St Camillus Health Center
10101 W Wisconsin Ave, Wauwatosa, WI 53226 · Non profit - Corporation · 50 certified beds · (414) 258-1814 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Feb 2024
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- inspectors cited 2 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (17) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $65,881 in federal fines (most recent 2025-04-14)
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 5 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 4 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
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 | 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 held steady at 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
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 | 9.8% | 16.1% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.3% | 5.1% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 2.3% | 2.1% | 0.9% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.1% | 2.7% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 5.7% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.0% | 3.3% | 3.3% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 4.2% | 16.9% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 95.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.6% | 5.0% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 34.3% | 24.6% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 3.3% | 15.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.5% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.7% | 82.2% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 28.3% | 23.1% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 6.9% | 15.5% | 12.0% | better |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
68.1% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 120 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 68.2% 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 88 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 0.62 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 89% 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 | 68.1%CMS range 59.7–77.1 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 8.2%CMS range 5.1–11.9 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 68.2% | 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 | 70.5% | 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 | 61.4% | 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 | 97.0% | 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 | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final 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 | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 1.0% | 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 | 5.9%CMS range 2.8–11.4 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.84 | 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 50 beds and averages 42.3 residents a day — about 85% occupied, or roughly 8 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 4.60 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.36 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.42 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 4.17 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.77 on weekdays — 13% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.46 to 1.10 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 42% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
17 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · K2025-04-14 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure 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 2.) R24 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Alzheimer's Disease with late onset, delirium due to known physiological condition (progressive disease that destroys memory and other important mental functions), repeated falls, and other disorders of bone development and growth, right tibia, and right fibula. R24 currently has an activated health care power of attorney (HCPOA). R24's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) completed 3/3/25 documents short and long term memory impairment and R24 is severely impaired for daily decision making. R24 has range of motion impairment (ROM) on 1 side of lower extremity. R24 requires substantial/maximum assistance for mobility and partial/moderate assistance for transfers. No trial of bladder and bowel toileting program is documented on R24's MDS. R24 is frequently incontinent of bladder and bowel. R24's Care Area Assessment (CAA) for at risk for falls completed 9/26/24 documents R24 is at risk for falls as evidenced by history of fall prior to admission and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2024-02-01 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 1 of 3 Resident #9 Abuse Interview with NHA and DON 01/24/24 11:19 AM Came to the facility from AL for increased in care. were receiving 1:1 caregiver. Doing well sharing the room. Different interventions, at first slept in the same bed, family never wanted them in the same room always. Situation were they were seeking out for each other, and it was a safety situation because they were pulling on each other. Them seeking out companionship became then stopped and stated, in order for them to get a restful night, needed to separate them out so they can still see each other. Aggressive or negative contact between the two of them? - 1/24/23 bed was in the same room together beds together, grabbing and pulling at clothing. Discoloration to Mrs. [NAME]. Investigation completed. 5/28/23 1800 - CNA reported [NAME] punched Mrs. [NAME]. beds were separated at that time. Upon admission physical contact was never shared with us that there was sexual contact still between the two residents. Refused to acknowledge that it…
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 before2025-07-08 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure 2 (R1 and R2) of 2 residents with allegations of abuse and injuries of unknown origin were reported to the state agency and one or more law enforcement entities.* On 6/13/25, R1's daughter Companion-K allegedly overheard Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA)-I verbally abusing R1 when providing cares to R1. The facility did not report this allegation of abuse to law enforcement.* On 6/13/25, the facility was informed by R2's wife of bruising and swelling of unknown origin with R2's right foot. R2 had an X-RAY of R2's foot on 6/14/25, which showed a fracture of the 5th metatarsal in R2's right foot. The Registered Nurse (RN) Supervisor did not notify the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA)-A of the injury with fracture until 6/16/25. The facility did not report this significant injury of unknown origin within 24 hours to the State Agency as required.Findings include:The facility's policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, Mistreatment and Misappropriation of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-04-14 · 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 2.) The facility's Enhanced Barrier Precautions policy effective 7/15/22 documents: . Purpose of Enhanced Barrier Precautions(EBP) EBP are an infection control intervention designed to reduce transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) in nursing homes. EBP involve gown and glove use during high-contact Resident care activities for Residents known to be colonized or infected with a MDRO as well as those at increased risk of catching a MDRO (e.g. Residents with wounds or indwelling medical devices) Enhanced Barrier Precautions require: -The use of gown and gloves only for high-contact Resident care activities (unless otherwise indicated as part of Standard Precautions). Because EBP do not impose the same activity and room placement restrictions as Contact Precautions, they are intended to be in place for the duration of a Resident's stay in the facility or until resolution of the wound or discontinuation of the indwelling medical device that placed them at higher risk R23 was admitted to the facility on…
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 · E2025-04-14 · tag F0909 — failed to maintain a comfortable temperature — patternRegularly inspect all bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails (if any) for safety; and all bed rails and mattresses must attach safely to the bed frame.
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 does not conduct regular inspection of all bed rails as part of a regular maintenance program to identify areas of possible entrapment for 4 (R1, R24, R28 and R392), of 4 Residents observed with bilateral enabler bars on the beds during the survey process. Findings Include: The facility's Proper Use of Bed Rails effective 7/18/24 documents: .Policy: It is the policy of this facility to utilize a person-centered approach when determining the use of bed rails. Appropriate alternative approaches are attempted prior to installing or using bed rails. If bed rails are used, the facility ensures correct installation, use, and maintenance of the rails. Installation and Maintenance of Bed Rails 12. The facility will assure the correct installation and maintenance of bed rails, prior to use. This includes: iii. Inspecting and regularly checking the mattress and bed rails for areas of possible entrapment v. Checking the bed rails regularly to make sure they are still…
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 before2025-04-14 · 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 record review and staff interview, the facility did not ensure all allegations involving potential abuse (R1) were thoroughly investigated for 1 of 4 reviewed facility reported incidents. *On 6/13/24, 2/21/25, and 3/5/25, the facility submitted facility reported incidents (FRI) involving R1 and allegations of R1 and sexual misconduct. All three FRIs were not thoroughly investigated by the facility. Findings Include: The facility's Abuse, Neglect, Mistreatment and Misappropriation of Resident Property updated 4/29/21 documents: .E. Investigation It is the policy of this facility that reports of abuse (mistreatment, neglect, or abuse, including injuries of unknown source, exploitation and misappropriation of property) are promptly and thoroughly investigated. Procedure: The investigation is the process used to try and determine what happened. The designated facility personnel will begin the investigation immediately. A root cause investigation and analysis will be completed. The information gathered 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 · D2025-04-14 · tag F0700 — isolatedTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
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 assess the risk for possible entrapment and review the risks & benefits and obtain consent on a quarterly basis for 2 (R1 and R24) of 4 Residents observed having side/bed rails. Findings Include: The facility's Proper Use of Bed Rails effective 7/18/24 documents: .Policy: It is the policy of this facility to utilize a person-centered approach when determining the use of bed rails. Appropriate alternative approaches are attempted prior to installing or using bed rails. If bed rails are used, the facility ensures correct installation, use, and maintenance of the rails. Examples of bed rails include, but are not limited to side rails, bed side rails, safety rails, grab bars and assist bars. Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: Resident Assessment 1. As part of the Resident's comprehensive assessment, the following components will be considered when determining the Resident's needs, and whether or not the use of bed rails meets those…
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 · F2024-02-01 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — widespreadEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Pot for all FACILITY Kitchen Initial Kitchen Tour: 01/22/24 9:49 AM Interview with DM (Assistance Dietary Manager) completed: 01/22/24 9:49 AM Assist DM Name: [NAME] Credentials: Service Aid Manager and in school with Univ. South Dakota for Food Director Certification. 4 dietary manager in the building and all work somewhat with the SNF. 1/23/24 10:00 AM interview with DM [NAME] - has associate degree in food service. RD present daily, full time on site. Experience: 10 years Food Code Used: State food code Clinical Dietitian Name: [NAME] Time In Facility: Full time on site. Who completes resident assessments: RD Who meets with new residents regarding preferences: RD Vender: Sysco, Rynhardt Delivery Days: Tuesday and Friday. When do they begin temperature checking and serving? Cooking temps are done in the main kitchen. Holding temps done in kitchen in SNF at approximately 11:30 AM When do they begin dishwashing?1:00 - 1:15 PM Dry Storage Dating System (first in/first out): First in/First Out Cleanliness: No…
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 · F2024-02-01 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure safe food handling practices were implemented. This had the potential to affect 43 of 43 residents residing in the facility. Staff did not cool foods with an approved cooling method. Staff were unaware of temperature requirements when testing parts per million (PPM) of the sanitizing solution. Staff did not ensure a can opener was clean. Findings include: On 1/22/24, at 9:49 AM, Surveyor conducted an initial tour of the kitchen with Assistant Dietary Manager (ADM)-E who stated the facility follows the Wisconsin Food Code. Food Cooling Temperatures: The Wisconsin Food Code 2022 documents at section 3-501.14 Cooling. (A) Cooked time/temperature control for safety food shall be cooled: (1) Within 2 hours from 57°Celsius (C) (135°Fahrenheit (F)) to 21°C (70°F); and (2) Within a total of 6 hours from 57°C (135°F) to 5°C (41°F) or less. (B) Time/temperature control for safety food shall be cooled within 4 hours to 5°C (41°F) or less.…
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 before2024-02-01 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not ensure all allegations of abuse and injuries of unknown origin were reported to the State Agency (SA) for 2 Residents (R) (R4 and R9) of 2 sampled residents. On 5/28/23 at approximately 6:00 PM, staff witnessed R4 punch R9 on the right side of the face. The facility did not report the allegation of abuse to the SA. On 1/28/23 at approximately 11:00 PM, Registered Nurse (RN)-C entered the shared room of R4 and R9 and observed R9 laying on a floor mat next to R4's bed. R4 was pulling at R9's arms. Despite redirection, R4 continued to pull and grab at R9's right arm which contained a bleeding skin tear. The facility did not report the allegation of abuse to the SA. On 1/24/23 at approximately 4:15 AM, RN-C entered the shared room of R4 and R9 and observed R4 grabbing and undressing R9. Staff noted redness and bruising on R9's right eyelid and multiple bruises in various stages of healing on R9's arms and hands. The injuries were unwitnessed and R9…
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 before2024-02-01 · 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 2 of 2 Resident #9 Abuse Interview with NHA and DON 01/24/24 11:19 AM Came to the facility from AL for increased in care. were receiving 1:1 caregiver. Doing well sharing the room. Different interventions, at first slept in the same bed, family never wanted them in the same room always. Situation were they were seeking out for each other, and it was a safety situation because they were pulling on each other. Them seeking out companionship became then stopped and stated, in order for them to get a restful night, needed to separate them out so they can still see each other. Aggressive or negative contact between the two of them? - 1/24/23 bed was in the same room together beds together, grabbing and pulling at clothing. Discoloration to Mrs. [NAME]. Investigation completed. 5/28/23 1800 - CNA reported [NAME] punched Mrs. [NAME]. beds were separated at that time. Upon admission physical contact was never shared with us that there was sexual contact still between the two residents. Refused to acknowledge that it…
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 · D2024-02-01 · 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 observation, staff interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure the accurate and safe administration of medication for 1 Resident (R) (R139) of 14 sampled residents. On 1/22/23, Surveyor observed medications left at R139's bedside. R139 did not have a self-administration of medication assessment or a physician's order to self-administer medication. Findings include: The facility's Medication Administration policy indicates: Medications are administered only by licensed nursing, medical, pharmacy or other personnel authorized by state laws and regulations to administer medications .Residents are allowed to self-administer medications when specifically authorized by the attending physician and in accordance with procedures for self-administration of medications. On 1/22/24, Surveyor reviewed R139's medical record. R139 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including urinary tract infection (UTI). R139's medical record contained a Power of Attorney for Healthcare (POAHC)…
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 5 citations
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-01 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not monitor for adverse reactions of a high risk medication for 1 Resident (R) (R16) of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. R16 had an order for morphine sulfate (concentrate) solution (an opioid medication) 20 mg/ml (milligrams per milliliter) as needed (PRN) for pain at a level 4-6 or shortness of breath (SOB). The facility did not monitor for adverse side effects or the effectiveness of the medication. Findings include: The facility's Medication Management policy, dated 6/2015, indicates: To optimize the therapeutic benefit of medication therapy and minimize or prevent potential adverse consequences, facility staff, the attending physician/prescriber, and the consultant pharmacist perform ongoing monitoring for appropriate, effective, and safe medication use. When selecting medications and non-pharmacological interventions, members of the interdisciplinary team participate in the care process to identify, assess, address, advocate for,…
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 · D2024-02-01 · 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 staff interview and record review, the facility did not monitor for adverse reactions or the effectiveness of psychotropic medication for 2 Residents (R) (R187 and R16 ) of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. R187 had an order for .5 mg (milligrams) of as needed (PRN) lorazepam (Ativan) (a psychotropic medication used to treat anxiety). The facility did not monitor for adverse reactions or the effectiveness of the medication and R187's order did not contain an end or duration date. In addition, R187 had an order for sertraline 25 mg daily for depression. The facility did not monitor for adverse reactions or the effectiveness of the medication. R16 had an order for lorazepam 0.5 mg PRN for restlessness/anxiety. The facility did not monitor for adverse reactions or the effectiveness of the medication. Findings include: The facility's Psychotropic Medication Usage policy, dated 9/10/08, indicates: It is the policy of St. Camillus Health Center to assure that each resident's drug regimen 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 · Dcited before2024-02-01 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure it was free of a medication error rate of 5% or greater. During medication administration observations, 6 errors occurred during 26 opportunities which resulted in a 23% medication error rate that affected 2 Residents (R) (R18 and R16) of 3 residents observed during the medication pass. On 1/23/24 at 8:22 AM, Surveyor observed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN)-F crush and administer R18's medication. R18 did not have an order to crush medication. On 1/23/24 at 9:10 AM, Surveyor observed staff administer the wrong medication to R16. Findings include: The facility's Medication Administration-Preparation and General Guidelines policy indicates: .A. Preparation: Tablet crushing/capsule opening: crushing tablets may require a physician's order, per facility policy. If it is safe to do so, medications tablets may be crushed or capsules emptied out when a resident has difficulty swallowing or is tube-fed . The facility's Administering…
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 before2022-10-03 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and record review, the facility did not ensure its medication error rate was not 5 percent or greater. The facility medication error rate was 10.53%. * R17 did not receive Vitamin D or Calcium Carbonate as ordered. * R238 did not receive Diclofenac gel as ordered and received Lidocaine patch which was discontinued. Findings include: The Facility policy titled Medication Administration Preparation and General Guidelines dated 06/15 documented, in part . .Policy Medications are administered as prescribed in accordance with good nursing principles and practices and only by persons legally authorized to do so. 4) Five rights - Right resident, right drug, right dose, right route and right time are applied for each medication being administered. A triple check of these 5 rights is recommended at three steps in the process of preparation of a medication for administration. 1. On 9/29/22 at 7:27 AM Surveyor observed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN)-C prepare the following medications for R17: Carbidopa/Levodopa 25/100 mg (milligrams), Folic Acid 1 mg, Furosemide 20 mg,…
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 before2022-10-03 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and record review the facility did not maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe and sanitary environment to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 2 of 2 (R8 and R17) residents residing in the facility. Facility staff touched medications with their bare (ungloved) hand during medication pass observation. Findings include: The Facility policy titled Medication Administration-Preparation and General Guidelines dated 06/15 documents, in part . .A. Preparation 2) Handwashing and Hand Sanitization: The person administering medications adheres to good hand hygiene, which includes washing hands thoroughly before beginning a medication pass, prior to handling any medication, after coming into direct contact with a resident. 6) If breaking tablets is ultimately necessary to administer the proper dose, hands are washed with soap and water or alcohol gel (and examination gloves worn) prior to handling tablets and examination gloves must be worn to prevent touching of tablets during…
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
$65,881 in federal fines across 2 penalties.
- $45,591 — penalty dated 2025-04-14
- $20,290 — penalty dated 2024-02-01
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| BARNES, STACY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/01/2023 |
| KISER, ALICIA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/01/2023 |
| LAUBUSCH, NICK | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/01/2006 |
| MASLOWSKI, JIM | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/01/2023 |
| TAYLOR, JUDITH | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/01/2023 |
| WINZENBURG, GEORGE | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/01/2023 |
| ANGELL, SHANNON | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 05/01/2022 |
| BLANCO, LEANDRO | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 03/01/2013 |
| CURRAN, MELISSA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 01/01/2023 |
| DONOVAN, AMBER | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 05/01/2022 |
| OROSA, AGUSTIN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 06/01/2022 |
| CRIVELLO, MARIO | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/01/1997 |
| PERUMPIL, MATHAI | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 06/01/2022 |
| VELLACHIRA, JOHNSON | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 06/01/2022 |
| WATSON, STEVE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/01/2023 |
The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
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.
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 525382. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-04-14, 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.