arrived for breakfast. Resident 6 directed her/his attention to Resident 8 and stated, It stinks in here. Resident 8 stated it was not nice to make the statement and Resident 6 responded, Who cares? A verbal argument developed, and staff intervened. However, Resident 6 continued to make unpleasant comments to Resident 8. Resident 8 indicated Resident 6 made comments in the past which led Resident 8 to isolate in her/his room. Verbal abuse was substantiated by…

  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 before2024-03-22 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure physician orders were followed for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#3) reviewed for medication administration. This placed residents at risk for adverse side effects of medications. Findings include: Resident 3 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including femur fracture. The 11/27/23 physician orders indicated Resident 3 was to receive aspirin 81 mg BID for 23 days (until 12/19/23) and then stop. The 11/2023 and 12/2023 MARs indicated Resident 3 received aspirin once daily from 11/28/23 through 12/8/23. The 12/8/23 physician order indicated to discontinue aspirin. On 3/22/24 at 9:15 AM Staff 2 (DNS) acknowledged Resident 3 did not receive aspirin as ordered from 11/28/23 through 12/8/23.

  Quality of Life and Care 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.

Fines & penalties

$27,967 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

• $10,033 — penalty dated 2024-09-19
• $17,934 — penalty dated 2024-03-22

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to THE ENSIGN GROUP — 342 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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 9 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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.

A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in OR