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

Sauk Co Health Care Center

1051 Clark St., Reedsburg, WI 53959 · Government - County · 82 certified beds · (608) 524-7500 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citations — no harm found (F0607, F0609, F0610) — most recent Feb 20264 immediate-jeopardy citations$160,977 in federal fines
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

In its favor
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
Worth asking about
  • it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • inspectors cited 4 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (16) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $160,977 in federal fines (most recent 2025-04-07)
  • its payroll-based staffing score sits well above its independent inspection score
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)
  • nursing-staff turnover (68%) runs well above the national median (45%)

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

1/5
CMS overall
1 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 1 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 1 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's staffing rating runs 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the staffing score rests on the facility's own payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★★ 5/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1900 N Dewey Ave · (608) 524-6477 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1100 E Main St · (608) 524-1228 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
703 K St · (608) 805-3827 · Call to confirm hours
Park
433 S Preston Ave · (608) 524-9781 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
850 Clark St · (608) 495-9220

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 1 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 1 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating1★
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 increased36.8%16.1%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight4.4%5.1%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%2.1%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection4.8%2.7%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.6%5.7%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury3.0%3.3%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened33.9%18.4%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication8.0%16.9%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%95.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.3%5.0%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control24.6%24.6%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table19.8%15.8%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication5.0%1.2%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine86.4%82.2%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission26.9%23.1%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit18.0%15.5%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days3.931.661.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.802.291.80worse

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.

56.2% 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 39 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

56.2%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.9%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
44.9%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.31U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.15hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.14hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.02hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 44.9% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 49 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 0.31 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 50% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 15% 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 SNF56.2%CMS range 41.9–67.451.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.9%CMS range 6.4–15.410.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge44.9%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge55.1%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge44.9%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 identified95.5%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 settingnot 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 discharge97.1%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened6.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.6%CMS range 3.4–12.17.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.951.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

1.16
RN hours/ resident / day
0.89
LPN hours/ resident / day
3.36
Aide hours/ resident / day
5.40
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.79
RN hoursweekends
68.1%
Total nursing turnover
92.3%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 82 beds and averages 46.2 residents a day — about 56% occupied, or roughly 36 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 5.40 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.16 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.36 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 4.78 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.65 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.31 to 0.79 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 68% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

Inspection trend

5
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-04-07)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2024-05-01)

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

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

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.

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

  • Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2025-04-07 · 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 interview and record review, the facility did not ensure a resident received care, consistent with professional standards of practice, to prevent pressure ulcers for 1 of 3 residents (R) reviewed for pressure injuries (R19). R19 was at risk for developing pressure injuries (PI) related to decreased mobility, bilateral above knee amputation, and radiation therapy. R19 developed a facility-acquired stage 3 PI. The facility did not identify or stage this as a PI but considered it a chronic wound, identifying the root cause was related to friction and shearing from the use of a slide board transfer. The facility continued to use the slide board transfer until after R19 had a EpiFix flap procedure to heal the PI. Additionally, R19 was known to use a rolled washcloth under his hip which the facility also identified as contributing to the PI. Despite these known risk factors, the facility continued to utilize the slide board and failed to provide documented risk vs. benefits to R19 regarding continued use of…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-10-30 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure that each resident received, and the facility provided, care and services consistent with professional standards of practice (N6. Wisconsin Nurse Practice Act) for 1 of 5 residents (R4) reviewed for change of condition. R4 presented with a change of condition including decreased appetite (even her favorite foods), abdominal pain, fatigue, nausea, and vomiting. The facility failed to complete a GI (Gastrointestinal)/abdominal assessment and failed to notify R4's physician with R4's complaints of abdominal pain. R4 became lethargic and was transferred to the hospital and noted to have a perforated colon and pneumoperitoneum (the presence of air or gas in the abdominal cavity.) R4 was not a surgical candidate and returned to the facility on hospice services. The facility's failure to recognize a significant change of condition, complete a comprehensive nursing assessment, and notify the physician with a change of condition created a finding of…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2024-10-30 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident (R) received adequate supervision to prevent accidents for 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for falls. On 9/2/24, R1 was in the shower room when CNA D (Certified Nursing Assistant) attempted to remove R1's incontinent product from under her while she was sitting in the shower chair. This caused R1 to begin to fall. CNA D and CNA E assisted R1 to the floor. When a nurse had not shown up for 15 minutes, CNA D & CNA E assisted R1 off of the floor prior to a nurse assessing R1 for any type of injury. From the fall incident on 9/2/24, R1 sustained a fracture to her right tib/fib. On 10/4/24, R1 had an x-ray completed that showed an angulated and displaced left femur fracture. R1 was sent to the hospital on [DATE] related to R1 now having an open fracture of the left femur. The facility's failure to prevent accidents from occurring due when CNA D and CNA E attempted to remove an incontinent product while R1 was in a shower chair and then…

    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
  • Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-05-01 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure each resident receives care, consistent with professional standards of practice (SOP), to prevent pressure injuries (PI) and each resident with PIs receives necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional SOP, to promote healing, prevent infection, and prevent new injuries from developing in 1 of 1 sampled residents (R12) out of a total sample of 17 residents reviewed. R12 developed a pressure injury in the facility. Over time, this pressure injury developed an odor, grew in size, and was noted to have an increase in drainage. The facility did not update R12's Medical Doctor (MD) with these changes. Surveyor observed R12 calling out, striking, and wincing in pain during wound care. Staff were unaware R12 had an order for as needed oxycodone to be given prior to wound care. Staff took a defensive approach by placing pillows between R12 and themselves prior to providing wound care and during wound care and staff did not…

    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
  • Actual harm · Gcited before2026-02-03 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure that residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice (N6, Wisconsin Nurse Practice Act) for 1 of 3 sampled residents (R2).On 12/10/25 staff observed and documented an open area on R2's left 5th digit. The facility did not complete an initial comprehensive assessment of the wound including, measurements, size and characteristics. On 12/19/25, R2 was sent to emergency department due to deterioration in the wound. R2 was diagnosed with a displaced fracture and osteomyelitis requiring antibiotic therapy. Evidenced by:According to the Wisconsin Nurse Practice Act, N6.03(1), An R.N. (Registered Nurse) shall utilize the nursing process in the execution of general nursing procedures in the maintenance of health, prevention of illness or care of the ill. The nursing process consists of the steps of assessment, planning, intervention, and evaluation. This standard is met through performance of each…

    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 · Dcited before2026-02-03 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment, are reported immediately to the administrator of the facility and to other officials, including the State Survey Agency, in accordance with State law through established procedures for 1 of 3 residents (R2) reviewed for abuse.Facility became aware of an injury of unknown origin on 12/19/25 when R2 was sent to the emergency department and was found to have a closed nondisplaced fracture of the left pinky finger. The facility failed to report it to the state within the required timeframe.Evidenced by:The facility policy entitled Reporting and Investigation of Alleged Caregiver Misconduct or Resident Rights Violation, dated 12/2025, states, in part: . Policy: It is the policy of the Sauk County Health Care Center that each resident will be free from Abuse. Sauk County Health Care Center will take all reasonable measures to ensure resident safety and security and 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-03 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure that in response to allegations of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment, that all alleged violations are thoroughly investigated, and that steps were taken to prevent further abuse for 1 of 3 Residents reviewed (R2).Facility became aware of an injury of unknown origin on 12/19/25 when R2 was sent to the emergency department and was found to have a closed nondisplaced fracture of the left pinky finger. The facility failed to conduct and complete a thorough investigation.Evidenced by:The facility policy entitled Reporting and Investigation of Alleged Caregiver Misconduct or Resident Rights Violation, dated 12/2025, states, in part: . Policy: It is the policy of the Sauk County Health Care Center that each resident will be free from Abuse. Sauk County Health Care Center will take all reasonable measures to ensure resident safety and security and will promptly investigate all reports/allegations of resident rights violations, abuse, neglect,…

    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 · Dcited before2025-12-03 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment, are reported immediately to the administrator of the facility and to other officials, including the State Survey Agency, in accordance with State law through established procedures for 2 of 3 residents (R1 and R2) reviewed for abuse. Facility became aware of an abuse allegation on 10/4/25 at 7:41 PM involving R1 and R2 The facility did not report the allegation to the State Agency. Evidenced by: The facility policy entitled, Reporting and Investigation of Alleged Caregiver Misconduct or Resident Rights Violation, dated 10/2024, states, in part: . Policy: It is the policy of the Sauk County Health Care Center that each resident will be free from abuse. Abuse can include verbal, mental, sexual, or physical abuse, exploitation, corporal punishment or involuntary seclusion.Definitions: Definitions of Abuse and Neglect: .i. Verbal abuse is defined as the use of oral,…

    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 · Dcited before2025-12-03 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate an accusation of verbal abuse for 2 of 3 residents (R1 & R2) reviewed for abuse.Facility became aware of an abuse allegation on 10/4/25 regarding R1 and R2. The facility did not conduct a thorough investigation or put protections in place during the investigation. Evidenced by:The facility policy entitled, Reporting and Investigation of Alleged Caregiver Misconduct or Resident Rights Violation, dated 10/2024, states, in part: . Policy: It is the policy of the Sauk County Health Care Center that each resident will be free from abuse. Abuse can include verbal, mental, sexual, or physical abuse, exploitation, corporal punishment or involuntary seclusion.Definitions: Definitions of Abuse and Neglect: .i. Verbal abuse is defined as the use of oral, written or gestured language that willfully includes disparaging and derogatory terms to residents or their families. Examples of verbal abuse include, but are not limited to: threats of…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-04-07 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not assure drugs and biologicals used in the facility were stored and labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional practices and include the expiration date when applicable for 1 of 2 medication rooms and 2 of 5 medication carts reviewed for compliance. Surveyor observed the following: -R25's PRN (as needed) Loperamide (27 capsules) expired 12/24. -R19's PRN Loperamide (4 capsules) expired 12/24. -R6's escitalopram (1 tablet) card expired 9/24. -3 boxes of blood glucose control solutions expired (7/27/23 & 3/1/25). -R9's Naproxen (7 tablets) PRN card expired 11/24. -6 stock insulin pens were expired: -1 Semglee expired 6/24. -2 Tresiba expired 12/31/23 & 11/30/24. -3 Basaglar expired 8/17/24 and 2 on 4/04/24. -Stock supply of Promethazine suppositories (6 suppositories) expired 10/24. Evidenced by: The facility policy entitled, Medication Storage Policy, undated, states, in part: .Policy: The facility shall store all drugs and biologicals in a safe, secure, and orderly manner. Procedure: . D. 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-04-07 · 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 interview and record review, the facility did not implement policies and procedures to prohibit and prevent abuse for 1 of 8 staff reviewed for caregiver background checks. LPN G (Licensed Practical Nurse) was hired on 12/3/24 and had lived in one other state within the last three years. LPN G's background check information did not contain an out-of-state criminal background check. This is evidenced by: The facility's Prevention/Reduction of Resident Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation or Misappropriation of Property policy, revised 05/19 and reviewed 10/24, indicates in part: Employee Screening and Training .d. A criminal background check will be conducted on all prospective employees as provided by the facility's policy on criminal background checks. The facility's Care Giver Background Investigations policy, reviewed/revised on 03/21/14, indicates in part: As applicable, other documentation will be obtained by the entity when information is needed to complete the background check, such as out of state's conviction records when a 'caregiver' has lived out of the state in 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-04-07 · 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 a resident with a catheter receives appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections for 1 of 3 residents (R25) reviewed for catheter care out of total sample of 17. Staff did not perform appropriate hand hygiene per Standards of Practice while providing catheter care. Evidenced by: The facility policy entitled. Hand Washing, dated 3/19/24, states, in part: . Purpose: -To cleanse hands to prevent the spread of potentially deadly infections -To provide a clean and healthy environment for residents, staff, and visitors -To reduce the risk to the healthcare provider of colonization or infections acquired from a resident Hand hygiene continues to be the primary means of preventing the transmission of infection. Policy: It is the policy of this facility that hand hygiene (HH) (e.g. hand washing and/or Alcohol-based hand rub (ABHR), also known as Alcohol-based hand sanitizer (ABHS), is to be performed consistent with…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-04-07 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
    Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
    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 it was free of medication error rates of 5% or greater. There were 2 errors in 29 opportunities that affected 2 out of 7 residents (R30 & R9) included in the medication pass task, which resulted in an error rate of 6.9%. R30 did not receive her ordered senna at the ordered time. R9 did not receive her ordered aspirin at the ordered time. Evidenced by: The facility policy entitled, Medication Pass, dated 2/2016, states, in part: .Policy: It is the policy of the [Facility name] that medications prescribed by the Physician will be administered accurately and timely. Procedure: .2. Read and compare the label on the drug with the MAR (Medication Administration Record) at least three (3) times- before, during and after preparing the drug .16. Be sure that you have the- A. Right Drug B. Right Dose C. Right Route D. Right Time E. Right Resident . Example 1: R30 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and has diagnoses that include…

    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 · D2024-10-30 · 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 adequately monitored and that the drug regimen was free from adverse consequences for 1 of 1 resident (R2) reviewed for adequate monitoring. R2 has a diagnosis of Atrial Fibrillation (an irregular heartbeat, that occurs when the upper chambers of the heart beat rapidly and irregularly) and receives Coumadin (a blood thinner). R2 was prescribed Bactrim on 10/1/24. Antibiotics can potentiate the effect of Warfarin (Coumadin). The facility did not complete monitoring for symptoms of drug interactions. R2 was sent to the hospital after a fall and was found to have a supratherapeutic (high) INR (international normalized ratio, a lab that measures how long it takes the blood to clot) of 4.5. The therapeutic range for INR is 2-3. This is evidenced by: The facility's policy titled Warfarin (Coumadin) Monitoring states in part; Purpose: To assure resident safety with a goal to maintain INR and keeping within residents…

    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 · E2024-05-01 · tag F0687 — failed to care for feet properly — pattern
    Provide appropriate foot care.
    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, the facility did not ensure that 4 of 4 sampled residents (R1, R12, R13, and R35) received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for foot care. The facility failed to provide diabetic foot checks daily in accordance with current standards of practice. The facility did not have a policy reflecting the current standards of practice related to diabetic foot checks. Evidenced by: Facility policy, entitled Skin Integrity-Foot Care, reviewed 4/2024, does not reflect current standards of practice related to daily diabetic foot checks completed by a nurse or someone with education to perform assessments. Per the American Medical Directors Association - The Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine. Pressure Ulcers. Clinical Practice Guideline, dated 12/9/14, includes, in part: http://www.amda.com/tools/guideline.cfm#pressureulcer .to the extent feasible, caregivers should educate patients about daily foot care .Treatment of foot problems in…

    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 · E2024-05-01 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interviews, the facility failed to serve food at an appetizing temperature. This has the potential to affect 2 of 17 sampled Residents (R32 and R3) and 2 of 3 supplemental Residents (R36 and R20). R3, R32, R36, and R20 voiced concerns that hot food was not always served hot and cold food was not served cold. 1 of the 2 test trays temped failed to meet appropriate temperatures. Evidenced by: The facility policy, Food Temperatures, with a revised date of, 4/2024, states, in part; .All hot food items must be cooked to appropriate internal temperatures, held and served at a temperature of at least 135 F All cold food items must be maintained at served at a temperature of 41 F or below Example 1 On 4/18/24 at 8:01 AM, the kitchen delivered breakfast on B Hallway. Surveyor requested the last tray on the cart. Dietary Aide provided Surveyor the last tray. The tray had French toast sticks, bacon, yogurt, and crushed strawberries. French toast sticks temped at 102.3 F and were hard. No concerns…

    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.

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

$160,977 in federal fines across 3 penalties.

  • $123,000 — penalty dated 2025-04-07
  • $11,723 — penalty dated 2024-10-30
  • $26,254 — penalty dated 2024-05-01

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

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
SAUK COUNTYOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 06/10/2010
VOSEN, JENNIFERIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 03/23/2016

CMS files one row per role, so the 4 rows in the source record cover these 2 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

1 organizational owner 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.

$7.1M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-11.7%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 79%Medicare 6%Other / private 14%

About 79% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$422per resident / day
operating cost
$12,823per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$378per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in 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 525114. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-04-07, 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