Mt. Tabor Health & Rehabilitation
6040 SE Belmont Street, Portland, OR 97215 · For profit - Corporation · 120 certified beds · (503) 231-7166 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0602) — most recent Apr 2024
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0604, F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (38) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (71%) runs well above the national median (45%)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 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 | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 3 to 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 14.0% | 14.9% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.3% | 4.7% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.4% | 1.4% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.2% | 2.0% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 5.5% | 4.9% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 5.4% | 2.4% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 16.9% | 20.6% | 16.1% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 6.5% | 12.4% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 90.5% | 95.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 7.5% | 5.8% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 27.7% | 21.8% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 11.2% | 13.9% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.5% | 1.4% | 1.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 73.8% | 81.2% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 21.5% | 21.4% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 9.9% | 16.1% | 12.0% | better |
§ 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.
71.6% 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 139 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 43.9% 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 66 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 0.30 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 48% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 20% 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 | 71.6%CMS range 62.3–79.0 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 8.1%CMS range 5.1–11.7 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 43.9% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 51.5% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 50.0% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 85.9% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 95.5% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 96.8% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.1% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 2.2% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.4%CMS range 3.7–11.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.71 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 68.3 residents a day — about 57% occupied, or roughly 52 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.85 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.49 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.49 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 4.53 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.98 on weekdays — 9% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.54 to 0.35 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 71% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
38 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 28 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-24 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide transportation for dialysis treatments for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#1) reviewed for dialysis care. This placed residents at risk for not receiving their dialysis services according to their schedules. Findings include: Resident 1 was admitted to the facility in 12/2025, with diagnosis including acute kidney failure, dependence on renal dialysis and metabolic encephalopathy. Resident 1's Care Plan dated 11/22/25 documented the resident received dialysis, was to be transported to dialysis center three days a week (Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday) and would be free from complications secondary to requiring dialysis. Resident 1's Progress Note dated 12/24/25 noted Resident 1 received a dialysis treatment at the hospital on [DATE] and did not receive treatment on 12/25/25. There was no documentation of her/his treatment on 12/27/25. In an interview on 2/19/26 at 12:22 PM, Staff 11 (Receptionist) stated she or nursing…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-11-20 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — patternEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure licensed nursing staff had the necessary competencies to care for residents with feeding tubes for 1 of 1 licensed staff (#25) reviewed for tube feedings. This placed residents at risk for incorrect tube feed and water flush administration. Findings include:Resident 1 was admitted to the facility in 10/2025 with diagnoses including Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) and choledochoduodenal fistula (a rare complication often caused by a perforated duodenal ulcer).Resident 1's Physician Orders dated 10/31/25 indicated Resident 1's tube feeding was scheduled for 2:00 PM.On 11/17/25 at 2:40 PM, Staff 25 (LPN) was observed to wash his hands, don gown and gloves and enter Resident 1's room. Staff 25 identified Resident 1's tube feeding port and discovered the connector was missing. Staff 25 removed his gown and gloves and left the room.On 11/17/25 at 3:12 PM, Staff 20 (Interim DNS) and Staff 25 entered Resident 1's room wearing only gloves and handled Resident 1's feeding tube. Both staff…
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 before2025-11-20 · 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 interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to follow physician orders for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#1) reviewed for physician orders. This placed residents at risk for adverse health consequences. Findings include: Resident 1 admitted to the facility in 10/2025 with diagnoses including fistula of gallbladder.Resident 1's admission MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 10, indicating moderate impairment. Resident 1's care plan dated 11/10/25 revealed she/he was at risk for weight loss and/or malnutrition. Interventions were to encourage Resident 1 to eat, consult with the Registered Dietitian (RD) and follow a therapeutic diet.Resident 1's Physician Orders dated 10/31/25 were to administer one Phos-Nak (a dietary supplement used for people who cannot get enough phosphorus, needed for strong bones and controlling calcium in the body and urine) packet three times per day, to be taken with meals and at bedtime.Resident 1's 11/2025 MAR revealed the medication was not administered…
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 · D2025-11-20 · 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
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide necessary care and services for tube feeding nutrition for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#1) reviewed for tube feedings. This placed residents at risk for dehydration and declining nutritional status. Findings include:Resident 1 was admitted to the facility in 10/2025 with diagnoses including GERD (gastroesophageal reflux disease) and choledochoduodenal fistula (a rare complication often caused by a perforated duodenal ulcer) requiring Resident 1 to have nutrition delivered via tube feedings (the delivery of nutrients through a feeding tube directly into the stomach, duodenum or jejunum).Resident 1's 10/31/25 Physician Orders included the following orders:-Administer free water BID via feeding tube at a rate of 35 ml/hr for 18 hours per day and feeding tube off for six hours per day, and-Enteral feeding BID, administer Peptamen AF (a nutritional formula for individuals with impaired gastrointestinal function) via feeding tube for 18 hours per day to provide 2160 calories over a 24-hour…
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 before2025-11-20 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide 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 adhere to Enhance Barrier Precautions related to feeding tubes for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#1) reviewed for infection control. This placed residents at risk for infection. Findings include:Resident 1 was admitted to the facility in 10/2025 with diagnoses including GERD (gastroesophageal reflux disease) and the presence of a gastric tube.According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Enhanced Barrier Precautions expand the use of PPE and refer to the use of gown and gloves during high-contact resident care activities for residents with wounds or indwelling medical devices. On 11/17/25 at 10:00 AM, signage was observed outside Resident 1's room indicating Resident 1 required Enhanced Barrier Precautions. On 11/17/25 at 3:12 PM, Staff 20 (Interim DNS) and Staff 25 (LPN) were observed handling Resident 1's feeding tube and assess the pump and the gastric tube on the resident's abdomen while wearing only gloves and no gown. On 11/20/25 2:48 PM, Staff 20 acknowledged that neither she…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-06-06 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — patternHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
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 ensure a system was in place to receive and resolve resident and/or resident representative grievances for 1 of 1 sampled facility reviewed for Resident Council. This placed residents at risk for unreported and unresolved grievances. Findings include: Record review of the facility's 2025 Grievances binder revealed written grievances were completed by residents or family members on the following dates: - 1/20/25; - 3/27/25; - 4/14/25; - 5/24/25; - 5/30/25. Record review of the facility's 2024 Grievances binder revealed written grievances were completed by residents or family members only four times in 10/2025. No other grievance were completed in 2024. During the 6/4/25 at 1:30 PM Resident Council meeting, multiple residents stated they did not know there was a grievance process in the facility, they did not know how to file a grievance and several stated it did not matter because when you reported a concern to staff nothing was ever done. On 6/4/25 the lobby reception area, facility common…
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 before2025-06-06 · tag F0636 — patternAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
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 complete a comprehensive assessment for 4 of 8 sampled resident (#s 3, 254, 355 and 404) who were reviewed for accidents, ADLs, pain and food. This placed residents at risk for unidentified care needs. Findings include: 1. Resident 3 admitted to the facility in 5/2018 with diagnoses including dementia. Resident 3's Annual MDS completion deadline date was 4/22/25 and was incomplete as of 6/4/25 at 12:49 PM. On 6/5/25 at 4:27 PM, Staff 2 (DNS) confirmed Resident 3's Annual MDS was not completed in the required time frame. Staff 2 stated she expected the MDS assessments to be completed within the required timeframes. 2. Resident 254 was readmitted to the facility in 5/2025 with diagnoses including chronic kidney disease and transient ischemic attack (interruption of bloodflow to the brain). Resident 254's admission MDS completion deadline date was 5/9/25 and was incomplete as of 6/5/25 at 1:32 PM. On 6/5/25 at 1:52 PM Staff 2 (DNS) stated she was responsible for completion of Resident 254's admission MDS.…
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 before2025-06-06 · 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 record review it was determined the facility failed to properly store food and failed to maintain sanitary conditions in 1 of 1 kitchen and 1 of 3 unit refrigerators. This placed residents at risk for food borne illness and contaminated food. Findings include: 1. On 6/2/25 at 8:12 AM during the initial tour of kitchen, the following items were observed in refrigerator walk-in #1: *Tofu salad dated 5/26/25 (stored eight days) *Chicken salad dated 5/26/25 (stored eight days) *Two separate containers of lunch meat which were undated. On 6/2/25 at 10:36 AM Staff 11 (Dietary Manager) confirmed salad was made on 5/26/25 and she discarded the items after four days. The salad should have been removed from the refrigerator. 2. A review of the undated Employee Cleanliness Policy for the kitchen revealed facial hair must be completely covered with a beard net. On 6/2/25 at 8:23 AM Staff 12 (Dietary Aid) was observed with a beard which was uncovered while moving throughout the kitchen prepping items for breakfast. On 06/2/25 at 10:39 AM Staff 8 (Maintenance…
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 · D2025-06-06 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
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 respect resident rights for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#8) reviewed for personal property. This placed residents at risk for diminished quality of life. Findings include: Resident 8 was admitted to the facility in 4/2016 with diagnoses including depression. An 8/31/24 Progress Note revealed the facility called the police related to reports of Resident 8 watching illegal pornography on her/his phone. The police spoke with Resident 8 and directed facility staff to take Resident 8's phone away and not give the phone back. The nurse took Resident 8's phone and locked it in the Resident Care Manager's office. A 5/1/25 Significant Change MDS indicated Resident 8 was cognitively intact. On 6/2/25 at 9:13 AM Resident 8 stated the facility took her/his phone in 9/2024 due to an accusation of watching pornographic videos on her/his phone. Resident 8 stated she/he wanted her/his phone back. On 6/3/25 at 2:10 PM Staff 20 (LPN) stated on 8/31/24 Resident 8 was observed watching illegal pornography and Staff 20 called the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-06 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
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 ensure residents were assessed for safe self-administration of medications for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#44) reviewed for self-administration of medications. This placed residents at risk for unsafe medication administration and adverse medication side effects. Findings include: The facility's Self-Administration of Drugs policy, dated 5/2010, revealed the following: - Residents who wished to self-administer medications may do so if it was determined they were capable of doing so. -Medications must be stored in a safe and secure place, not accessible by other residents. Resident 44 was admitted to the facility in 1/2025 with diagnoses including a stroke with hemiparesis and hemiplegia (weakness or complete paralysis or loss of function on one side of the body) affecting the left dominant side. During observations on 6/2/25 at 12:13 PM, four round pills and one capsule was observed, unsecured, on top of the resident's nightstand and on 6/3/25 at 8:24 AM, one round pill was observed, unsecured,…
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 28 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-06 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview it was determined the facility failed to provide maintenance to maintain a safe, comfortable and homelike environment for 1 of 1 facility reviewed for physical environment. This placed residents at risk for an unsafe and unkempt interior building. Findings include: 1. An observation on 6/2/25 at 9:39 AM, revealed the wall to the right of room [ROOM NUMBER]'s bed was in disrepair with scratches of paint missing from the wall. On 6/5/25 at 2:02 PM, Staff 8 (Maintenance Director) observed the wall to the right of room [ROOM NUMBER]'s bed which was in disrepair with scratches of paint missing from the wall. Staff 8 stated he was unaware of the scratches of paint missing from the wall and he would expect the wall to be painted. On 6/6/25 at 11:25 AM Staff 1 (Administrator) stated she expected all resident rooms to be in good condition and walls maintained. 2. On 6/2/25 at 10:35 AM four sections of approximately 5 feet long areas of carpet were observed buckled 4 inches high in 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-06 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview it was determined the facility failed to complete MDS assessments which reflected accurate mental health diagnoses for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#45) reviewed for medications. This placed residents at risk for inaccurate assessment and care. Findings include: Resident 45 was admitted in 2/2025 with diagnoses including major depressive disorder (mood disorder) and schizophrenia (chronic brain disorder characterized by disconnection from reality). On the 2/7/25 Admissions MDS and the 5/13/25 Quarterly MDS, schizophrenia was coded in Section I. On 6/6/25 at 9:05 AM and at 11: 22 AM, Staff 2 (DNS) stated there was no supporting evidence in the medical record regarding Resident 45's diagnosis of schizophrenia and the MDS should not have been coded without supporting evidence of the diagnosis.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-06 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
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 Staff 17 (Former Agency LPN) adhered to professional standards for medication management and licensed nurse oversight of assigned residents. This placed residents at risk for adverse side effects of medication and unmet medical needs. Findings include: The facility initiated an investigation on 3/1/24 regarding Staff 17 for her night shift which started on 2/29/24. Staff 2 (DNS) completed interviews and record reviews for residents which were assigned under Staff 17's supervision. Staff 2 concluded on the evening of 2/29/24 until 3/1/24 at about 6:30 AM, Staff 17 slept in her car in the facility parking lot most of the shift and was not available. Staff 2 concluded seven residents missed ordered medications, opportunities for PRN medications or treatments. On 6/4/25 at 6:39 AM Staff 18 (CNA) confirmed Staff 17 was the charge nurse when she worked in the facility on 3/1/24. Staff 18 stated Staff 17 went missing from the facility and at around 6:00 AM she found Staff 17 asleep in her car and Staff 17…
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 before2025-06-06 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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
Based on observation, interview and record review, it was determined the facility failed to implement fall interventions to reduce hazards and risks for 1 of 3 sampled resident (#3) reviewed for accidents. This placed residents at risk for injury. Findings include: Resident 3 was admitted to the facility in 2018 with diagnoses including dementia and diabetes. Fall/Post Fall Assessments reviewed from 11/16/24 to 6/4/25 revealed Resident 3 experienced a fall on the following dates: - 11/16/24; - 11/29/24; - 12/24/24; - 1/4/25; - 2/5/25; - 2/8/25; - 4/23/25; - 5/30/25. Resident 3's 1/14/25 Quarterly MDS was assessed with a BIMS score of three (severely cognitively impaired) and identified over the past quarter she/he experienced two or more falls with no major injury. Resident 3's 6/4/25 at risk for falls care plan directed staff to implement the following: - Make sure the door to the room was opened wide enough so staff could visualize if she/he was attempting to get out of bed; - To keep her/his room door open except when providing care; - Leave wheelchair at bedside at the foot of…
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 before2025-06-06 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure Staff 17 (Former Agency LPN) adhered to medication administration and treatment management for 7 of 7 sampled residents (#s 5, 17, 21, 27, 31, 36, and 155) reviewed for failure to follow physician orders. This placed residents at risk for adverse side effects and unmet medical needs. Findings include: 1. Resident 5 admitted to the facility in 2004 with diagnoses including esophageal reflux (stomach contents leak backwards from the stomach into the food pipe) and Cerebral Palsy (affect ability to move, balance and posture). Review of Resident 5's 3/2024 MAR revealed a physician order which directed staff to administer 20 mg of Omeprazole Suspension 2 MG/ML via G-tube (tube to stomach), and eternal feeding (tube delivers nutrients directly to stomach) water flushes on 3/1/24 at 3:00 AM. Resident 5's 3/1/24 MAR revealed she/he was not administered the medication or treatment on 3/1/24 at 3:00 AM. On 6/5/25 at 9:50 AM Staff 2 (DNS) confirmed Staff 17 did not administer the prescribed medications for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-11 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect 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 ensure residents were free from sexual abuse for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#202) reviewed for abuse. This placed residents at risk for abuse. Findings include: Resident 202 was admitted to the facility in 4/2024 with diagnoses including hemiplegia (paralysis that affects only one side of the body). Resident 202's 4/5/24 admission: Social Services Assessment indicated the resident was cognitively intact. Resident 201 was admitted to the facility in 2/2024 with diagnoses including unspecified psychosis (a collection of symptoms that affect the mind where there has been some loss of contact with reality). Resident 201's 2/21/24 Socially Inappropriate Sexual Behavior Care Plan revealed the following: -The resident's socially inappropriate sexual behaviors included showing photos of her/his private parts and exposing her/himself to staff. -The resident masturbated in her/his room with the door open. Resident 201's 2/23/24 admission MDS indicated the resident was moderately cognitively impaired. The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-11 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to timely report allegations of abuse to the State Survey Agency for 2 of 3 sampled residents (#s 201 and 202) reviewed for abuse. This placed residents at risk for delayed and incomplete investigations. Findings include: The facility's 10/2022 Reporting Abuse to Facility Management Policy directed the following: -Employees, facility consultants and/or Attending Physicians must immediately report any suspected abuse or incidents of abuse to the Administrator. -When an alleged or suspected case of abuse is reported, the facility Administrator or her/his designee will notify the State licensing/certification agency responsible for surveying/licensing the facility within two hours of the allegation being made. Resident 202 was admitted to the facility in 4/2024 with diagnoses including hemiplegia (paralysis that affects only one side of the body). Resident 202's 4/5/24 admission: Social Services Assessment indicated the resident was cognitively intact. Resident 201 was admitted to the facility in 2/2024 with…
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 before2024-02-23 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview it was determined the facility failed to maintain a homelike environment for 1 of 1 facility reviewed for environment. This placed residents at risk for living in an unkempt environment. Findings include: Observations of the facility's general environment and resident rooms from 2/20/24 through 2/23/24 identified the following issues: -Floor 2 on the north side near the elevators had a large area of cracked paint that was peeling. -Floor 4 had nine missing wall guard endcaps. -room [ROOM NUMBER] had a baseboard peeling off the wall near the resident bathroom. -room [ROOM NUMBER] had a privacy curtain with several brown spots and smudges that appeared to be blood. -The wall outside room [ROOM NUMBER] had two quarter-sized patches that were not painted. -room [ROOM NUMBER] had three large areas of ceiling damage between the south wall and resident bed. -room [ROOM NUMBER] had a large unpainted patch on the north wall. -The wall outside room [ROOM NUMBER] had a softball-sized…
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 · E2024-02-23 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — patternProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
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 timely call light responses on 2 of 2 sampled units and for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#15) reviewed for sufficient staffing. This placed residents at risk for delayed and unmet needs. Findings include: 1. Resident 15 was admitted to the facility in 11/2023 with diagnoses including chronic pain and hemiplegia (weakness of one side of the body). On 2/20/24 at 12:52 PM Resident 15 stated call light response times were often 30 minutes or more, depending on the time of day. Review of Resident 15's 1/1/24 through 1/13/24 Call Light Tracking Logs revealed the following call light response times: -1/1/24 at 3:03 AM: call light response time was 26 minutes. -1/1/24 at 6:46 AM: call light response time was 25 minutes. -1/1/24 at 7:26 AM: call light response time was 24 minutes. -1/1/24 at 5:47 PM: call light response time was 22 minutes. -1/2/24 at 1:08 PM: call light response time was 47 minutes. -1/2/24 at 3:02 PM: call light response time was 30 minutes. -1/3/24 at 3:33 AM: call light response time was 18…
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 · E2024-02-23 · tag F0730 — patternObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
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 CNAs received annual performance reviews for 5 of 5 randomly selected CNA staff (#s 7, 13, 28, 29 and 30) reviewed for staffing. This placed residents at risk for lack of care by competent staff. Findings include: A review of personnel records on 2/21/24 at 2:19 PM with Staff 15 (Human Resources) indicated the following employees had not received their annual performance evaluations: -Staff 7 (CNA), hire date 11/23/22: no annual performance review was completed. -Staff 13 (CNA), hire date 10/18/19: no annual performance review was completed. -Staff 28 (CNA), hire date 12/5/19: no annual performance review was completed. -Staff 29 (CNA), hire date 10/6/06: no annual performance review was completed. -Staff 30 (CNA), hire date 12/21/22: no annual performance review was completed. On 2/21/24 at 2:19 PM Staff 15 confirmed annual performance reviews for Staff 7, Staff 13, Staff 28, Staff 29 and Staff 30 were not completed. On 2/23/24 at 11:41 AM Staff 2 (DNS) stated her expectation was annual CNA…
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 · E2024-02-23 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure 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 observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure medications were secured, maintain and log appropriate medication storage temperatures and ensure proper labeling of biologicals for 3 of 3 floors reviewed for safe medication storage. This placed residents at risk for receiving medications with reduced efficacy and access to potentially harmful medications. Findings include: 1. On 2/22/24 at 10:09 AM the medication room door on the fourth floor by the nurse's station was observed to be open with no staff present nearby. The medication room contained resident medications that were sitting on the counter. Continuous observations from 10:09 AM through 10:15 AM revealed staff were walking by or at the nurse's station while the door remained open. On 2/22/24 at 10:15 AM Staff 20 (LPN) stated she was the nurse for the fourth floor medication room and acknowledged it was left open and contained resident medications. 2. On 2/22/24 at 9:56 AM the medication refrigerator on the fifth floor was observed with Staff 16 (CMA) and contained 2 open…
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 before2024-02-23 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview it was determined the facility failed to prepare and serve food in a safe and sanitary environment for 1 of 1 kitchen observed for food service. This placed residents at risk for foodborne illness. Findings include: On 2/20/24 at 9:10 AM the kitchen was toured and the following was observed: -The backsplash in the dishwashing area had a black substance extending up the wall approximately 8-12 inches. -Multiple light fixture covers were dirty where food was prepared and one had a dead spider dangling 12 inches from the light fixture. -Multiple ceiling tiles in the main kitchen area were damaged or missing. On 2/21/24 at 11:23 AM Staff 18 (Dietary Manager) acknowledged the black substance on the wall, dirty light covers and missing tiles. On 2/21/24 at 12:10 PM Staff 1 (Administrator) stated the mentioned areas in the kitchen needed to be cleaned and repaired.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-23 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide 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 a restorative program to maintain or improve ROM for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#14) reviewed for ROM. This placed residents at risk for decline in ROM. Findings include: Resident 14 was admitted to the facility in 2010 with diagnoses including heart failure and anxiety. The 12/19/23 Annual MDS indicated Resident 14 had lower extremity impairment on both sides, muscle weakness, and impaired balance. Resident 14 required assistance with ADLs and mobility. Resident 14's 2/2024 restorative care plan indicated Resident 14 had weak ankles. Resident 14's goal was to strengthen her/his ankles and improve her/his ability to self-transfer. Staff were to assist Resident 14 to complete daily exercises consisting of eight to twelve repeated exercises with an exercise band. The care plan indicated staff were to refer to signage posted in the resident's room. Task sheets reviewed from 1/2/24 through 2/22/24 revealed Resident 14 received exercise support on four out of 29 days. On 2/20/24 at 12:00 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 · Dcited before2024-02-23 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to assess for care plan effectiveness, identify and implement new fall interventions or provide adequate supervision needed to prevent falls for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#36) reviewed for falls. This placed residents at risk for avoidable falls. Findings include: Resident 36 was admitted to the facility in 7/2023 with diagnoses including cognitive deficit, osteoporosis and fracture of the left femur (thigh). Resident 36's 7/19/23 admission MDS indicated the resident had severe cognitive impairments. The resident required the extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, limited assistance of two staff for transfers and the extensive assistance of one staff for toileting and personal hygiene. The resident was not steady moving from a seated to standing position and was only able to stabilize herself/himself with staff assistance. Resident 36 was incontinent of bowel and bladder and was not on a toileting program. Resident 36's 7/19/23 ADL, Cognition and Fall CAAs indicated 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-23 · 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
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to maintain a medication error rate of less than 5%. There were 2 errors with 35 opportunities resulting in an 5.71% medication error rate. This placed residents at risk for adverse drug reactions. Findings include: Resident 305 admitted to the facility in 2024 with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The 2/12/24 physician order indicated Resident 305 was to receive the following medications: -fluticasone-salmeterol (Wixela inhaler) one inhalation twice daily for COPD. -pantoprazole 20 mg before breakfast for indigestion. On 2/22/24 at 9:18 AM Staff 16 (CMA) was observed to administer pantoprazole. Resident 305 stated she/he already ate breakfast. Staff 16 was observed to administer the Wixela inhaler. Staff 16 did not instruct the resident to rinse her/his mouth after using the inhaler and the resident was not observed to rinse her/his mouth after using the inhaler. On 2/22/22 at 9:18 AM and 9:51 AM Staff 16 acknowledged the pantoprazole was not given prior 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 · D2024-02-23 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
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 consent was obtained prior to administering psychotropic medications to residents for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#305) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This placed residents at risk for being uninformed about their medications. Findings include: Resident 305 was admitted to the facility in 1/2024 with diagnoses including congestive heart failure. Resident 305's 1/31/24 Physician Order indicated the resident was prescribed lorazapam for anxiety disorder. Resident 305's 1/2024 and 2/2024 MARs revealed the resident received lorazapam PRN starting on 1/31/24. Review of Resident 305's health record revealed no documentation to indicate the resident was informed in advance of the risks and benefits of lorazapam. On 2/23/24 at 9:25 AM Staff 2 (DNS) reviewed Resident 305's health record, acknowledged there was no documentation to indicate the resident was informed of the risks and benefits of lorazapam and confirmed consent was not obtained from Resident 305 prior to the resident starting the medication.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-23 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to notify the physician and the resident's responsible party of a change of condition for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#153) reviewed for change of condition. This placed residents at risk for delayed treatment and uniformed responsible parties. Findings include: The facility's 10/2016 Lab and Diagnostic Test Results - Clinical Protocol stated: If the resident has signs and symptoms of acute illness or condition change and he/she is not stable or improving, or there are no previous results for comparison, then the nurse will notify the Medical practitioner promptly to discuss the situation, including a description of relevant clinical findings as well as the test results. Resident 153 admitted to the facility in 12/2023 with diagnoses including spinal stenosis (narrowing of spaces within spinal canal). Resident 153's clinical record indicated Witness 1 (Family Member) was Resident 153's responsible party, POA (Power of Attorney) and Emergency Contact #1. A physician order dated 1/21/24 indicated Resident 153 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-23 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolatedProtect 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
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to properly secure controlled medications for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#11) reviewed for misappropriation. This placed residents at risk for loss of medications. Findings include: Resident 11 admitted to the facility in 2023 with diagnoses including chronic pain. The 11/27/23 physician order indicated Resident 11 was to receive oxycodone (narcotic pain medication) 5 mg BID PRN. The Controlled Substance Record Book #113, page 82 indicated the following: -On 12/5/23 the oxycodone 5 mg medication card had 13 doses remaining on 12/5/23 and no additional doses signed out. -On 12/8/23 it was noted this oxycodone medication card was missing. On 2/23/24 at 1:01 PM Staff 2 (DNS) stated she completed the facility investigation and Resident 11's oxycodone was missing on 12/5/23 but was not discovered until 12/8/23 due to staff not counting narcotic medication correctly in between shifts. Staff 2 acknowledged Resident 11's 13 doses of oxycodone were missing and the facility was unable to determine what happened to the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-11-18 · 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 and interview it was determined the facility failed to store food in a sanitary manner and ensure dietary staff wore facial hair restraints for 1 of 1 kitchen staff serving all residents within the facility and 1 of 1 steam carts. This placed residents at risk for food borne illness and contaminated food. Findings include: 1. On 11/14/22 at 9:15 AM during the initial tour of the facility's kitchen, packaged food items were observed stored directly on the floor in the hallway outside of the kitchen and directly on the floor of the dry storage room. Items stored on the floor in the hallway outside of the kitchen included: *A box of scone and shortcake mix; *A box of pasta; *Six cans of three bean salad; *A box of cranberry juice; *A box of white and wheat bread; *A box of white tea rolls; and *A case of V8 juice (one six-pack was removed). Items stored on the floor of the dry storage room included: *A flat of cans of pumpkin; *A flat of cans of red beans (one can was removed); and *A flat of cans of crushed tomatoes (one can was removed). On 11/14/22 at 9:30 AM…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-11-18 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a common-use glucometer (a device used to obtain blood glucose levels) was appropriately disinfected between uses for 3 of 3 sampled residents (#s 10, 24 and 29) reviewed for CBG monitoring. This placed residents at risk for bloodborne infections. Findings include: The facility's 4/2019 Obtaining a Fingerstick Glucose Level Policy and Procedure directed to ensure the glucometer was disinfected before use according to the manufacturer's instructions. The 3/2020 ForaCare GD20 Blood Glucose Monitoring System Owner's Manual specified the following safety precautions: - Users need to adhere to standard precautions when handling or using this device. - All parts of the glucose monitoring system should be considered potentially infectious and are capable of transmitting blood-borne pathogens between patients and healthcare professionals. - The meter should be disinfected after use on each patient. - This Blood Glucose Monitoring System may only be used for testing multiple patients 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.
- Potential for harm · D2022-11-18 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents received reasonable accommodation of needs for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#10) reviewed for accommodation of needs. This placed residents at risk for not meeting resident's individualized needs. Findings include: Resident 10 was admitted in 10/2022 with diagnoses including surgical aftercare for digestive surgery and hematuria (blood in the urine). On 11/14/22 at 1:30 PM Resident 10 reported she/he was unable to access her/his belongings stored on the bookshelf due to the bookshelf being blocked by the resident's TV and TV stand. Resident 10 stated she/he wished they had access to the bookshelf as it contained several personal items the resident wanted. On 11/17/22 at 9:45 AM Resident 10's bookshelf was observed blocked by the resident's TV and TV stand, which made it inaccessible to the resident. On 11/17/22 at 9:46 AM Staff 13 (CNA) stated due to the location of the TV and TV stand, Resident 10 was unable to access items from the bookshelf. Staff 13 stated Resident 10 had to rely on staff 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 · D2022-11-18 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolatedKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview it was determined the facility failed to ensure resident privacy was provided for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#10) reviewed for dignity. This placed residents at risk for lack of privacy. Findings include: Resident 10 was admitted in 10/2022 with diagnoses including surgical aftercare for digestive surgery and hematuria (blood in the urine). On 11/14/22 at 1:30 PM Resident 10 reported her/his roommate's head of the bed extended beyond the privacy curtain towards Resident 10's side of the room. Resident 10 reported the privacy curtain was unable to fully close due to the location of the roommate's bed. Resident 10 stated the roommate had the ability to view her/his care or when she/he slept. On 11/15/22 at 10:05 AM and on 11/17/22 at 9:45 AM observations of Resident 10's room revealed the head of the roommate's bed was positioned on Resident 10's side of the room which prevented the privacy curtain from being fully closed. On 11/17/22 at 9:52 AM Staff 13 (CNA) stated Resident 10's privacy curtain was obstructed and did not provide full privacy. 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 · D2022-11-18 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolatedEnsure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
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 ensure residents were free from physical restraints for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#15) reviewed for restraints. This placed residents at risk for being physically restrained. Findings include: Resident 15 was admitted in 10/2022 with diagnoses including dementia and anxiety. On 11/16/22 at 8:32 AM Resident 15 was observed in bed with bilateral padded bed rails installed on each side of the bed. During the observation, it was determined the resident was unable to be interviewed. A review of Resident 15's clinical record revealed no physician orders or assessments in the resident's record regarding the use of padded bed rails. On 11/16/22 at 8:41 AM Staff 5 (CNA) stated the padded bed rails on Resident 15's bed were used to keep Resident 15 from getting out of bed as she/he was a high fall risk. Staff 5 stated she was unaware of how long the padded bed rails had been there. On 11/16/22 at 8:51 AM Staff 15 (LPN) stated Resident 15's padded bed rails prevented her/him from getting out of bed and…
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 before2022-11-18 · tag F0636 — isolatedAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
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 comprehensively assess restraints for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#15) reviewed for physical restraints. This placed residents at risk for unassessed physical restraints. Findings include: Resident 15 was admitted in 10/2022 with diagnoses including dementia and anxiety. A review of Resident 15's 11/11/21 and 10/12/22 Annual MDS Assessment for Restraints and Alarms indicated no padded bed rails were used in conjunction with Resident 15's care. On 11/16/22 at 8:32 AM Resident 15 was observed in bed with padded bed rails installed on each side of the bed. On 11/16/22 at 9:10 AM Staff 16 (RNCM) stated upon review of the MDS Assessment for Restraints and Alarms, no assessment was obtained for the use of padded bed rails.
- Potential for harm · D2022-11-18 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
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 nail care for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#17) reviewed for ADL care. This placed residents at risk for unmet care needs. Findings include: Resident 17 was admitted to the facility in 8/2019 with diagnoses including type 2 diabetes. The 8/16/22 Annual MDS revealed Resident 17 had a BIMS score of 13 indicating cognitively intact, was bedbound and required extensive assistance of one person for personal hygiene. Resident's 17's 8/22/22 Comprehensive Care Plan for ADLs indicated Resident 17 required physical assistance for most of her/his ADLs due to impaired mobility and physical limitations. No reference to nail care was made in the resident's care plan. Resident 17's fingernails were noted to be long and dirty during observations made from 11/14/22 to 11/16/22 between the hours of 10:00 AM to 2:00 PM. On 11/16/22 at 3:24 PM and 3:40 PM Staff 5 (CNA) and Staff 10 (CNA) stated it was the responsibility of the nurse to provide diabetic nail care. On 11/16/22 at 4:04 PM Staff 7 (RN) stated…
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 · D2022-11-18 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
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 implement interventions to prevent pressure ulcers and skin breakdown for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#17) reviewed for positioning. This placed residents at risk for the development of pressure ulcers and skin breakdown. Findings include: Resident 17 was admitted to the facility in 8/2019 with diagnoses including type 2 diabetes and a history of skin and subcutaneous tissue (the deepest layer of skin) disease. Resident 17's 8/16/22 Annual MDS revealed the resident was at risk for developing pressure ulcers/injuries, was bedbound and required extensive assistance for bed mobility with two person physical assist. The 11/2022 signed physician orders directed staff to off-load pressure to Resident 17's right lateral ankle each shift and to notify her/his physician if a pressure ulcer or skin breakdown was observed. Multiple observations of Resident 17 between 11/14/22 to 11/18/22 from 10:00 AM to 3:330 PM noted the resident lying in bed with her/his right ankle flat on the mattress. On 11/16/22 at…
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 · D2022-11-18 · tag F0687 — failed to care for feet properly — isolatedProvide appropriate foot care.
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 routine diabetic foot care for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#17) reviewed for foot care. This placed residents at risk for infection and pain. Findings include: Resident 17 was admitted to the facility in 8/2019 with diagnoses including type 2 diabetes. A 1/31/20 podiatry (foot care) appointment progress note indicated the resident received debridement (procedure to remove debris or infected/dead tissue from a wound) of her/his toenails and return in about 10 weeks. No documentation in Resident 17's clinical record indicated she/he received foot care services post her/his 1/31/20 appointment. On 11/16/22 at 3:22 PM Resident 17's toenails were observed to be thick, yellow and long. The nail on her/his left big toe measured approximately 1.5 inches. Resident 17 confirmed her/his toenails caused her/him pain on a daily basis. On 11/16/22 at 4:04 PM Staff 7 (RN) stated licensed nurses were responsible for the nail care of all diabetic residents. Staff 7 observed Resident 17's toenails and…
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 before2022-11-18 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure safety interventions were in place to prevent elopement for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#23) reviewed for elopement. This put residents at risk for potentially avoidable accidents. Findings include: Resident 23 was admitted in 1/2021 with diagnoses including stage 4 pressure ulcers of the sacral region (bottom), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (a condition that restricts lung capacity) and paralytic syndrome (a condition that causes paralysis in the legs and lower torso). A 5/14/21 physician's order stated Resident 23 may go out of the facility with a responsible individual and appropriate medications. Review of Resident 23's clinical record revealed no assessment was completed that determined the resident's safety or capabilities regarding ambulation to and from the facility. On 11/17/22 at 12:40 PM Resident 23 was observed outside of the facility unsupervised in her/his wheelchair. Resident 23 self ambulated…
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.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to HILL VALLEY HEALTHCARE — 43 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 1.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 1.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.0 | +1.0 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 3.7 | -0.7 vs chain |
The other 42 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.8★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 42; lowest-rated first.
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 / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MT TABOR SNF OPERATIONS HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | 100% | since 04/08/2025 |
| DELILAH 2626 HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 06/01/2025 |
| JML 1836 HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 06/01/2025 |
| LANSILH IRRV TR | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 06/01/2025 |
| IDELS, SHIMON | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2025 |
| LION 26 HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/08/2025 |
| SABRINA 1818 HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/08/2025 |
| SAESSY IRREVOCABLE TRUST | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 06/01/2025 |
| TATIRIQ IRREVOCABLE TRUST | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 06/01/2025 |
| OLUM, APRIL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2025 |
| SLAVIK, LISA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 21 rows in the source record cover these 11 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
8 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.
This home reported $635K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
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
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 Oregon 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 385141. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-06-06, 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.