Juliette Manor
482 Oak Street, Berlin, WI 54923 · Non profit - Corporation · 37 certified beds · (920) 361-3092 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- 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 (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)
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 | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 5 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 1 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 1 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 1 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 2 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 improved from 3 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 11.6% | 16.1% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 12.2% | 5.1% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 4.1% | 2.1% | 0.9% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.2% | 2.7% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 1.4% | 5.7% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.4% | 3.3% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 22.7% | 16.9% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 96.2% | 95.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 18.6% | 5.0% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 22.5% | 24.6% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 26.5% | 15.8% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.9% | 82.2% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 25.1% | 23.1% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 13.6% | 15.5% | 12.0% | worse |
‡ 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.
47.5% 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 53 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 36.7% 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 30 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.68 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 91% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 13% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 47.5%CMS range 37.0–59.2 | 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 | 9.9%CMS range 6.2–14.4 | 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 | 36.7% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 33.3% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 46.7% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 96.9% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 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 | 9.5% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 3.1% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.5%CMS range 3.6–12.4 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.85 | 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 37 beds and averages 35.6 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 1 bed typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. 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 4.92 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.45 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.05 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 4.22 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.20 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.60 to 1.07 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 50% 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.
9 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-08 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure 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 staff interview and record review, the facility did not ensure a resident representative provided informed consent and was aware of the risks and benefits of prescribed psychotropic medication and monitored prescription medication for 1 resident (R) (R5) of 5 sampled residents.R5 had orders for Buspar (an antianxiety medication), gabapentin (an anticonvulsant medication/monitored prescription medication), venlafaxine (an antidepressant medication), and Rexulti (an atypical antipsychotic medication). The facility did not obtain written consent from R5's legal representative to administer the medications. Findings include:Wisconsin Statute 50.08(3)(fm)2 Informed consent for psychotropic medications indicates: Unless consent is withdrawn sooner, the informed consent is valid for the period specified on the informed consent form or for 15 months from the date on which the resident, or the person acting on behalf of the resident, signs the form, whichever is shorter.Between 4/6/26 and 4/8/26, Surveyor…
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 · D2026-04-08 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
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 staff interview and record review, the facility did not ensure the Office of the State Long Term Care Ombudsman was notified of hospital transfers for 1 resident (R) (R5) of 3 sampled residents.R5 was transferred to the hospital on [DATE] and [DATE]. Long Term Care Ombudsman (LTCO)-D was not notified of the hospital transfers. Findings include:The facility's Long Term Care (LTC) Discharge and Transfer Policy, revised [DATE], indicates: .7. The facility will forward a copy of all discharge/transfer notices to the Office of the State LTC Ombudsman.The facility provided Surveyor with the following forms:~ Department of Health Services (DHS) 132.53 Transfers & Discharges (no date indicated): This section shall apply to all resident transfers and discharges .(2) Conditions: (a) Prohibition & Exceptions: No resident may be discharged or transferred from a facility except .9. If the short-term care period for which the resident was admitted has expired. ~ Wisconsin DHS Division of Quality Assurance (DQA)…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-10 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview and record review, staff did not report an allegation of abuse in a timely manner for 1 resident (R) (R1) of 4 sampled residents.On 8/27/25, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA)-C witnessed CNA-D yell and swear at R1. R1 reported that CNA-D told R1 to urinate in R1's brief. The allegation of abuse was not reported timely to Nursing Home Administrator (NHA)-A.Findings includeThe facility's Long Term Care (LTC) Resident Abuse Prevention and Reporting Policy, revised 4/11/25, indicates: .G. Reporting: 1. Anyone who witnesses an act that may potentially meet the definition of abuse or any other defined misconduct, or to whom someone has reported abuse or any other defined misconduct, will immediately ensure resident safety and then report the allegation to the Administrator. 2. The proper method of reporting is in-person or phone call to assure prompt notification is made .5. For alleged violations of abuse, or if there is serious bodily injury, the facility must report the allegation to the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-10 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond 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 staff interview and record review, the facility did not ensure an allegation of abuse was thoroughly investigated and corrective actions were taken to prevent further abuse for 1 resident (R) (R1) of 4 sampled residents. On 8/27/25, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA)-C witnessed CNA-D enter R1's room, yell and swear at R1, and tell R1 to urinate in R1's brief. The facility's investigation did not include thorough staff education on abuse prevention and reporting or ensure education retention. In addition, staff did not immediately intervene and remove CNA-D from resident care per the facility's policy.Findings include:The facility's Long Term Care (LTC) Resident Abuse Prevention and Reporting Policy, revised 4/11/25, states the purpose of the policy is to outline standards and processes to ensure: (1) Residents live in a safe environment where they are free from abuse and neglect and are treated with respect and dignity, and, (2) to be in compliance with state and federal laws and regulations.E.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-02-05 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — patternEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of 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 staff interview and record review, the facility did not ensure therapeutic diets were followed for 5 residents (R235, R23, R184, R186, and R10) of 36 sampled residents. R235, R23 and R184 had orders for cardiac diets. R235, R23, and R184 did not receive their ordered diets for lunch on 2/4/25. R186 had an order for a renal diet. R186 did not receive R186's ordered diet for lunch on 2/4/25. R10 had an order for a cardiac/diabetic/renal diet. R10 did not receive R10's ordered diet for lunch on 2/4/25. Findings include: The facility's extended menu (that contains what residents on therapeutic diets should receive) for the 2/4/25 lunch meal indicated the following: ~General diet: Breaded chicken, mashed potatoes with gravy, carrots, a raspberry pocket, and milk ~Cardiac diet: Plain chicken breast, baked potato, fruit, and milk ~Renal diet: Grilled chicken breast, large garden salad, and fruit Between 2/4/25 and 2/5/25, Surveyor reviewed residents' medical records and diet orders and made the following…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-05 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff and resident interview and record review, the facility did not report an allegation of abuse to Nursing Home Administrator (NHA)-A or the State Agency (SA) in a timely manner for 1 resident (R) (R2) of 16 sampled residents. R2 reported to staff that Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA)-F was rough with cares and yelled at R2. The allegation of abuse was not reported timely to NHA-A or the SA. Findings include: The facility's Long Term Care (LTC) Resident Abuse Prevention and Reporting Policy, revised 9/12/24, indicates: .G. Reporting: 1. Anyone who witnesses an act that may potentially meet the definition of abuse or any other defined misconduct, or to whom someone has reported abuse or any other defined misconduct, will immediately ensure resident safety and then report the allegations to the Administrator. 2. The proper method of reporting is in-person or phone call to assure prompt notification is made .6. For alleged violations of abuse, or if there is serious bodily injury, the facility must…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-05 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond 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 staff and resident interview and record review, the facility did not ensure an allegation of abuse was thoroughly investigated for 1 resident (R) (R2) of 16 sampled residents. R2 reported that Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA)-F was rough with cares and yelled at R2. R2 informed staff that R2 did not want CNA-F to care for R2. CNA-F attempted to go back into R2's room to obtain R2's vital signs but R2 yelled at CNA-F to get out. CNA-F was not removed from or supervised during resident care until 1/22/25. Findings include: The facility's Long Term Care (LTC) Resident Abuse Prevention and Reporting Policy, revised 9/12/24, indicates: .E. Protection: 1. Immediately upon receiving a report of alleged abuse or any other defined misconduct, the facility will take all necessary steps to protect residents from additional harm. The facility will coordinate delivery of appropriate medical and/or psychological care and attention. 2. Safety, security, and support of the residents will be provided. The facility will…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-05 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, and record review, the facility did not maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to prevent the transmission of communicable disease and infection for 1 resident (R) (R2) of 1 resident observed during wound care. Registered Nurse (RN)-C did not complete hand hygiene during wound vac dressing changes for R2. Findings include The facility's Long Term Care (LTC) Infection Prevention and Control Policy, dated 12/23/24, indicates: .2. Hand Decontamination: a. Team members will use an alcohol-based hand rub: .iii. Before and after resident contact; iv. After contact with a resident's surroundings or equipment; v. Prior to performing any aseptic procedures .vii. Prior to contact with a resident's invasive medical device . From 2/3/25 to 2/5/25, Surveyor reviewed R2's medical record. R2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses including encounter for surgical after care following surgery on the circulatory system, hypertensive heart and chronic…
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 · D2024-11-26 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure appropriate supervision was implemented to ensure the safety of 3 residents (R) (R5, R6, and R7) of 8 sampled residents. On 3/1/24, R1 made a lewd comment to R5. The facility did not complete a thorough investigation. On 6/19/24, R1 asked R6 to expose R6's self while R1 watched from outside the window. The facility did not revise R1's care plan to provide sufficient supervision. On 8/9/24, R1 entered R7's room while R7 was sleeping. The facility did not complete a thorough investigation or revise R1's care plan to provide sufficient supervision. Findings include: The facility's LTC (Long Term Care) Resident Abuse Prevention & Reporting Policy, with a review date of 9/12/24, indicates: The purpose of this policy is .to ensure: (1) Residents live in a safe environment where they are free from abuse and neglect and are treated with respect and dignity .C. Prevention: .5. The population of LTC facilities present the following…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| ABBREDERIS, JARED | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/01/2022 |
| BENDING, TAMMY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/15/2025 |
| ANDRABI, IMRAN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/15/2025 |
| FLETT, WILLIAM | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/01/2024 |
| FROEDTERT THEDACARE HEALTH, INC. | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/01/2024 |
| THEDACARE, INCORPORATED | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 06/30/2014 |
| BATLEY, CRAIG | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/24/2025 |
| BLAZEL, JOHN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/24/2025 |
| BOSTELMANN, MARGARET | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/24/2025 |
| CLARK, MICHELE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/24/2025 |
| COCKLEY, MARK | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/24/2025 |
| DETTERMAN, BUFFY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/24/2025 |
| DUFFY, JAYSON | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/24/2025 |
| GLASHEEN, JENNIFER | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/15/2025 |
| GROVE, KIRSTEN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/24/2025 |
| PAHL, SUSAN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/15/2025 |
| PIGEON, KATHLEEN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/15/2025 |
| POSORSKE, MARGARET | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/24/2025 |
| VIDETIC, DENNIS | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/15/2025 |
| WENBERG, ELLEN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/15/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 26 rows in the source record cover these 20 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.
What families pay in WI
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 Wisconsin 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 525286. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-08, 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.