No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Brown CTY Comm Treatment CTR-Bayshore Village

3150 Gershwin Drive, Green Bay, WI 54311 · Government - County · 63 certified beds · (920) 391-4700 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (920) 391-4700 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0607) — cited Sep 2022
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • 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)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (24% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607) — 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 (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.

5/5
CMS overall
5 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 5 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 2 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Urgent care / clinic
2900 Curry Ln · (920) 272-3380 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
Walgreens2.3 mi
2204 University Ave · (920) 469-5516 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
2430 University Avenue
Park
Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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 2 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 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 held steady at 3 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.

Overall rating3★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased19.0%16.1%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight2.7%5.1%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.4%2.1%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.3%2.7%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%5.7%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained2.5%0.1%0.1%worse
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury2.5%3.3%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened14.5%18.4%16.1%typical
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication40.4%16.9%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%95.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.0%5.0%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control20.4%24.6%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table47.6%15.8%17.1%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.281.661.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days3.162.291.80worse

* 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.

0.13U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.05hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.06hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.02hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.13 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 10% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 6% 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at dischargenot 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 dischargenot 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 dischargenot 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 identifiednot 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 settingnot reported — Newly certified nursing home with less than 12-15 months of data available or the nursing home opened less than 6 months ago, and there were no data to submit or claims for this measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — Newly certified nursing home with less than 12-15 months of data available or the nursing home opened less than 6 months ago, and there were no data to submit or claims for this measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF staynot 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 worsenednot 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 hospitalizationnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFsnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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

0.77
RN hours/ resident / day
0.90
LPN hours/ resident / day
3.01
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.69
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.52
RN hoursweekends
24.3%
Total nursing turnover
25.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 63 beds and averages 59.7 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 3 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 4.69 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.77 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.01 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 3.90 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.01 on weekdays — 22% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.88 to 0.52 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 24% is below 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

1
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2024-12-11)
6
at the previous standard inspection (2023-08-30)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

13 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-12-11 · 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, staff interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure food was stored and prepared in a sanitary manner. This practice had the potential to affect all 61 residents residing in the facility. The facility did not cool pre-cooked leftover food with an approved cooling method. Findings include: The 2022 Federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Food Code documents at section 3-501.14 Cooling Methods: (A) Cooling shall be accomplished in accordance with the time and temperature criteria specified under § 3-501.14 by using one or more of the following methods based on the type of food being cooled: (1) Placing the food in shallow pans; (2) Separating the food into smaller or thinner portions; (3) Using rapid cooling equipment; (4) Stirring the food in a container placed in an ice water bath; (5) Using containers that facilitate heat transfer; (6) Adding ice as an ingredient; or (7) Other effective methods. During an initial kitchen tour with Dietary Manager (DM)-C on 12/9/24 that began at 8:28 AM, Surveyor noted the freezer contained pre-cooked leftover…

    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 · E2023-08-30 · tag F0641 — pattern
    Ensure 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 3. On 8/30/23, Surveyor reviewed R1's medical record. R1 had to diagnoses including dementia, seizure disorder, anxiety, depression, and schizophrenia. R1's Quarterly MDS assessment, 6/13/23, contained a BIMS score of 4 out of 15 which indicated R1 was severely cognitively impaired. R1's medical record contained the following MDS assessments: ~Quarterly MDS assessments, dated 9/12/22 and 12/12/22, and an Annual MDS assessment, dated 3/13/23, indicated R1 was rarely/never understood. Staff assessment indicated R1 had moderately impaired cognition. The MDS' also indicated there was not an acute change in R1's baseline mental status. A progress note, dated 6/20/23, indicated the following: BIMS score of 4 out of 15. (R1) repeated all three words and recalled none. (R1) stated the correct day of the week, however, was incorrect on the month and year. PHQ-9 (Patient Health Questionnaire) (used to diagnose and monitor the severity of depression) score of 5 (which indicates either no or subthreshold depression). (R1)…

    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 · D2023-08-30 · tag F0553 — failed to let residents help plan their care — isolated
    Allow resident to participate in the development and implementation of his or her person-centered plan of care.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not ensure 1 Resident (R) (R259) and their Guardian of 20 sampled residents were offered care conferences and involved in continued care planning. R259's last care conference was completed in March of 2023. Staff verified a care conference should be offered every 3 months or more frequently if needed. Findings include: The facility's Resident Assessment, Baseline Care Plan and Care Plan Policy, last reviewed 8/2023, indicated: The facility shall prepare an interdisciplinary comprehensive assessment of the resident's needs, strengths, goals, history and preferences and information required by the resident assessment instrument (RAI) using the Minimum Data Set 3.0 (MDS) and evidence-based, discipline specific assessment tools. The information will be used to develop, with the input and participation of the resident and resident representative, a comprehensive person-centered care plan. Procedure: Upon admission, with a significant change in the resident's status, and annually, the interdisciplinary team (IDT) will complete 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-30 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
    Honor 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 staff interview and record review, the facility did not ensure the medical record of 2 Residents (R) (R54 and R42) of 7 residents reviewed for code status contained an advance directive/code status that was consistent with the residents' wishes. R54 had a code status of do not resuscitate (DNR). R54's care plan identified R54 as a full code. R42 had a code status of DNR. R42's care plan identified R42 as a full code. Findings include: The facility's Code ER, Medical Emergencies, Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Defibrillator Use Policy, revised 6/2022, contained the following information: Code Status is verified by observing the legal document in the client/resident chart or electronic medical record prior to performing CPR (cardiopulmonary resuscitation). The code status is reviewed upon admission, quarterly and with a significant change in condition. If the resident/resident representative indicates/signs No CPR in the advanced directives, as defined in Wisconsin State Statute 154.17 (2), a DNR order…

    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 · D2023-08-30 · tag F0636 — isolated
    Assess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not complete a comprehensive Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment within the required timeframe for 1 Resident (R) (R259) of 20 sampled residents. R259's Annual MDS assessment, due on 8/11/23, was marked in process. The Annual assessment was not completed and was 17 days overdue. Findings include: The Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual, revised October 2019, indicates: The annual assessment is a comprehensive assessment for a resident that must be completed on an annual basis (at least every 366 days .Assuming the resident did not experience a significant change in status, was not discharged , and did not have a Significant Correction to Prior Comprehensive assessment (SCPA) completed, assessment scheduling would then move through a cycle of three Quarterly assessments followed by an Annual (comprehensive) assessment. The facility's Resident Assessment, Baseline Care Plan and Care Plan Policy, last reviewed 8/2023, indicated: The facility shall prepare an interdisciplinary comprehensive assessment of 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-30 · tag F0638 — isolated
    Assure 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

    Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not complete a Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment within the required timeframe for 1 Resident (R) (R259) of 20 sampled residents. R259's last Quarterly MDS assessment was completed on 2/10/23. R259's next Quarterly MDS assessment (due in May of 2023) was not completed. Findings include: The Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual, revised October 2019, indicates: .Assuming the resident did not experience a significant change in status, was not discharged , and did not have a Significant Correction to Prior Comprehensive assessment (SCPA) completed, assessment scheduling would then move through a cycle of three Quarterly assessments followed by an Annual (comprehensive) assessment. The facility's Resident Assessment, Baseline Care Plan and Care Plan Policy, last reviewed 8/2023, indicated: The facility shall prepare an interdisciplinary comprehensive assessment of the resident's needs, strengths, goals, history and preferences and information required by the resident assessment instrument (RAI) using 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-30 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolated
    Develop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
    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 vaccinations were reviewed, offered, and administered for 3 Residents (R) (R18, R8, and R26) of 5 residents reviewed for vaccines. The facility did not review R18's vaccination history or offer R18 the PCV20: 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate (Prevnar 20®) vaccine. The facility did not review R8's vaccination history or offer R8 the PCV20: 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate (Prevnar 20®) vaccine. The facility did not review R26's vaccination history or offer R26 the PCV20: 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate (Prevnar 20®) vaccine. Findings include: Abbreviations (www.cdc.gov): PCV13: 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (Prevnar13®) PCV15: 15-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (Vaxneuvance®) PCV20: 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (Prevnar 20®) PPSV23: 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (Pneumovax23®) The most recent CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) recommendations for pneumococcal vaccinations indicate:…

    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 · Ecited before2022-09-08 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure food was prepared, stored, and served under sanitary conditions. Outdated and undated products were stored for 5 Residents (R) (R15, R27, R35, R54, and R157) of 60 residents. Staff did not date or did not discard food and beverages after seven days of constitution or opening for community use beverages and R15, R27, R35, R54, and R157's individually labeled items. Kitchenette ovens had baked food debris, in varying amounts, in the interior of oven. Findings include: On 9/6/22 at 8:36 AM, Surveyor interviewed Dietary Manager (DM)-I who indicated the facility used the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Food Code as its standard of practice. Undated and Outdated Beverages FDA Food Code 2017 documents at 3-501.17 Ready-to-Eat, Time/Temperature Control for Safety Food, Date Marking. (A) Except when PACKAGING FOOD using a REDUCED OXYGEN PACKAGING method as specified under § 3-502.12, and except as specified in ¶¶ (E) and (F) of this…

    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 · D2022-09-08 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, staff interview and resident representative interview, the facility did not document or make prompt efforts to resolve grievance for 1 Resident (R) (R306) of 18 sampled residents. Social Worker (SW)-J and Registered Nurse (RN)-L heard R306's Power of Attorney (POA)-M's verbal grievance regarding lack of activities and request for activity calendar but did not document, resolve or report the grievance to grievance official, SW-J. Findings include: The facility's Policy titled Grievance Policy-Bayshore Village revised on 09/2022. Policy: . each Resident has the right to voice grievances to the facility. Definitions: Voice grievances are not limited to a formal, written grievance process but may include a Resident's verbalized complaint to facility staff. Prompt efforts to resolve include facility acknowledgment of complaint/grievances and actively working toward resolution of that complaint/grievances. Grievance Official is an individual who is responsible for overseeing the grievance process, receiving and tracking grievances through to their conclusions.…

    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 · D2022-09-08 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolated
    Develop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not implement the abuse prevention policy requiring background checks for 1 (Facility Worker (FW)-F) of 8 sampled staff. Facility did not obtain a response from Department of Health Services (DHS) Integrated Background Information System (IBIS) information prior to hiring FW-F. Findings include: Wisconsin (WI) Caregiver Program Manual, revision dated January 2020, documents At a minimum, a complete caregiver background check completed for a caregiver consists of the following three documents: .3. A 'Response to the Caregiver Background Check' letter from DHS that reports the person's status, including administrative finding or licensing restrictions. Facility policy Abuse, Neglect, Mistreatment, and Misappropriation of Resident and Client Property Policy, revision dated 3/2022, Employee Screening and Training. B. Prospective employees will need to have a successful completion of criminal background checks. On 9/6/22 and 9/8/22, Surveyor observed FW-F working in facility. On 9/7/22, Surveyor selected sample of 8 staff to…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-09-08 · 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

    Based on staff interviews and record review, the facility did not ensure a Resident (R) prescribed a high risk medication had a care plan developed to monitor for possible side effects for 3 (R19, R42, and R47) of 18 sampled residents. The facility did not develop a care plan to monitor for possible side effects of R19's opioid (narcotic pain relief) and diuretic (commonly referred to as a water pill) medications. The facility did not develop a care plan to monitor for possible side effects of R42's antidepressant and opioid medications. The facility did not develop a care plan to monitor for possible side effects of R47's antipsychotic medication. 1. From 9/6/22 through 9/8/22, Surveyor reviewed R19's medical record which documented R19's prescriptions included tramadol (opioid medication) twice per day and up to two additional times per day as needed. R19's prescriptions also included hydrochlorothiazide (diuretic medication) daily. Surveyor noted R19's medical record did not contain monitoring for possible negative side effects for opioid (such as respiratory depression) 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-09-08 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on Observations, record review and staff interview, the facility did not ensure 2 Residents (R) (R16 and R34) of 5 sampled residents received necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, prevent infection and prevent new ulcers (injuries) from developing. R16 was observed sitting in chair with cushion and towel over cushion for two days of survey. R34 was observed sitting in recliner without cushion in recliner for 2 of the survey days. Findings include: Facility follows AHRQ (Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality) as a guide for Pressure Injury (PI) prevention. R34 was admitted to facility on 6/18/22 with the diagnosis of dementia, muscle weakness, difficulty walking, Alzheimer and failure to thrive. R34's MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment dated [DATE] indicated that R34 required extensive assistance with bed mobility, transfers, dressing and hygiene. R34's skin condition record dated 6/18/22 indicated that R34 had an opening on left…

    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 · D2022-09-08 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure the resident environment was free of accident hazards for 1 Resident (R) (R42) of 4 sampled residents reviewed for fall safety. R42 was not appropriately secured into R42's wheelchair with the seat belt while unsupervised as assessed and care planned. Findings Include: R42 was admitted in 2019 with congestive heart failure (CHF), chronic osteomyelitis, diabetes mellitus type 2, unspecified displaced fracture of second cervical vertebra, major depressive disorder, and dementia without behavioral disturbance. R42's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated R42's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) was unable to be completed, indicating, No (resident is never/rarely understood.) On 9/7/22 at 7:45 AM, Surveyor interviewed R42's legal guardian (LG)-E . LG-E stated R42 had a seat belt that needed to be applied while R42 is in R42's wheelchair. LG- stated R42 had two irreparable breaks in R42's neck and is…

    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

“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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
COUNTY OF BROWNOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF100%since 10/10/2009
GRUBER, KARAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/06/2022
RAMNANAN, KESHNIIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/29/2022
OAK MEDICAL SCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/29/2022

CMS files one row per role, so the 7 rows in the source record cover these 4 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in Wisconsin
$10,646/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$12,319/mo
Nursing home (private)
$6,540/mo
Assisted living

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 525693. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-12-11, 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.

What to do next