Life Care Center of Casper

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

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.

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.

51.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 248 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 83.7% 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 104 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 0.48 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 79% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 18% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 74.1 residents a day — about 62% occupied, or roughly 46 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 4.17 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.31 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.25 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.60 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.40 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.49 to 0.87 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 44% 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 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.

16 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 6 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · D2026-04-23 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to implement resident centered care plans for 2 of 5 sample residents (#6, #9) reviewed for development and implementation of care plans. The findings were:1.Review of the quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #6 had a BIMS score of 15 out of 15, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact, and had diagnoses which included non-Alzheimer's dementia, debility, depression, adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood. Further review of the 5/30/24 care plan showed the resident was to receive care with a minimum of 2 staff members present while providing care. The following concerns were identified:Review of an incident report dated 8/16/25 showed CNA #1 provided cares for resident #6 without another staff member present.Interview with CNA #1 on 4/21/26 at 3:40 PM confirmed cares were provided to the resident without another staff member present.Interview with RN #1 on 4/22/26 at 5:26 PM revealed staff had…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-10-17 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — pattern
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, resident and staff interview, grievance review, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure residents were treated with dignity and respect on 1 of 2 resident units (unit 1). The census was 81. The findings were: 1. Interview with 9 residents during resident council on 10/15/24 at 10:40 AM revealed at times residents had to wait between 45 minutes and 2 hours for call lights to be answered. The residents revealed they had observed staff walking by rooms or sitting at the nurses' station while call lights were sounding. Further interview revealed the number of staff answering call lights during the survey was increased compared to the number of staff who normally answered call lights. 2. Observation on 10/16/24 at 9:35 AM showed the call light for resident #20 was turned on. Continued observation until 9:48 AM showed 18 staff members passed by the resident's room. The staff included 3 activities staff members, 4 CNAs, an LPN, and 2 laundry staff members which walked past the resident's room a total of 18 times without entering the resident'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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-10-17 · tag F0641 — pattern
  Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of the RAI (resident assessment instrument) manual, the facility failed to ensure MDS assessments were accurately completed for 3 of 5 (#34, #35, #71) sample residents reviewed for falls. The findings were: 1. Review of a 5/4/24 Event Note showed resident #34 had a witnessed fall with bilateral knee soreness, pain to the right lateral thigh, and bruising to the left knee and right lateral thigh. Review of a 6/15/24 Event Note showed the resident had an unwitnessed fall and had no signs or symptoms of pain or distress. The following concerns were identified: a. Review of 5/15/24 and 8/13/24 quarterly MDS assessments showed the resident was coded as not having any falls since admission or the prior assessment. 2. Review of a 3/20/24 Event Note showed resident #35 had an unwitnessed fall and was transported to the emergency department for evaluation. Further review of the medical record showed the resident had fractured his/her left hip. The following…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-10-17 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, medical record review, staff interview, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 2 of 2 resident units. This failure affected resident #30, #50, #52, #67, and #73. The census was 81. The findings were: 1. Review of the 8/23/24 quarterly MDS assessment for resident #30 showed s/he had a suprapubic catheter and a diagnosis of neurogenic bladder. Observation on 10/16/24 at 9:44 AM of the resident's room showed no EBP (enhanced barrier precautions) signage or PPE (personal protective equipment) was present. 2. Review of the 8/21/24 admission MDS assessment for resident #50 showed s/he had a suprapubic catheter with a diagnosis of progressive neurological conditions. Observation on 10/16/24 at 9:44 AM of the resident's room showed no EBP signage or PPE was present. 3. Review of the Order Summary Report for resident #52 showed s/he had an indwelling catheter, a PICC (peripherally inserted…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-10-17 · tag F0637 — isolated
  Assess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of the MDS 3.0 RAI (Resident Assessment Instrument) manual, the facility failed to ensure a significant change assessment was completed for 1 of 18 (#35) sample residents. The findings were: 1. Review of the medical record for resident #35 showed s/he had fallen on 3/20/24 which resulted in a fractured hip. Review of the 3/26/24 significant change MDS assessment showed the resident was coded as dependent for toileting hygiene, lower body dressing, putting on and taking off footwear, toilet transfers, and tub/shower transfers. The resident was coded as requiring substantial/maximal assistance for showering or bathing self, personal hygiene, rolling left to right, sitting to lying, sitting to standing, and chair/bed-to-chair transfers. In addition, the resident was coded as requiring partial/moderate assistance for eating, oral hygiene, upper body dressing, lying to sitting, and moving a manual wheelchair. The resident was not assessed for walking due to safety reasons. 2. Review of the 9/11/24 quarterly MDS assessment showed…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-17 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
  Implement 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 medical record review, staff interview, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure as needed (PRN) psychotropic medication was limited to 14 days or the physician provided a rationale for extended use for 1 of 5 sample residents (#43) reviewed for unnecessary medications. The findings were: 1. Review of the physician orders for resident #43 showed the resident had an order for lorazepam (antianxiety) 0.5 milligrams to be given every 2 hours as needed for anxiety and restlessness related to end of life care ordered on 8/16/24 and no stop date. The following concerns were identified: a. Review of a progress note dated 10/17/24 and timed 9:33 AM showed Per [RN name] with Dr. [name] re: [regarding] Lorazepam usage: The dx [diagnosis] palliative care for its use of Lorazepam is for [facility] comfort care and the behavior could occur at any time and so its [sic] for the benefit of the patient. The benefit outweighs the risk of continuing the medication for the life of resident. 2.…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-04-09 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect 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 Based on medical record review, resident interview, staff interview, and review of incident investigation documentation, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from sexual abuse for 1 of 5 sample residents (#1). The findings were: The facility had implemented the corrective action prior to the survey and was determined to be in substantial compliance as of 3/29/24. The facility was in past non-compliance. 1. Review of resident #1 (victim) medical record showed a significant change MDS assessment dated [DATE], which showed the resident had a BIMS score of 12 out of 15 (moderately cognitive impaired). The diagnoses included non-Alzheimer's dementia, hemiplegia, dysarthria following cerebral infarction, blindness right eye, seizure disorder, and adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood. Review of the care plan showed Risk for elopement. Disoriented to place, Impaired safety awareness, resident wanders aimlessly dated 9/15/23. The Vision status showed the resident as legally blind 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-01-25 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — pattern
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, resident and staff interview, concern form review, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure residents received services to maintain good personal hygiene for 4 of 9 sample residents (#1, #6, #7, #9) reviewed for bathing. The findings were: 1. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #9 had a BIMS score of 13 out of 15 (cognitively intact). Review of the care plan last revised on 11/21/23 showed the resident has a self-care deficit related to new onset of confusion. Further review showed the resident had showers scheduled twice per week on Tuesday and Friday and required staff supervision and set-up help. The following concerns were identified: a. Review of the 30 day look back for the showers task showed the resident went 7 days without a shower from 1/2/24 through 1/9/24, and 1/9/24 through 1/16/24. Further review showed the resident went 8 days without a shower from 1/16/24 through 1/24/24 and refused a shower once during that…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-08-24 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident and staff interview, medical record review, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure timely toileting assistance was provided for 1 of the 5 sample residents (#5) who required assistance with activities of daily living. The findings were: 1. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #5 had a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score of 13 out of 15, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact, and had diagnoses which included Alzheimer's disease, non-Alzheimer's dementia, idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus, muscle wasting and atrophy of the right shoulder, periodic limb movement disorder, obesity, age-related osteoporosis without current pathological fracture, unspecified abnormalities of gait and mobility, and constipation. Further review showed the resident required extensive physical assistance of 2 or more people for transfers and toilet use, was not on a toileting program, and was frequently incontinent (7 or…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-08-24 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolated
  Make sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
  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, medical record review, resident and staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a call device was readily available for 1 of 18 residents (#68) reviewed for accommodation of needs. The findings were: 1. Review of the admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #68 had a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score of 13 out 15, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact, and had diagnoses which included pneumonia, malnutrition, respiratory failure (acute and chronic), history of malignant neoplasm of bronchus and lung, and acquired absence of lung. Further review showed the resident required limited physical assistance of 1 person for bed mobility, transfers, and toilet use. Review of the Activities of daily living (ADL) care plan dated 8/2/23 showed the resident required standby assistance of one person for transfers, supervision for bed mobility, and setup and supervision for toileting. The following concerns were identified: a. Observation 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.

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to LIFE CARE CENTERS OF AMERICA — 194 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

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

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 23 rows in the source record cover these 14 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

This home reported $2.0M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 18% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. 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, FY2024). 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 WY