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

Friendly Village Nursing And Rehab Center

900 Boyce Dr, Rhinelander, WI 54501 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 100 certified beds · (715) 365-6832 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (715) 365-6832 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0609) — cited Aug 2023
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

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 (4/5)
  • 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 (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed

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) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
639 West Kemp Street
Pharmacy
34 N Brown St · (715) 420-1685 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Trig's0.7 mi
232 S Courtney St · (715) 369-1470 · Call to confirm hours
Park
718 W Phillip St · 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 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 5 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 3 to 5 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 rating5★
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 increased15.6%16.1%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight5.9%5.1%5.4%typical
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder1.3%2.1%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.4%2.7%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms13.4%5.7%6.5%worse
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury4.9%3.3%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened18.8%18.4%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication25.9%16.9%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine97.1%95.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.9%5.0%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control34.1%24.6%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table12.9%15.8%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.2%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%82.2%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission6.7%23.1%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit6.3%15.5%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days0.681.661.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.092.291.80better

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.

59.3% 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 76 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

59.3%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.4%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
73.3%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.30U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.12hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.11hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.07hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 73.3% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 30 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.30 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 48% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 8% 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 SNF59.3%CMS range 47.0–69.451.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.4%CMS range 6.6–14.010.7%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 discharge73.3%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 discharge60.0%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 discharge60.0%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 identified100.0%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 dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay2.6%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 worsened2.6%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 hospitalization5.7%CMS range 2.9–9.17.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.981.02Oct 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

0.81
RN hours/ resident / day
0.58
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.09
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.48
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.69
RN hoursweekends
38.0%
Total nursing turnover
23.5%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 100 beds and averages 75.3 residents a day — about 75% occupied, or roughly 25 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.484 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.81 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.09 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.24 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.58 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.87 to 0.69 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 38% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-04-22)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2025-02-06)

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.

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

  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-22 · tag F0659 — isolated
    Provide care by qualified persons according to each resident's written plan of 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure unlicensed staff would not administer medications to 1 resident (R27) for 5 residents reviewed for medication administration in a sample of 23 residents.Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) D was observed by Surveyor applying a Lidocaine external patch 4% to R27's back.Findings include:The facility policy titled Administering Medication, revised 01/22/2024, states, Only licensed staff.may administer or record the administration of medications.certified medication technicians may administer specific medications under the direction of a licensed nurse if competency has been determined.R27 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and has diagnoses of cerebral palsy and back pain. R27 has a physician's order for Lidocaine external patch 4% - apply to lower back topically two times a day for pain. On in AM and off in the evening. On 04/21/2026 at 9:05 AM, Surveyor observed CNA D apply a Lidocaine external patch to R27's lower back after…

    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 · Dcited before2026-04-22 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure standard and transmission-based precautions are followed to prevent spread of infections for 2 residents (R27, R25) of 23 residents reviewed for infection control precautions in a sample of 23 residents. The facility failed to prevent possible transmission of infection/disease to R25 and R27 as follows: Staff did not wear personal protective equipment (PPE) during cares performed for R27 who is on enhanced barrier precautions (EBP). Staff did not perform hand hygiene before and after cares performed for R27. Staff used contaminated gloves during application of topical cream to buttock and applying a new dressing to suprapubic catheter site for R27. Urinary catheter drainage bag lying on floor at foot of R25's bed without a protective barrier between drainage bag and floor. Findings include:The facility policies, titled Enhanced Barrier Precautions, dated 03/26/2024, and Hand Hygiene, last revised 05/08/2024, state, Staff will perform…

    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 · Fcited before2025-02-06 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility did not store resident foods brought in by visitors in a manner to prevent food-borne illness. The facility practice had the potential to affect 59 of 76 residents who reside on the main level of the facility on the 100, 200, 300 and 400 wings. The facility did not ensure the low temperature dishwasher chemical sanitizer maintained the correct concentration per manufacturer's guidelines. The facility practice had the potential to affect all 76 residents who are served foods from the facility's kitchen. Surveyor observed foods and beverages brought in for residents by visitors in 2 refrigerators/freezers in the nurses' station that were not labeled by resident or dated with received by and use by dates. Surveyor observed dish machine logs showing the low temperature dishwasher did not maintain appropriate chemical sanitizer minimal parts per million. This is evidenced by: Example 1 Surveyor requested and reviewed the facility policy titled Resident…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2025-02-06 · tag F0851 — widespread
    Electronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure the mandatory staffing data that had been submitted from 7/1/24-9/30/24 was complete, accurate, and auditable. This has the potential to affect all 76 residents that reside in the facility. This is evidenced by: The facility policy titled Payroll Based Journal dated as revised on 2/26/22 in part read: Policy: Long-term facilities must electronically submit to CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) complete and accurate direct care staffing information, including information for agency and contracted staff, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data in a uniform format according to specifications established by CMS. Procedure: ~The facility must submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, including: The category of work for each person on direct care staff (including, but not limited to, whether the individual is a registered nurse, licensed practical nurse, licensed vocational nurse, certified nursing assistant, therapist, other type of medical personnel as specified…

    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.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-02-06 · tag F0623 — pattern
    Provide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
    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 provide a notice of transfer to residents or resident representatives. This affected 4 of 4 sampled residents (R8, R9, R20, and R73). -A notice of transfer was not provided prior to a facility-initiated discharge for R8, R9, R20, and R73. -The facility did not inform the residents or their representatives, prior to a transfer, of appeal rights, including the name, address, and telephone number of the entity which receives such requests; and information on how to obtain an appeal form and assistance in completing the form and submitting the appeal hearing request. Findings include: The facility's policy, Policy & Procedure Admission, Readmission, Bed Hold, and Transfer/Discharge, read in part, Transfer/Discharge. Before the facility transfers or discharges a resident, the facility must- -Notify the resident and the resident's representative(s) of the transfer or discharge and the reasons for the move in writing and in a language and manner they…

    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 · D2025-02-06 · tag F0641 — isolated
    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 Based on record review and interview, the facility did not accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for 2 of 2 residents (R) reviewed for Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) screen. (R18 and R48) -The MDS assessments are coded in error stating that a PASARR level 2 screen had not been completed when it was completed at the time of assessment for R18. -The MDS assessments are coded in error stating R48 had a serious mental illness when, in fact, the mental illness was a result of progressive dementia. Findings include: Example 1 R18 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including depression, anxiety, and PTSD. Record review identified R18 had a PASARR level 2 screen completed on 03/03/22. R18's comprehensive MDS assessment, dated 01/13/25, indicated for question A 1500 that No PASARR level 2 had been completed. Example 2 R48 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include dementia with severe agitation and delusional disorders. Surveyor was unable to find that…

    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 · D2025-02-06 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
    Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
    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 (R) maintained acceptable parameters of nutritional status for 1 out of 3 residents reviewed for nutrition. R5 did not receive the assistance R5 required with eating. Weights were not obtained in over 60 days when R5 had been identified for high risk for altered nutrition. R5 had a recorded significant weight loss, and the facility did not reassess significant weight loss or her ability to feed herself. Findings include: The facility policy titled, Resident Height and Weight last revised 1/7/2025, documents, in part: All residents will be weighed upon admission and subsequently as the policy directs to provide a baseline and ongoing record for monitoring stability of weight as an indicator of nutritional status and medical condition over a period of time. Nursing department staff and Registered Dietitian (RD) will cooperate to prevent. Monitor, and provide intervention for undesirable weight variances for our 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-01-11 · 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 meal observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to distribute food under sanitary conditions, improper glove use, and food handling without proper hand hygiene. This has the potential to affect all 78 residents who reside in the facility. This is evidenced by: The facility policy and procedure entitled: Sanitization and Cleaning Schedule, states in part . 2. All foodservice employees must use one of two acceptable sanitary procedures when handling foods: a. Hands are washed using appropriate procedure and food is handled with tongs, deli paper or other utensils. b. Disposable gloves are used and changed when soiled, torn, or switching tasks. 3. Bare hand contact with ready to eat food is not permitted by dietary staff preparing or serving the food. On 01/08/24 at 7:48 AM, Surveyor observed Dietary Aide (DA) G dishing food onto plates to all residents. During food service process, Surveyor observed DA G resting gloved hands onto steam table and lean up against steam table with scrub top. DA G held the pen and clipboard to write food temps half-way…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-01-11 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility did not maintain an infection prevention and control program according to professional standards of practice when droplet precautions of appropriate Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) were not followed, and improper hand hygiene was performed during cares. This affected 4 of 4 residents (R49, R72, R16, R71) observed for infection control. This is evidenced by: The facility policy entitled: Isolation Precautions under the category Droplet Precautions, states in part .3. Prior to entering the isolation room, the following steps are required: a. Perform hand-hygiene and apply gloves, gown, and mask prior to entering room. The facility policy entitled: Hand Hygiene, states in part, staff are to wash hands with soap or water or use alcohol-based hand gel .Before applying and after removing gloves . before moving from a contaminated body site to a clean body site during resident care; example: after providing peri-care, before applying moisture barrier or other treatments . Example 1 On 01/09/24 at 9:27 AM, Surveyor…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-01-11 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    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 care plans were reviewed and revised based on changed needs and goals for antidepressant medications for 1 of 18 residents (R48) reviewed. This is evidenced by: R48 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. R48's diagnoses include dementia with behaviors, anxiety disorder, and depression. R48's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicates Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 10, which means R48 has a moderate cognitive impairment. R48's physician orders dated 01/25/23, includes in part, Citalopram 10mg by mouth once a day until 02/15/23, then give Citalopram 20mg once a day for severe depression. Surveyor reviewed R48's care plan with a target date of 01/09/24 where there is no mention of the antidepressant medication Citalopram which R48 is currently receiving. The care plan did include use of an antianxiety medication lorazepam which was confirmed by physician orders R48 was no longer receiving as of 01/11/23. On 01/11/23 at 8:31 AM,…

    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 · D2024-01-11 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide the necessary services to maintain good personal hygiene following urinary incontinence for 1 of 4 residents reviewed (R16) for toileting and hygiene assistance. This is evidenced by: The National Association for Incontinence ([NAME]) states in part, .Urinary incontinence leaves the aging population at risk for impaired skin integrity. Exposure to urine and feces is one of the most common causes of skin breakdown . The [NAME] goes on to state that urinary incontinence makes the skin more susceptible to maceration, incontinent dermatitis, bacterial infections, fungal infections, and exposure to caustic agents, such as ammonia, a prime caustic agent in urine. [NAME] goes on to state, . Timely cleansing of the perineal area by using gentle, but effective, cleansers is essential to maintaining skin integrity, controlling odor, and providing comfort and improved self-esteem . R16 has medical diagnoses that include, but are not limited…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-01-11 · 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 that a resident with a pressure injury (PI) received correct treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing for 1 of 1 resident (R) reviewed for PIs. (R4) Findings include: R4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses, in part of pressure ulcer of sacral region, stage 4, diabetes, muscle wasting and weakness, and abnormalities of gait and mobility. R4's care plan revised on 12/26/23 indicates that R4 is at risk for PIs and had a PI to right buttocks. Interventions include to administer treatment as ordered. According to R4's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 10/06/23, R4 is cognitively intact. R4 is dependent on staff for all mobility, transfers, and toileting and is unable to stand or walk. R4 uses a Foley catheter and was always incontinent of bowel. R4 was assessed at risk for developing PIs and had one stage 4 unhealed PI at the time of admission. On 01/09/24 at…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-01-11 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
    Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services related to the accurate administration of steroid inhaler to meet the needs for 1 of 1 resident reviewed (R20). This is evidenced by: Surveyor reviewed manufacturer's instructions for Symbicort on My Symbicort.com, which states, Symbicort may cause serious side effects, including . fungal infection in your mouth or throat (thrush). Rinse your mouth with water without swallowing after using Symbicort to help reduce your chance of getting thrush . On 01/09/24 at 3:09 PM, Surveyor observed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) N enter R20's room with eye medication and an inhaler. LPN N educated R20 to take a deep breath in and to exhale and then administered one puff of Symbicort Aerosol 160 MCG/4.5 with a spacer or aero-holding device. LPN N administered a second puff at 3:11 PM. LPN N did not educate or offer oral rinsing following this administration. On 1/10/24 at 1:27 PM, Surveyor interviewed Director of Nursing (DON) B regarding the expectation of staff with the administration…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-14 · 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

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to develop and/or implement policies and procedures for ensuring the reporting of a reasonable suspicion of a crime in accordance with section 1150B of the Act. The facility did not report to local authorities when R2 pushed R1 to the ground. The facility reported incident (FRI) indicated R2 pushed R1 and caused her to fall to the floor. R1 experienced pain and required a transfer to the emergency room for evaluation. The facility did not report the incident to local authorities as outlined in the facility policy. This is evidenced by: Example 1 Surveyor requested and reviewed the facility policy titled, Vulnerable Adult Abuse and Neglect Prevention which is most recently dated 10/03/22. The policy reads in part: Purpose: To provide residents a safe environment that is free from harm. Investigation: ~If it appears that maltreatment may involve a crime, immediately notify the police as directed . Reporting of Incidents: ~Call law enforcement officials if suspected concern is criminal in nature (theft, assault, unwanted touch,…

    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

“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.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to EDEN SENIOR CARE — 21 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 5 of 52.6+2.4 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.5+1.5 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 53.1+0.9 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 53.3+1.7 vs chain
The other 20 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.6★, per CMS)

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

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
FEINSTEIN, DANIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST12%since 09/01/2017
LIFSICS, CHANNIEIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL9%since 09/01/2017
POLSTEIN, MORDECHAIIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST16%since 09/01/2015
STESEL, MAXIMIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST45%since 09/01/2017
RICHARDSON, PATRICIAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 09/01/2017
MAUER, DOVIEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 09/01/2017
RICE, PAMELAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 09/01/2017

CMS files one row per role, so the 8 rows in the source record cover these 7 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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.

$8.7M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+3.1%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.1M
Related-party expense13% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 74%Medicare 6%Other / private 20%

About 74% 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. This home reported $1.1M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 13% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

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

$309per resident / day
operating cost
$9,386per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$319per 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 525459. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-22, 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