Middle River Health And Rehabilitation Center
8274 E San Rd, South Range, WI 54874 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 86 certified beds · (715) 398-3523 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (24) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (62%) 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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 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.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 13.2% | 16.1% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 8.3% | 5.1% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 2.1% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.6% | 2.7% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.6% | 5.7% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 1.8% | 3.3% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 13.8% | 18.4% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 11.3% | 16.9% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.7% | 95.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 1.3% | 5.0% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 26.0% | 24.6% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 35.8% | 15.8% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 3.0% | 1.2% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 92.0% | 82.2% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 22.0% | 23.1% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 27.2% | 15.5% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.09 | 1.66 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 3.39 | 2.29 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
Met the expected recovery: 30.8% 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 26 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 0.29 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 45% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 6% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 30.8% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 30.8% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 26.9% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 63.4% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not 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 stay | 7.3% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 4.9% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.90 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 86 beds and averages 45.1 residents a day — about 52% occupied, or roughly 41 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 4.36 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.14 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.59 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.84 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.57 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.30 to 0.76 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 62% is well above the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are 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.
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.
24 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 13 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2026-02-03 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure 1 of 4 residents reviewed (R1) received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents.Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) C did not use stand aid correctly causing a fall resulting in R1 sustaining a fracture.Findings include:R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE].On 09/30/25, R1 had a Brief Interview for Mentals Status (BIMS) score of 6/15, which indicates severe cognitive impairment.Care plan includes in part: a focus of self-care deficit related to polyneuropathy, frequent falls, failure to thrive, weakness, and decreased mobility with interventions of high fall risk last revised on 11/22/25. Transfers: stand aid assist of 1. Toileting: 2 assist before morning cares, at bedtime, and every 2-3 hours while awake and upon request.On 01/18/26 at 1:45 PM, CNA C entered R1's room for incontinence care. CNA C assisted R1 to a standing position in the stand aid with no other staff assistance. While R1 was standing 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-16 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation, and interview, the facility did not ensure the resident's environment remains as free of accident hazards as possible, and each resident receives adequate supervision and assistive devices to prevent accidents for 1 of 1 resident (R) reviewed. (R1)R1's motion sensor alarm was not turned on when R1 was in bed, as indicated in R1's care plan to prevent falls. Findings include: R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease with early onset, dementia with agitation. R1's Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score is 00/15 indicating severe cognitive impairment. R1's care plan indicates R1 is high risk for falls related to confusion and is unaware of safety needs. On 3/12/26, R1 had a witnessed fall. On 04/23/26, R1's care plan was updated to have a motion sensor on the floor while R1 is in bed on exit/door side to alert staff when R1 moves their legs over the side of the bed, per POA request. On 06/16/26 at approximately 10:00 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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-03 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not provide evidence that all alleged violations are thoroughly investigated for an injury of unknown cause.-Facility did not conduct interviews for other staff and residents.-Facility did not complete education in relation to the incident-Facility did not ensure a Registered Nurse (RN) completed an assessment after a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) completed the initial assessment.-Facility did not investigate further after becoming aware of fracture.Findings include:R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE].On 09/30/25, R1 had a Brief Interview for Mentals Status (BIMS) score of 6/15 which indicates severe cognitive impairment.R1's care plan in part includes a focus of self-care deficit related to polyneuropathy, frequent falls, failure to thrive, weakness, and decreased mobility with interventions of high fall risk last revised on 11/22/25. Prior to the incident R1's care plan stated R1 required assist of 1 with the stand aid for transfers…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-03 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure 1 of 4 residents reviewed (R1) received person-centered care according to the comprehensive care plan.-A facility staff member did not follow R1's care plan for toileting resulting in a fall.Findings include:R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE].On 09/30/25, R1 had a Brief Interview for Mentals Status (BIMS) score of 6/15 which indicates severe cognitive impairment.Care plan includes in part; Transfers: stand aid assist of 1. Toileting: 2 assist before morning cares, at bedtime, and every 2-3 hours while awake and upon request.On 01/18/26 at 1:45 PM, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) C entered R1's room for incontinence care. CNA C assisted R1 to a standing position in the stand aid with no other staff. While R1 was standing in the stand aid, CNA C attempted to pull down R1's pants to change incontinent brief. R1 stated R1 could no longer stand and R1's feet slipped off the stand aid platform. CNA C stated CNA C attempted to assist R1 put R1's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2025-08-14 · tag F0851 — widespreadElectronically 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure accurate reporting of the mandatory submission of staffing information based on payroll data to the Centers for Medicate and Medicaid [NAME] (CMS). The facility failed to enter accurate data in their Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) system. This has the potential to affect all 45 residents residing in the facility.Findings:Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Electronic Staffing Data Submission Payroll-Based Journal, Long-term Care Facility Policy Manual, dated June 2022, states in part: Chapter 1: Overview, 1.1 introduction .(U) mandatory submission of staffing information based on payroll data in a uniform format. Long-term care facilities must electronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, including information for agency and contract staff, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data in a uniform format according to specifications established by CMS.1.2 Submission Timelines and Accuracy.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-08-14 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop 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 record review and interview, the facility did not ensure each resident (R), or their representative had the right to participate in the care planning process for 7 of 13 residents (R3, R5, R25, R42, R1, R4, R11) reviewed for care conferences. This is evidenced by: Facility policy titled Resident Care Conference, revised 5/25, states in part: Policy: To have a multi-disciplinary approach to evaluate and make assessments of a resident's needs and goals and to implement the assessment into a resident's total plan of care.Procedure. All residents shall have a care conference every quarter or more if necessary. a reminder will be sent to the resident and/or their responsible party when the care conference is scheduled. Each department gives a brief report of how the resident is doing. The resident and/or their responsible party is welcome to ask questions or for clarification on anything discussed during the care conference. The staff attending the care conference will evaluate the effectiveness of the care…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-08-14 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure 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, staff interview and record review, the facility did not ensure drugs and biologicals were stored under proper temperature controls. This practice had the potential to affect 5 of 5 residents.Staff were not monitoring the refrigerator temperatures for both first and third floor medication rooms.Findings:Form titled Temperature Log for Refrigerator- Fahrenheit stated in part: Monitor temperatures closely1. Write your initials below in Staff initials: and note the time in exact time.2. If using a temperature monitoring device that records min/max temps document current and min/max once each workday, preferably in the morning. If using a temperature monitoring device that does not record min/max temps, document current temps twice, at beginning and end of each workday. On 08/11/2025 at 2:13 PM, Surveyor noted the refrigerator temperatures were missing on the first-floor refrigerator temperature log. Dates in July missing temperatures were: 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31. The August log has no entries. R15 had a FlexTouch 100-unit insulin pen…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-14 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility did not ensure residents/representatives were notified of the rate to reserve the resident's bed in the bed hold notice. This has the potential to affect 1 of 2 residents (R), R51.R51 received a bed hold notice with no daily rate documented.Findings:R51 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 which indicated that R51 was cognitively intact (but this did decline while in the facility). R51 had diagnoses of dementia, Alzheimer's, hallucinations, irritability and anger.R51 had a care plan for behaviors indicating physical/verbal aggression dated 7/5/25.R51 had a minimum data set (MDS) dated [DATE] titled Discharge Return Anticipated.On 07/11/25 at 10:41 PM, progress note revealed R51 became aggressive with staff both physically and verbally and police were notified. At 8:20 PM, R51 left the facility with officers and went to the emergency room.On 08/12/25 at 2:14 PM, Surveyor asked Nursing Home Administrator…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-14 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure development and implementation of a comprehensive person-centered care plan to address the resident's history of recurring urinary tract infections (UTI), for 1 of 13 residents (R) R27 whose care plans were reviewed, This is evidenced by:The facility's policy titled: Care Plans - Comprehensive, states in part: An individualized comprehensive care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychological needs is developed for each resident. Section 3 states, each resident's comprehensive care plan is designed to: (a) Incorporate identified problem areas.(e) Reflect treatment goals, timetables, and objectives in measurable outcomes, and (i) Reflect currently recognized standards of practice for problem areas and conditions. R27 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and has diagnoses that include acute renal failure, morbid obesity, diabetes, and urinary tract infections.R27's Minimum…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-14 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, observation and interview, the facility did not ensure the resident environment remains free of accident hazards as possible and each resident receives adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 2 of 5 residents (R42 and R11) reviewed. R42's record review noted an unwitnessed fall when staff did not implement interventions of a fall mat per plan of care resulting in an emergency room (ER) visit. R42 was observed being transferred with a mechanical lift with an assist of 1 staff member. R42 requires assistance of 2 per plan of care. R11 had a fall where staff did not follow the facility protocols to do a complete assessment post fall. This is evidenced by: The facility policy titled Falls and Fall Risk, managing, states: Based on previous evaluations and current data, the staff will identify interventions related to the resident's specific risks and causes to try to prevent the resident from falling and to try to minimize complications from falling. Under section titled Prioritizing approaches to managing falls and fall risk, states…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-14 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide 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 interview and record review, the facility did not ensure that a resident who is incontinent of bladder receives appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections (UTI) for 1 of 3 residents (R27) reviewed. The facility failed to follow up on recommendation for urology consult due to history of frequent UTIs. This is evidenced by:R27 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and has diagnoses of acute renal failure, morbid obesity, type II diabetes and urinary tract infections.R27's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 06/26/25, indicated that R27 is frequently incontinent and has no urinary toileting program. R27 has a BIMS score of 15/15, meaning cognitively intact.R27's care plan, dated 06/05/25, states that R27 has functional bladder incontinence related to activity intolerance. The identified Intervention/Tasks states in part. R27 prefers a bedpan while in bed. monitor/document/report PRN any possible causes of incontinence: bladder infection. loss of bladder tone, decreased…
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.
Show the remaining 13 citations
- Potential for harm · F2025-06-25 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide 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 and interview, the facility did not maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. This had the potential to affect 48 residents (R). Physical Therapy Assistant (PTA) C and Registered Nurse (RN) O entered R5's room without proper Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) who is on airborne precautions for parainfluenza infection. Findings include: Surveyor reviewed facility policy titled, Isolation-Initiating Transmission Based Precautions, states in part, .-Transmission-Based Precautions will be initiated when there is reason to believe that a resident has a communicable infectious disease. Transmission-Based Precautions may include Contact Precautions, Droplet Precautions, or Airborne Precautions. #5. When Transmission-Based Precautions are implemented, the Infection Preventionist (or designee) shall: a. Ensure that protective equipment…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-25 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 interviews and record reviews, the facility did not provide care and treatment by professional standards of practice to maintain a resident's highest practicable level of physical well-being by not assessing and/or treating a post-medication error for 1 out of 3 residents (R) reviewed for medication errors, R8. -R8 was given the wrong medications of Eliquis 5 mg, metoprolol 12.5 mg, and omeprazole 40 mg. R8 was not assessed every 4 hours for 24 hours as per physician order. Findings include: Example 1 R8 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including Parkinson disease, Alzheimer's disease unspecified, unspecified dementia, irritable bowel syndrome with constipation, essential hypertension, obstructive sleep apnea, and spinal stenosis. Surveyor reviewed medication error, dated 06/14/25, which stated, in part, incident details include R8 was given wrong medications listed as Eliquis 5 mg, metoprolol 12.5 mg, and omeprazole 40 mg. The resolution for this error was that R8's provider gave…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-25 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure medications were administered under professional standards of clinical practices for 3 of 3 residents (R) reviewed for medication errors, R6, R8 and R7. -R6 received ciprofloxacin 500 mg twice a day for 3 days and should have received 250 mg twice a day for 3 days, and ciprofloxacin did not have an expiration label on it. -R8 received the wrong medications, including Eliquis 5 mg, metoprolol 12.5 mg, and omeprazole 40 mg. -R7's self-administration assessment stated R7 required assistance and nurse left Eliquis, melatonin, omeprazole, and metoprolol in a medicine cup at R7's bedside, left the room, and did not ensure R7 took the medications. Example 1 Surveyor reviewed medication error, dated 06/16/25, which stated, in part, R6 received the wrong dose of ciprofloxacin 500mg twice a day on 06/14/25, 06/15/25, and 06/16/25. R6 was supposed to receive ciprofloxacin 250 mg twice a day for 3 days. Incident details include Registered Nurse (RN) I, who…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-29 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility did not ensure a system of records of receipt and disposition of all controlled drugs in sufficient detail to reconcile accurately. This affected 12 out of 49 residents (R) in the facility. (R1, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9, R10, R11, R12, R13, and R14) The facility did not ensure medications were administered under professional standards of clinical practices for residents. This had the potential to affect all residents on 1 of 2 floors in the facility. Findings include: Facility policy titled, Administering Medications, dated 2019, states in part, .#22. The individual administering the medication initials the resident's Medication Administration Record (MAR) on the appropriate line after giving each medication and before administering the next ones. #23. As required or indicated for a medication, the individual administering the medication records in the resident's medical record: g. The signature and title of the person administering the drug .…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-12-02 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
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, interviews and record reviews, the facility did not ensure they were monitoring the effectiveness of psychotropic drugs. Behavioral monitoring was not completed as outlined in the comprehensive care plan to determine effectiveness of the medication for 1 of 3 residents (R) reviewed (R2). Findings include: The facility policy titled, Behavioral Assessment, Intervention, and Monitoring, dated 03/2019, states in part: .Management -#1. The interdisciplinary team will evaluate behavioral symptoms in residents to determine the degree of severity, distress, and potential safety risk to the resident, and develop a plan of care. -#10. When medications are prescribed for behavioral symptoms, documentation will include: b. potential underlying causes of the behavior, c. other approaches and interventions tried prior to use of antipsychotic medications. e. specific target behaviors and expected outcomes. h. monitor for efficacy and adverse consequences. Monitoring -#1. If the resident is being treated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2023-08-29 · tag F0801 — widespreadEmploy sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and observation, the facility failed to have qualified onsite dietary manager. This has the ability to affect 40 out of 40 residents. Facility has not had a Dietary Manager since 07/06/2023. Findings include: On 08/29/23 at 10:50 a.m., Surveyor entered kitchen and [NAME] D stated if Surveyor was looking for the dietary manager, the facility does not have one. On 08/29/23 at 12:30 p.m., Surveyor interviewed Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) A and asked about the Dietary Manager. NHA A stated the facility has not had a Dietary Manager since 07/06/23. NHA A stated NHA A checks on dietary and has Human Resources (HR) L supervise dietary part-time. NHA A and HR L do not have a dietary certification. NHA A stated Dietary Aide (DA) M orders food for the dietary department and updates the resident tray tickets regarding diets and likes/dislikes. NHA A stated NHA A consults and refers to the facility Dietician as needed, and the Dietician is onsite at the facility every two weeks. NHA A stated the Dietician works remotely as well and reviews changes in resident conditions,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2023-06-07 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility did not prepare, store, or distribute foods in a safe and sanitary manner. The facility practices have the potential to affect all 43 residents. Facility staff do not cover beverages that are poured by staff on the wings and delivered to residents in their rooms. Cook Q did not allow the thermometer to air dry after wiping with alcohol and before inserting into resident foods. Dietary Aide (DA) T used alcohol-based hand rub (ABHR) as a means to sanitize her hands in the kitchen. ABHR is not an approved means to sanitize hands when food handling in the kitchen. The refrigerators and freezers where resident foods are brought into the facility do not have complete logs of monitoring for safe storage temperatures. The freezer on the first floor showed evidence of melted ice cream in the freezer. The temperature of the refrigerator was outside parameters for safe storage of foods. The facility did not monitor water temperatures for the water heater that is stored in the basement and circulates water to the basement kitchen…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-06-07 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — patternDevelop 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 record review and interviews, the facility did not implement their abuse policy in regard to screening for 7 of 8 employees. Caregiver and criminal background checks were not completed for Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) (CNA H, I, J, and K), Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) L, Dietary Manager (DM) M, and Laundry Aide (LA) N. Out of state background checks were not completed for DM M and LA N. Findings include: The facility policy, entitled Abuse Prevention Program, Screening of Employees with a last revised date of 08/2022 reads in part, Background checks are completed per state guidelines on each employee. On 06/05/23, Surveyor requested Caregiver and Criminal background checks for a sample of 8 employees. On 06/06/23, the employee background information was reviewed. CNA H, J, and LPN L were all hired on 10/01/22. Caregiver and criminal background checks were not completed until 06/05/23. The Background Information Disclosure (BID) was not completed by the employees until 06/05/23. CNA K was hired on 10/25/22. Caregiver and criminal background checks were not completed.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-06-07 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility did not ensure nutritional values are maintained when altering food consistencies to minced and moist and pureed consistencies. This has the potential to affect 12 of 43 sampled and supplemental residents who eat this food consistency (R5, R8, R2, R4, R35, R24, R18, R20, R41, R15, R25 and R292). Cook Q was observed pureeing scrambled eggs and bacon using hot water as a thinning agent. [NAME] Q expressed there are no recipes, no policy or any directions that tell her what she is to use to modify food to ensure nutritional value. This is evidence by: On 06/06/23 at 7:10 AM, Surveyor observed [NAME] Q pureeing scrambled eggs and bacon. [NAME] added the eggs to the robocoup to puree then proceeded to the hot water thermos to pour water to pitcher. [NAME] Q did not measure the water and added it to the eggs to puree the consistency. [NAME] Q repeated this process with bacon. Surveyor asked [NAME] Q how she knows what and how much liquid she needs to add to foods to modify the consistency. [NAME] Q expressed the facility is…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-06-07 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide 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, staff interview and record review, the facility did not ensure each resident received care consistent to prevent Pressure Injuries (PIs) from developing for 1 of 2 sampled residents (R)2. R2 is at moderate risk for PI development. R2 was observed in bed with both heels on the mattress. This is evidenced by: R2 was admitted to facility on 01/22/21. Diagnoses include dementia with behavioral disturbance, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, repeated falls, depression, weakness, and need for assistance with personal cares. R2's Power of Attorney (POA) is activated. Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], indicated R2's cognition is severely impaired. R2 is at risk for development of pressure related injuries. R2 requires a Hoyer (mechanical lift) for transfers and has recently been using a Broda chair (positional wheelchair) for mobility. R2 scored 13 during Braden Scale for Predicting Pressure Sore Risk, completed on 04/26/23, indicating moderate risk for development of PI. R2's nutritional assessment,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-06-07 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility did not ensure the resident environment is free from accidents for safe smoking, affecting 2 of 2 residents reviewed for smoking (R12 and R37). R12 indicated she maintains her smoking materials in her coat pocket or dresser drawer in her room and goes out to smoke on her own without any devices worn for smoking. R12's smoking assessment was not complete, to ensure safety interventions were in place on R12's smoking care plan. R37 indicated she maintains her smoking materials in her room and does not wear any apron or other devices while smoking. R37's smoking assessment was not complete, to ensure safety interventions were in place on R37's smoking care plan to prevent injury while smoking. This is evidenced by: Surveyor reviewed the facility policy titled Accident Prevention-Smoking Policy dated as last reviewed on 10/2022. The policy in part reads: Policy: The facility shall establish and maintain safe resident smoking practices. Guidelines: Any…
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.
- No harm found · C2023-06-07 · tag F0625 — widespreadNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
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 provide written notice of the facility bed-hold policy for 2 of 3 residents (R) reviewed for hospital transfer (R19 and R40). R19 was transferred to hospital on [DATE] and 05/07/23. A bed-hold notice was not provided to R19 or his representative. R40 was transferred to hospital on [DATE]. A bed-hold notice was not provided to R40. This is evidenced by: Surveyor reviewed Bed Hold Policy Acknowledgement, as part of facility admission packet. Policy reads in part .At the time of transfer to the hospital you or your legal representative will be asked to make a decision whether or not you would like your bed held here at the facility. This will be done with every transfer to the hospital. Surveyor reviewed R19's record and noted Minimum Data Set (MDS) Discharge Return Anticipated dated 04/26/23 indicating an unplanned transfer to hospital. Progress notes confirm R19 readmitted to facility on 05/04/23 and was re-hospitalized from [DATE]-[DATE]. 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.
- No harm found · C2023-06-07 · tag F0732 — widespreadPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and staff interview, the facility did not post the daily required information related to nurse staffing levels. This practice could potentially affect all 43 residents. On 06/05/23 the daily nurse staff posting that was displayed was dated 05/22/23. The faciity did not ensure the daily nurse staff posting was posted daily and updated each shift. This is evidenced by: On 06/05/23 at 11:41 AM Surveyor observed the staff listing titled Aspen Health and Rehab posting for daily care staffing dated 05/22/23. The posting read: Date 05/22/23 Shift 6 am - 2 pm 1 RN (Register Nurse) first floor (8hr), 2 RN third floor (16hr) 2 CNA's (Certified Nursing Assistant) 1st floor (8hr), 2 CNA's third floor (16hr) Shift 2 pm - 10 pm 1 LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse) first floor (8hr), 2 RN's third floor (16hr) 3 CNA's first floor (24hr), 2 CNA's third floor (16hr) Shift 10 pm - 6 am 1 LPN first floor (4hr), 1 LPN third floor (4hr) 1 CNA first floor (8hr), 1 CNA third floor (8hr) On 06/06/23 at 8:08 AM, Surveyor observed a new posting dated 06/06/23 with no issues…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MARKOWITZ, ALAN | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 04/16/2024 |
| KURTZ, TAMMY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/16/2024 |
| WIEDERIN, JASON | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/16/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 5 rows in the source record cover these 3 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.
About 78% 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
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
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Wisconsin Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 525408. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-14, 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.