Rocky Mountain Care - Riverton

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

73.0% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 165 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 80.7% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 57 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 1.03 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 97% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 10% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 40 beds and averages 37.5 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 2 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.02 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.71 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.78 is below 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 3.41 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.27 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.84 to 1.38 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 54% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 3 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

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

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.

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.

17 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 6 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2021-08-19 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolated
  Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
  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 2 of 22 sample residents, that the facility did not ensure each resident was free of significant medication errors. Specifically, a resident with a known allergy was administered a medication she was allergic to and required Narcan. This finding resulted in a harm level deficiency. In addition, another resident that required medication with food was not administered medication with food. Resident identifiers: 28 and 195. Findings include: HARM 1. Resident 195 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included after care following joint replacement surgery, morbid obesity, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and encounter for prophylactic measures. On 8/16/21 at 12:00 PM, an interview was conducted with resident 195. Resident 195 stated that facility staff over medicated and dehydrated her. Resident 195 stated that she was given pain medication that she was allergic to and had to go to the emergency room (ER) at the local hospital. Resident…

  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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2024-09-26 · tag F0801 — widespread
  Employ sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview, the facility did not employ a clinically qualified full-time dietitian or another clinically qualified nutrition professional to serve as the director of nutrition services. Specifically, the facility did not employ a full time Registered Dietitian (RD) and the Dietary Manager (DM) did not meet the requirements to serve as the director of nutrition services. Findings included: On 9/23/24 at 8:51 AM, an initial walk-through of the kitchen was completed. An interview was conducted with the DM who stated she had not completed the training required to serve as the DM. The DM stated she was ServeSafe certified and had taken the RD consulting company's menu training. The DM stated the RD came to the facility every Wednesday, and was available by phone if she had questions or concerns. The DM stated the RD conducted a kitchen audit every week when she was in the facility, but she did not receive the information from those audits. On 9/25/24 at 10:11 AM, an interview was conducted with the RD. The RD stated that she had worked for the facility for two years and was full…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-09-26 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation and interview, the facility did not store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Specifically, the dish machine was not running properly to sanitize the dishes after meals. Findings included: On 9/23/24 at 8:51 AM, an initial walk-through of the kitchen was conducted. On 9/23/24 at 9:17 AM, an observation was made of the dish machine. The Dietary Manager (DM) was running dishes through the dish machine, three racks had gone through the machine, and were on the belt. A fourth rack was inside the dish machine. The wash cycle was running at a temperature of 160 degrees Fahrenheit. After the wash cycle finished, no water entered the dish machine for a rinse cycle. A container of dish machine detergent was noted to be connected to the dish machine. When questioned what it was, the DM stated that it was empty and did not replace it. On 9/23/24 at 9:18 AM, an observation was made of the dish machine temperature log. The temperatures listed the wash temperature, the rinse temperature, and a sanitizer…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-09-26 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not establish 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. Specifically, for 3 out of 22 sampled residents, staff were not using the appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) for residents on Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP). In addition, a resident with a physician's order for EBP did not have signage posted on their door and PPE was not readily available. Resident identifiers: 21, 84, and 85. Findings included: 1. Resident 21 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included, but were not limited to, pyogenic arthritis, cellulitis of right lower limb, cellulitis of left lower limb, pressure ulcer of sacral region stage 3, localized edema, infection and inflammatory reaction due to internal right knee prosthesis, chronic kidney disease, protein-calorie…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-09-26 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure that a resident who was incontinent of bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections and to restore continence to the extent possible. Specifically, for 1 out of 22 sampled residents, a resident had a urinary catheter without a physician's order. Resident identifier: 180. Findings included: Resident 180 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included encounter for other orthopedic aftercare, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, lymph nodes of head, face, and neck, other acute postprocedural pain, cellulitis of right lower limb, muscle weakness, obstructive sleep apnea, fracture of shaft of right fibula, subsequent encounter for closed fracture with routine healing, fracture of shaft of right tibia, subsequent encounter for closed fracture with routine healing, heart failure, venous insufficiency, hypothyroidism, hyperlipidemia, dementia, unspecified severity, without behavioral…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-09-26 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolated
  Ensure 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, 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 which indicated that the dose should be reduced or discontinued. Specifically, for 1 out of 22 sampled residents, a resident's blood pressure (BP) support medication was administered outside of the physician's ordered parameters. Resident identifier: 21. Findings included: Resident 21 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included cellulitis of right lower limb, cellulitis of left lower limb, pressure ulcer of sacral region, localized edema, muscle weakness, infection and inflammatory reaction due to internal right knee prosthesis, chronic kidney disease, protein-calorie malnutrition, essential hypertension, acute on chronic combined systolic (congestive)…

  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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-03-01 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
  Immediately 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 interview and record review, it was determined, the facility did not consult with a resident's physician when there was a change in the resident's status. Specifically, for 1 out of 21 sampled residents, a resident had a blood glucose reading below 60 and the physician was not notified per the physician's order. Resident identifier: 137. Findings included: Resident 137 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included atrial fibrillation, esophageal obstruction, tinea pedis, history of falling, pain, heart failure, chronic kidney disease, type 2 diabetes, muscle weakness, and hypertension. On 2/27/23 at 12:13 PM, an interview was conducted with resident 137. Resident 137 stated that on 2/26/23, her blood sugar was checked in the morning and was 125. Resident 137 stated she was given her scheduled insulin. Resident 137 stated she started to feel unwell and when her glucose was checked it was 56. Resident 137 stated she was provided a glucagon shot and was given some orange juice through her feeding…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-03-01 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop 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, the facility did not develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that were identified in the comprehensive assessment. Specifically, for 2 out of 21 sampled residents, residents that were receiving oxygen therapy did not have the oxygen therapy included in their comprehensive care plan. Resident identifiers: 4 and 17. Findings included: 1. Resident 4 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included, but were not limited to, intraspinal abscess and granuloma, sepsis, vertebrogenic low back pain, infection and inflammatory reaction due to internal left knee prosthesis, dysphagia, muscle weakness, need for assistance with personal care, repeated falls, cognitive communication deficit, acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, methicillin susceptible staphylococcus aureus infection,…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-03-01 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, it was determined , the facility did not provide the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene to residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living. Specifically, for 1 out of 21 sampled residents, a resident did not receive showers or bathing assistance in a timely manner and according to the facility schedule for showers. Resident identifier: 7. Findings included: Resident 7 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that in included myotonic muscular distrophy, major depressive disorder, mild intellectual disabilities, hypomagnesemia, acute upper respiratory infection, and long QT (measurement of the hearts electrical activity) syndrome. On 2/27/23 at 11:29 AM, an interview was conducted with resident 7. Resident 7 stated that sometimes the staff forgot to shower her. Resident 7 stated she did not remember when her last shower was. On 2/27/23, resident 7's medical record was reviewed. Resident 7's annual Minimum Data…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-03-01 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined, the facility did not ensure that each resident receives necessary respiratory care and services that are in accordance with professional standards of practice. Specifically, for 2 out of 21 sampled residents, oxygen therapy was provided to residents without a physician's order and there was no documentation regarding the oxygen concentrator tubing maintenance. Resident identifiers: 4 and 17. Findings included: 1. Resident 4 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included, but were not limited to, intraspinal abscess and granuloma, sepsis, vertebrogenic low back pain, infection and inflammatory reaction due to internal left knee prosthesis, dysphagia, muscle weakness, need for assistance with personal care, repeated falls, cognitive communication deficit, acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, methicillin susceptible staphylococcus aureus infection, Parkinson's disease, essential…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2021-08-19 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
  Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation and interview it was determined, for 5 of 22 sample residents, that the facility did not provide each resident with food and drink that was palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperatures. Specifically, residents complained that the food was not palatable and the test tray was not attractive and palatable. Resident identifiers: 5, 17, 25, 28 and 191. Findings include: 1. On 8/16/21 at 1:44 PM, an interview was conducted with resident 5. Resident 5 stated the cook cannot cook vegetables. Resident 5 stated the food was awful and the pasta was overcooked. Resident 5 stated the meatballs were frozen and the spaghetti sauce looked like brown gravy. On 8/19/21 at 1:30 PM, a follow up interview was conducted with resident 5. Resident 5 stated that the sweet potatoes were hard and she could not chew them. Resident 5 stated she did not know what the sauce was on the meat because it had a strange flavor. 2. On 8/16/21 at 1:19 PM, an interview was conducted with resident 28. Resident 28 stated that all the veggies had been mushy and over cooked. Resident…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Fines & penalties

$30,038 in federal fines across 5 penalties.

• $4,938 — penalty dated 2024-02-20
• $12,534 — penalty dated 2024-01-22
• $3,418 — penalty dated 2024-01-08
• $2,797 — penalty dated 2024-01-02
• $6,351 — penalty dated 2023-12-11

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

Part of a chain

This home belongs to ROCKY MOUNTAIN CARE — 10 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

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

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 32 rows in the source record cover these 29 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

3 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

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 $1.3M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 19% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. 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 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

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

What families pay in UT