Millard County Care and Rehabilitation
150 South White Sage Avenue, Delta, UT 84624 · Government - County · 60 certified beds · (435) 864-2944 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605, F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (37) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $19,656 in federal fines (most recent 2024-02-07)
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
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) | 5 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 3 to 1 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 | 17.4% | 11.3% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 12.4% | 3.4% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 3.7% | 0.7% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.8% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 2.7% | 16.5% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 6.8% | 2.5% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 12.7% | 15.1% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 48.4% | 25.3% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 94.0% | 98.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 6.1% | 3.9% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 34.4% | 21.5% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 34.6% | 14.2% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 0.9% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 13.8% | 16.5% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 0.0% | 11.6% | 12.0% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.54 | 1.25 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.28 | 1.43 | 1.80 | better |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
55.5% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 56 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.14 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 11% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 0% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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 | 55.5%CMS range 44.3–65.2 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.8%CMS range 6.0–14.7 | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.7%CMS range 3.5–12.4 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.03 | 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 60 beds and averages 49.9 residents a day — about 83% occupied, or roughly 10 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.60 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.86 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.46 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 3.52 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.63 on weekdays — 3% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.95 to 0.65 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 37% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. 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.
37 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 26 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · G2024-02-07 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined, for 1 of 20 sampled residents, that based on the comprehensive assessment of a resident the facility did not provide care, consistent with professional standards of practice, to prevent pressure ulcers. In addition, a resident with pressure ulcers did not receive necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, prevent infection and prevent new ulcers from developing. Specifically, a resident had no treatment orders when a new pressure ulcer was identified. The same resident did not have wound measurements of her heel wound since November 2023 and December 2023 for two additional wounds. The heel wound increased in size and there was no re-assessment of the treatment orders. Resident identifier: 21. Findings include: Resident 21 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Alzheimer's disease, moderate protein-calorie malnutrition, 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 · E2026-04-30 · tag F0552 — patternEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
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 record review and interview, it was found that for 4 out of 20 sampled residents, the facility failed to ensure that each resident had the right to be informed of, and participate in, his or her treatment, including the right to be informed in advance, by the physician or other practitioner or professional, of the risks and benefits of proposed care, of treatment and treatment alternatives or treatment options and to choose the alternative or option he or she prefers. Specifically, five residents or resident representatives were not informed of risks and benefits, treatment or treatment alternatives or options in advance of starting psychotropic medications. Resident identifiers: 4, 6, 8, and 54. 1. Resident 8's medical record was reviewed 4/27/26 through 4/30/26.Resident 8 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting left non-dominant side, psychotic disorder with delusions due to known…
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 · E2026-04-30 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — patternPrevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
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 that for 3 out of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not ensure that residents who use psychotropic drugs received gradual dose reductions and did not ensure that PRN (as needed) orders for anti-psychotic drugs were limited to 14 days. Specifically, the facility did not document a gradual dose reduction attempt of psychotropic medications for two residents prior to January 2026 and one resident had an antipsychotic medication prescribed for more than 14 days. Resident identifiers: 4, 8, and 54. 1. Resident 4 was admitted on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including, but not limited to unspecified dementia unspecified severity without behavioral disturbance, psychotic disturbance, mood disturbance, and anxiety disorder unspecified.Resident 4's medical record was reviewed from 4/27/26 through 4/30/26. The facility completed a psychotropic medication review and gradual dose reduction attempt in January 2026. There were no other…
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 · E2026-04-30 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — patternTimely 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, it was found that for 4 out of 20 sampled residents, the facility failed to ensure all alleged violations of abuse, including injuries of unknown source, were reported immediately to the State Survey Agency and other officials in accordance with State law. Specifically, the facility failed to report an allegation of sexual abuse and incidents involving major injuries to the State Agency, which prevented a timely investigation and oversight of resident safety. Resident Identifiers: 3, 6, 19, and 59.1. Resident 59 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], readmitted on [DATE], and discharged [DATE] with diagnoses which included hemiplegia and hemiparesis.Review of resident 59's medical record was completed on 4/27/26 through 4/30/26.A Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that resident 59 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 6 which indicated severely impaired cognition.On 1/31/26 at 5:22 PM, a Nursing Note revealed the following, his roommate…
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 · E2026-04-30 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — patternRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, it was found that for 3 out of 20 sampled residents, the facility failed to ensure all alleged violations involving abuse and injuries of unknown sources were thoroughly investigated. Specifically, the facility failed to initiate or document an investigation into an allegation of sexual abuse and three separate incidents involving major injuries to determine the cause, identify responsible parties, or implement corrective actions to prevent further potential abuse. Resident Identifiers: 3, 6, and 59.1. Resident 59 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], readmitted on [DATE], and discharged [DATE] with diagnoses which included hemiplegia and hemiparesisReview of resident 59's medical record was completed on 4/27/26 through 4/30/26.A Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that resident 59 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 6 which indicated severely impaired cognition.On 1/31/26 at 5:22 PM, a Nursing Note revealed the following, his roommate…
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 before2026-04-30 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — patternEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, it was found that for 4 out of 20 sampled residents, the facility failed to ensure that a licensed pharmacist performed a drug regimen review at least once a month and failed to act upon the pharmacist's reports of any irregularities to the attending physician and the facility's medical director and director of nursing. Irregularities included, but were not limited to, any drug that met the criteria set forth in paragraph (d) of this section for an unnecessary drug. (ii) Any irregularities noted by the pharmacist during this review must be documented on a separate, written report that was sent to the attending physician and the facility's medical director and director of nursing and lists, at a minimum, the resident's name, the relevant drug, and the irregularity the pharmacist identified. (iii) The attending physician must document in the resident's medical record that the identified irregularity had been reviewed and what, if any, action had been taken to address it. If…
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 · E2026-04-30 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
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 record review and interview, it was determined that for 3 out of 20 sampled residents, the facility failed to maintain medical records on each resident that were complete, accurately documented, readily accessible, and systematically organized. Specifically, one resident's progress notes were entered late, at least 13 times with one being documented 48 days late, and 2 resident's pharmacy reviews were not readily available. Resident identifiers: 4, 23, 54 1. Resident 23's progress notes were reviewed:An Incident Note was documented on 10/24/25 at 1:39 PM for 9/30/25 at 4:50 PM, which was 24 days late;A Nurses Note was documented on 11/18/25 at 9:36 AM for 11/2/25 at 4:36 PM, which was 16 days late;A Social Services Note was documented on 1/5/26 at 10:25 AM for 11/18/25 at 10:23 AM, which was 48 days late;A Nurses Note was documented on 2/6/26 at 9:36 PM for 1/29/26 at 4:36 PM, which was 8 days late;A Nurses Note was documented on 3/2/26 at 9:49 AM for 2/28/26 at 4:48 PM, which was 2 days late;A Social…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-30 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure all drugs and biologicals used in the facility were labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles. Specifically, two open insulin pens were not labeled with a resident's name. Resident identifier: 56. On 4/29/26 at 10:50 AM, an observation of the south medication fridge was made where a plastic bin with resident 56's first name written on it was located, two open insulin pens were loose in the plastic bin and there was no resident name labeled on the medications. A concurrent interview was conducted with Registered Nurse (RN) 1 who stated the two insulin pens belonged to resident 56 and that they always put the names of the resident on the pen. RN 1 stated they were unsure why the labels had not been affixed. RN 1 was observed to place resident 56's identification label on both insulin pens.On 4/29/26 at 2:17 PM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON) who stated she threw the two previously unlabeled insulin pens away to avoid any medication errors…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-30 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — isolatedSet up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, it was determined that as part of their performance improvement activities, the facility failed to take actions aimed at performance improvement and, after implementing those actions, measure its success, and track performance to ensure that improvements were realized and sustained. Specifically, the facility was cited a deficiency for F756 when it failed to maintain documentation in the medical records to demonstrate that a pharmacist reviewed the residents' medications, identified potential irregularities, or provided recommendations to the attending physician for four sampled residents which was identified as a deficiency in the previous health survey in 2024.On 4/30/26 at 1:14 PM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing and she stated that she did not have time to maintain documentation in the medical records to demonstrate that a pharmacist reviewed the residents' medications, identified potential irregularities, or provided recommendations to the attending physician for four sampled residents because she did not have time.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-30 · 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, the facility failed to ensure a safe and sanitary environment to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. Specifically, staff were observed handling oral medications with bare hands during administration, and the facility failed to maintain documentation for tracking and investigating infections to identify patterns or trends. Resident identifier: 23.1. On 4/30/26 at 11:47 AM, an observation of Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) revealed that while preparing medications for resident 23, LPN 1 popped a pill directly into her bare hand before placing it into a medication cup. LPN 1 was then observed administering the contaminated medication to resident 23. On 4/30/26 at 1:29 PM, an interview with the DON was conducted. The DON stated that staff members were expected to pop pills directly from blister packs into medication dispenser cups and to never touch medications with bare hands. The DON stated that if a medication came in contact with a staff member's bare hand, that medication was to be…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-30 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — isolatedImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to develop and implement an antibiotic stewardship program that included antibiotic use protocols and a system to monitor antibiotic use. Specifically, the facility had no established facility-wide system to ensure the appropriate indication, dose, and duration for antibiotic prescriptions, nor a process for monitoring usage and resistance data.On 4/29/26 at 8:20 AM, the facility's Infection Control Surveillance Logs were requestedIt should be noted the facility's Infection Control Surveillance Logs, including any prescribed antibiotic tracking information, were unavailable.On 4/30/26 at 12:28 PM, an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) was conducted. The DON stated that she also served as the facility's designated Infection Preventionist. The DON stated that she did not track resident antibiotic utilization, including the specific clinical indications for the medications or the prescribed durations of treatment.
Show the remaining 26 citations
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-02-07 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide 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 that the facility did not maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections, including COVID-19. Specifically, a staff member tested positive for COVID-19 and was not excluded from working in the facility. Findings include: On 2/5/24 upon entering the facility, an interview was conducted with the Administrator. The Administrator stated the Maintenance Director tested positive for COVID-19 that morning. The Administrator stated he fixed the facility washing machine and then tested positive. The Administrator stated he was not feeling well and he was sent home. The Administrator stated the Maintenance Director did not feel good Friday and left early. The Administrator stated the Maintenance Director did not work Saturday or Sunday. On 2/6/24 at 10:05 AM, an observation was made of the Maintenance Director. The Maintenance Director was wearing a black surgical…
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 · F2024-02-07 · tag F0882 — widespreadDesignate a qualified infection preventionist to be responsible for the infection prevent and control program in the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, it was determined the facility did not designate one or more individuals as the infection preventionist (IP) who are responsible for the facility's infection control program. Findings include: The facility's Infection control documentation was requested. No Infection Control Surveillance Logs were available from the previous survey 5/5/22 to current. On 2/6/24 at 4:34 PM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated the facility had not had an IP since the previous survey. The DON stated she had not completed the IP training. The DON stated she was unable to fill the IP position because then it would take a nurse from patient care. The DON stated she did not have infection control tracking or trending. The DON stated she should have infection control tracking and trending for each month. [Cross refer to F880]
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-02-07 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — patternEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, it was determined for 5 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not ensure that each resident's drug regimen was reviewed once a month by the licensed pharmacist, and that any irregularities were reported to the physician and were acted upon. Specifically, monthly pharmacy reviews were not being conducted between July 2023 and January 2024. Resident identifiers: 14, 19, 20, 22 and 32. Findings include: 1. Resident 14 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included malignant neoplasm of endocrine pancreas, type 2 diabetes, neoplasm related pain, anxiety disorder, nausea with vomiting, thrombocytopenia, and occlusion and stenosis of aortic artery. Resident 14's medical record was reviewed between 2/5/24 and 2/7/24. No pharmacy reviews were located in resident 14's medical record. 2. Resident 19 was admitted to the facility initially on 4/17/22 and then again on 11/17/23 with diagnoses that included fracture of coccyx, muscle weakness, displace…
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 · E2024-02-07 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — patternImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review it was determined, for 5 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not ensure that residents who used psychotropic drugs received a gradual dose reduction (GDR), and behavioral interventions, unless it was clinically contraindicated. Specifically, residents prescribed psychotropic drugs did not have a GDR attempted. In addition, documentation for contraindication for GDR's were not documented. Resident identifier: 14, 19, 20, 22 and 32. Findings include: 1. Resident 20 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included atrial fibrillation, hypoxemia, pain in thoracic spine, unsteady on feet, wedge compression fracture, low back pain, pain in hip, heart failure, hypertension and osteoporosis. Resident 20's medical record was reviewed 2/5/24 through 2/7/24. Resident 20's physician's order dated 4/30/2020 revealed, Pristiq 100 milligrams (mg) to administer 1 tablet by mouth one time a day related to anxiety. Resident 20's physicians order dated 3/24/2020…
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 before2024-02-07 · 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 and interview it was determined that the facility failed to store all drugs and biologicals in locked compartments. Specifically, two refrigerators that contained medications were unlocked. Findings include: On 2/6/24 at 2:05 PM, an observation was made of the north side nursing station medication refrigerator. The medication refrigerator was unlocked and contained insulin medications. On 2/6/24 at 2:22 PM, an observation was made of the south side nursing station medication refrigerator. The medication refrigerator was unlocked and contained insulin medications. On 2/6/24 at 2:22 PM, an interview was conducted with Registered Nurse (RN) 1. RN 1 stated the medication refrigerator contained insulin and suppository medications. RN 1 further stated the south side medication refrigerator did not have a lock on it. On 2/6/24 at 2:35 PM, an interview was conducted with RN 2. RN 2 stated the medication refrigerator always needed to be locked. RN 2 stated the refrigerator contained insulin, eye drops, and suppository medications. On 2/6/24 at 4:35 PM, an interview was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-07 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined, for 1 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not notify the resident's physician when there was a signigicant change in the resident's physical, mental or psychosical status or when there was a need to alter treatment significantly. Specifically, a resident developed a new wound and the physicain was not notified. In addition, the resident did not have physician's orders to treat the wound. Resident identifier: 21. Findings include: Resident 21 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Alzheimer's disease, moderate protein-calorie malnutrition, open wound left foot, major depressive disorder and cutaneous abscess of left lower limb. On 2/5/24 at 1:52 PM, an interview was conducted with resident 21. Resident 21 stated she thought she had sores on her body. Resident 21 stated she did not have pain from her sores. Resident 21 stated her sores were kept covered with dressings. On 2/5/24 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 · D2024-02-07 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
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, for 1 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not provide or obtain routine dental services. Specifically, a resident stated her dentures did not fit and needed to be adjusted. Resident identifier: 34. Findings include: Resident 34 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Hemiplegia and hemiparesis, subluxation of left shoulder, heart failure, insomnia, cerebral infarction due to unspecified occlusion or stenosis of cerebral artery, muscle weakness, and type 2 diabetes mellitus. On 2/5/24 at 2:51 PM, an interview was conducted with resident 34. Resident 34 stated she needed her dentures realigned. Resident 34 stated she was not sure if she had enough money. Resident 34 stated she was able to wear her top dentures and her food was cut up for her to be able to eat it. Resident 34's medical record was reviewed 2/5/24 through 2/7/24. An annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed no dental issues. The MDS revealed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-07 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
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, for 1 of 20 sampled residents, it was determined the facility did not develop and implement a baseline care plan that included the instructions needed to provide effective and person centered care of the resident that met professional standards of quality care, and be developed within 48 hours of the resident's admission. Specifically, the resident's care plan was developed 5 days after the resident was admitted to the facility. Resident identifier: 19. Findings include: Resident 19 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included fracture of coccyx, muscle weakness, displaced fracture of left humerous, encephalopathy, chronic kidney disease, type 2 diabetes, major depressive disorder and dementia. Resident 19's medical records were reviewed between 2/5/23 and 2/7/23. A review of resident 19's careplan revealed focus areas initiated on 11/22/23 included: a. The resident had an ADL (activities of daily living) performance deficit…
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 before2024-02-07 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, it was determined that, for 5 of 20 sampled residents, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment. Specifically, care plans were not updated when there was a change in the resident's condition and therefore were not reflective of the services required for the residents to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental and psychosocial well-being. Resident identifiers: 9, 14, 21, 22, and 34. Findings include: 1. Resident 9 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included mental disorder, polyosteoarthritis, type 2 diabetes mellitus, sensorineural hearing loss, paralytic syndrome, chronic pain, hypoxemia, lagophthalmos left eye, hallucinations, and malignant…
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 before2024-02-07 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, for 2 of 20 sampled residents, the facility failed to ensure residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive assessment, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's preferences. Specifically, a resident who had a change in her diet order was not assessed as having a change in condition, and a resident who developed pneumonia and the flu did not have his change in condition documented until it was necessary to send him to the hospital. Resident identifiers: 22 and 32. Findings include: 1. Resident 22 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia with other behavioral disturbance, psychophysiologic insomnia, mood disorder with depressive features, and anxiety disorder. On 2/5/24 at 12:10 PM, an observation was made of resident 22 in the dining room for the lunch meal. Resident 22 received a pureed diet in a divided plate and a cup of jello. Resident 22…
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 · D2024-02-07 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
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, for 1 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not ensure that each resident's drug regimen was free from unnecessary drugs. An unnecessary drug was any drug when used in excessive dose; or for excessive duration; or without adequate monitoring; or without adequate indication for its use; or in the presence of adverse consequences. Specifically, a resident's medications did not have a diagnoses. Resident identifier: 20. Findings included: Resident 20 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included atrial fibrillation, hypoxemia, pain in thoracic spine, unsteady on feet, wedge compression fracture, low back pain, pain in hip, heart failure, hypertension and osteoporosis. Resident 20's medical record was reviewed 2/5/24 through 2/7/24. Resident 20's physician's orders dated 3/24/2020 revealed Eliquis 2.5 milligrams (mg) twice daily for displaced intertrochanteric fracture of unspecified femur, sequela. A physician's order dated…
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 · D2024-02-07 · tag F0773 — isolatedProvide or obtain laboratory tests/services when ordered and promptly tell the ordering practitioner of the results.
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, for 1 of 20 sampled residents, the facility did not obtain laboratory services only when ordered by a physician. Specifically, a resident had laboratory services completed without a physician's order. Resident identifier: 20. Findings include: Resident 20 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included atrial fibrillation, hypoxemia, pain in thoracic spine, unsteady on feet, wedge compression fracture, low back pain, pain in hip, heart failure, hypertension and osteoporosis. Resident 20's medical record was reviewed 2/5/24 through 2/7/24. Resident 20's last physician's orders for laboratory services was on 9/20/22 for a Comprehensive Metabolic Panel (CMP) with a diagnosis of protein malnutrition. Laboratory values in resident 20's medical record were the following: 1. 4/12/23: Urine analysis 2. 3/17/23: Urine analysis 3. 3/17/23: Urine Culture 4. 3/16/23 B-Type Natriuretic Peptide, Complete Blood Count (CBC) with Auto Diff, CMP, C-reactive protein (CRP),…
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 · D2024-02-07 · tag F0775 — isolatedKeep complete, dated laboratory records in the resident's record.
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 for 1 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not file in the resident's clinical record laboratory (lab) reports that were dated and contained the name and address of testing laboratory. Specifically, the lab results for 3 urinary cultures and sensitivities were not obtained or filed in the resident's medical record. Resident identifier: 19. Findings include: Resident 19 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included fracture of coccyx, muscle weakness, displace fracture of left humerus, encephalopathy, chronic kidney disease, type 2 diabetes, major depressive disorder and dementia. Resident 19's medical records were reviewed between 2/5/23 and 2/7/23. On 12/6/23 at 4:45 PM, a nursing progress note revealed, .She has been c/o [complaining of] lower back and pelvic pain, burning on urination. Staff reported that her urine looks cloudy and there is possible the presence of blood in the urine .At 1230…
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 · D2024-02-07 · tag F0779 — isolatedKeep signed and dated reports of x-rays and other diagnostic services in the residents record.
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 for 1 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not file in the resident's clinical record the signed and dated reports of radiological and other diagnostic services. Specifically, a resident's chest x-ray result was not filed in the medical record. Resident identifier: 32. Findings include: Resident 32 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included type 2 diabetes, major depressive disorder, macular degeneration, dementia, anxiety disorder, insomnia, pneumonia, and influenza A with respiratory manifestations. Resident 32's medical records were reviewed from 2/5/24 to 2/7/24. A physician's progress noted dated 11/29/23 revealed, DX [diagnosis]: Pneumonia. Patient with acute onset shortness of breath decreased oxygen today. Patient reports congestion. Borderline low oxygen 88 on my examination though noted to be 86. Blood pressure was stable today. Ordered CBC [complete blood count] CMP [complete metabolic…
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 · D2024-02-07 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolatedProvide or obtain dental services for each resident.
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, for 1 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not provide or obtain routine dental services. Specifically, a resident stated her dentures did not fit and needed to be adjusted. Resident identifier: 34. Findings include: Resident 34 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Hemiplegia and hemiparesis, subluxation of left shoulder, heart failure, insomnia, cerebral infarction due to unspecified occlusion or stenosis of cerebral artery, muscle weakness, and type 2 diabetes mellitus. On 2/5/24 at 2:51 PM, an interview was conducted with resident 34. Resident 34 stated she needed her dentures realigned. Resident 34 stated she was not sure if she had enough money. Resident 34 stated she was able to wear her top dentures and her food had to be cut up for her to be able to eat it. Resident 34's medical record was reviewed 2/5/24 through 2/7/24. An annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed no dental issues. The 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 · D2024-02-07 · tag F0808 — failed to follow doctor-ordered diets — isolatedEnsure therapeutic diets are prescribed by the attending physician and may be delegated to a registered or licensed dietitian, to the extent allowed by State law.
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 for 2 of 20 sampled resident, that the facility did not provide therapeutic diets as prescribed by the attending physician. Specifically, residents were provided puree diets when their prescribed diet was mechanical soft or regular. Resident identifiers: 9 and 22. Findings include: 1. Resident 22 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia with other behavioral disturbance, psychophysiologic insomnia, mood disorder with depressive features, and anxiety disorder. On 2/5/24 at 12:10 PM, an observation was made of resident 22 in the dining room for the lunch meal. Resident 22 received a pureed diet in a divided plate and a cup of jello. Resident 22 had water and juice to drink with her meal. A Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) was sitting between resident 22 and another resident and was assisting resident 22. Resident 22 was unable to feed herself. Resident 22's medical record was reviewed between 2/5/24 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 · D2024-02-07 · tag F0840 — isolatedEmploy or obtain outside professional resources to provide services in the nursing home when the facility does not employ a qualified professional to furnish a required service.
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, for 1 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not arrange outside resources in a timely manner for residents. Specifically, a resident with a referral for cataracts to be evaluated was not completed. Resident identifier: 38. Findings include: Resident 38 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included dementia, psychotic disturbance, mood disorder and macular degeneration. Resident 38's medical record was reviewed 2/6/24. A nursing progress note dated 6/8/23 at 4:45 PM revealed, Resident supervised with her care this morning. She c/o [complained of] R [right] eye pain and itching, eye is red from her rubbing it. She does have a history of macular degeneration. Prior to coming here, she had been getting an injection in her eye. She was given PRN [as needed] Tylenol and reported that it had helped some. I suggested that we talk with her family about getting an eye appointment here for her and possibly treatment with medication. 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 · D2024-02-07 · tag F0849 — isolatedArrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice 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 interview and record review, it was determined for 1 of 20 sampled residents, that the facility did not ensure that the hospice services met professional standards and principles that applied to providing services in the facility and to the timeliness of those services. Specifically, the facility did not obtain from the hospice provider the most recent hospice plan of care, physician re-certification of terminal illness, and all communication visit notes were not maintained in the resident's medical record. Resident identifier: 14. Findings include: Resident 14 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included malignant neoplasm of endocrine pancreas, type 2 diabetes, neoplasm related pain, anxiety disorder, nausea with vomiting, thrombocytopenia, and occlusion and stenosis of aortic artery. Resident 14's medical records were reviewed between 2/5/24 and 2/7/24. Resident 14's care plan revealed, The resident has a terminal prognosis r/t [related to] cancer. The goal was The resident's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2022-05-05 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — patternHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
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 did not provide the right for residents to choose medical treatment. Specifically, for 4 out of 37 sampled residents, residents Physicians Orders for Life Sustaining Treatment (POLST) forms were not completely filled out. Resident identifiers: 2, 41, 202 and 23. Findings include: 1. Resident 2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with a diagnoses that included: heart failure, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), atrial fibrillation, anxiety, polyneuropathy, cerebral infarction and dysphasia. On [DATE] a review of resident 2's medical record was conducted. During this review, it was discovered that resident 2's POLST was not completely filled out in Section D. 2. Resident 41 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE], with a diagnoses that included: hepatic failure, hypotension, bacteremia, esophageal varicies, type 2 diabetes, hypomagnesia and anemia. On [DATE] a review of resident 41's medical…
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 before2022-05-05 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 3. Resident 252 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia with Lewy bodies, iron deficiency anemia, muscle weakness, repeated falls, rheumatoid arthritis without rheumatoid factor, epilepsy, major depressive disorder, and anxiety. Resident 252's medical record was reviewed on 5/5/22. A review of resident 252's care plan revealed the care plan to be incomplete. Resident 252's care plan was initiated on 4/25/22 with the next review date scheduled for 5/6/22. Resident 252's care plan had a focus area initiated on 4/26/22 which stated, The resident has an ADL (activities of daily living) self-care performance deficit r/t (related to) dementia, musculoskeletal impairment, weakness. This focus area had one goal, initiated on 4/26/22, which stated, The resident will improve current level of function in ADL ability through the review date. This focus area and goal had six incomplete interventions, initiated on 4/26/22, which read: a. BED MOBILITY: The resident requires (SPECIFY what…
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 before2022-05-05 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations and interviews, it was determined that the facility did not ensure that standard precautions and hand hygiene procedures were followed by staff in direct resident contact to prevent the spread of infection. Specifically, staff members did not perform hand hygiene before and after providing resident care, did not perform hand hygiene between resident encounters, and did not disinfect the weight bench before and after each resident use. Findings included: On 05/02/22 at 1:14 PM, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 2 was observed assisting a resident to her room. It was observed that CNA 2 did not perform hand hygiene upon entering the resident's room or before providing care to the resident. It was observed that another staff member entered the same room and assisted CNA 2 to transfer the resident without performing hand hygiene before or after the encounter. On 05/03/22 at 12:45 PM, it was observed that CNA 2 and another staff member weighed the resident in room [ROOM NUMBER] with the weight…
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 · D2022-05-05 · 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 — 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 for 1 of 37 sampled residents, the facility did not conduct a periodic comprehensive, accurate, standardized, and reproducible Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment of each resident's functional capacity. Specifically, an annual MDS assessment was not completed timely. Resident identifier: 35. Findings include: Resident 35 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included morbid obesity with alveolar hypoventilation, chronic kidney disease, type 2 diabetes with diabetic neuropathy, lymphedema, hypoxemia, mood disorder with depressive features, obstructive sleep apnea, acute chronic diastolic heart failure and Charcot's joint-left ankle and foot. Resident 35's medical record was reviewed on 5/4/22. Resident 35's annual MDS assessment had a target date of 4/15/22. An observation was made that the annual MDS assessment on resident 35 was In Progress and the MDS viewer was flagged stating the annual assessment was 14 days overdue. On 5/5/22 at 9:30 AM, an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-05-05 · tag F0638 — isolatedAssure that each resident’s assessment is updated at least once every 3 months.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility did not use the quarterly review instrument once every three months for 1 of 37 sampled residents. Specifically, a Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was not completed and submitted in a timely manner. Resident Identifier: 23. Findings included: Resident 23 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Parkinson's disease, hypokalemia, dementia, psychotic disorders with delusions and hallucinations, benign prostatic hyperplasia, heart failure, amnesia, edema, insomnia, restless leg syndrome, hypertension, and gout. On 5/5/22 resident 23's electronic medical record (EMR) was reviewed. Resident 23's Quarterly MDS assessment had a target Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 4/1/22. Resident 23's EMR indicated that the Quarterly assessment was In Progress and the MDS viewer was flagged stating the Quarterly Assessment was 20 days overdue. [Note: A Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] was the last submitted and accepted MDS assessment…
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 before2022-05-05 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
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 that the facility did not develop and implement a baseline care plan for each resident that included the instruction needed to provide effective and person-centered care of the resident that meets professional standards of quality care. Specifically, a baseline care plan was not completed for a newly admitted resident, which left facility staff without the needed instruction to provide the resident with effective, person-centered care. Resident identifier: 252. Finding included: Resident 252 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia with Lewy bodies, iron deficiency anemia, muscle weakness, repeated falls, rheumatoid arthritis without rheumatoid factor, epilepsy, major depressive disorder, and anxiety. Resident 252's medical record was reviewed on 5/5/22. The record review revealed that a baseline care plan was not completed or implemented for resident 252. Records showed that an admission assessment was completed on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-05-05 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility did not provide treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice. Specifically, for 1 out of 37 sampled residents, the facility did not provide baseline monitoring of a resident's blood sugars. Resident identifier: 202. Findings include: Resident 202 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with a diagnosis that included: hemiplegia, heart failure, cerebral infarction, type 2 diabetes, hyperlipidemia, and chronic kidney disease. On 5/3/22 a review of resident 202's medical record was completed. Physician orders dated 4/22/22 stated continue to recheck blood sugar if BS (blood sugar) is below 70 or above 430 every hour until within these parameters. There were no physician orders to establish a baseline blood sugar. No blood sugar data was available during resident 202's stay. On 5/4/22 at 11:45 AM an interview was conducted with Registered Nurse (RN) 1, During this interview, RN 1 stated that she should have…
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 · D2022-05-05 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined that the facility did not maintain acceptable parameters of nutrition status, such as usual body weight or desirable body weight range, unless the resident's clinical condition demonstrated that this was not possible. Specifically, there was 1 of 37 sampled residents that lost weight and nutritional interventions recommended were not implemented timely. Resident identifier: 9. Findings include: Resident 9 was admitted to the facility initially on 6/5/17, had subsequent admissions on 10/4/2018 and 10/20/2019, and most recent readmission was on 4/13/22. Diagnoses upon admission included pneumonia, respiratory failure, severe sepsis, gastroesophageal reflux disease, anxiety disorder, systolic congestive heart failure, and mild cognitive impairment. On 5/2/22 at 2:55 PM an interview was conducted with resident 9. Resident 9 stated that she had not been included in decisions that were made about her care. Resident 9 also stated she was unsure if she had lost weight recently. Resident 9 was observed in her room, dressed…
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
$19,656 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $19,656 — penalty dated 2024-02-07
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| TRADITIONS HEALTH CARE, INC. | Organization | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2008 |
| MILLARD COUNTY CARE & REHABILITATION INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 03/01/2008 |
| CHRISTENSEN, JEFFERY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/13/2026 |
| SMITH, ALAN | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/17/2026 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 8 rows in the source record cover these 4 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $420K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in UT
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 Utah 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 465157. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-30, 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.