Cody Regional Health Long Term Care Center
707 Sheridan Ave, Cody, WY 82414 · Government - Hospital district · 94 certified beds · (307) 578-2434 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (58%) 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 | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 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 | 2 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 3 to 4 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 | 19.8% | 16.8% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.6% | 5.9% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 6.2% | 1.5% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 7.5% | 3.1% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 2.9% | 6.5% | 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 | 1.0% | 4.7% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 18.4% | 15.3% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 12.2% | 15.4% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 94.8% | 94.3% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.2% | 4.6% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 25.0% | 22.7% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 14.9% | 21.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.92 | 1.29 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 3.98 | 2.27 | 1.80 | worse |
§ 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.
34.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 45 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.02 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 1% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 0% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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 | 34.6%CMS range 23.8–46.3 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | worse than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.6%CMS range 6.4–13.1 | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 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 next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — Newly certified nursing home with less than 12-15 months of data available or the nursing home opened less than 6 months ago, and there were no data to submit or claims 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 — Newly certified nursing home with less than 12-15 months of data available or the nursing home opened less than 6 months ago, and there were no data to submit or claims for this measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 | 0.58 | 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 94 beds and averages 50.1 residents a day — about 53% occupied, or roughly 44 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 3.91 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.47 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.47 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 3.33 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.14 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.56 to 0.26 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 58% 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 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.
13 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · F2026-04-09 · tag F0800 — widespreadProvide each resident with a nourishing, palatable, well-balanced diet that meets his or her daily nutritional and special dietary needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, resident and staff interview, and menu and alternative menu review, the facility failed to consider resident preferences for meals in 2 of 2 dining rooms (main dining room, 2nd floor dining room). The census was 51. The findings were:1. Interview with resident #7 on 4/6/26 at 4:05 PM revealed residents were not offered choices for meals and they get what is served. S/he revealed residents could choose an alternative sandwich to eat if they did not want the main meal. 2. Interview with resident #36 on 4/6/26 at 4:41 PM revealed s/he did not feel she could make choices at the facility and there were not alternative meal options given if s/he did not like the food. 3. Observation of meal service in the second-floor dining room on 4/6/26 at 5:02 PM showed the white board indicated the dinner was a turkey and cheddar wrap with lettuce, tomato, and onion, garlic Brussel sprouts, and banana cream pie. There was no evidence of an alternative meal item listed. Interview with dietary staff member #1 at that time revealed if residents did not want the meal, the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-04-09 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — patternPrevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
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 adequate monitoring of psychotropic medications for 5 of 5 sample residents (#2, #4, #5, #41, #56) reviewed for unnecessary medications. The findings were:1. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #41 had a BIMS score of 11 out 15, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment, and diagnoses which included anxiety disorder and depression. Further review showed the resident displayed no behaviors and received antidepressant and hypnotic medication. Review of the physician orders showed the resident received temazepam (hypnotic) 7.5 milligrams (mg) by mouth daily at bedtime for insomnia and duloxetine (antidepressant) 40 mg by mouth twice per day for major depressive disorder. Review of the antidepressant medication care plan, last revised on 3/31/26 showed interventions which included Monitor/Document side effects and effectiveness Q [every] shift. The following concern was…
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 · D2026-04-09 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, resident and staff interview, and grievance log review, the facility failed to ensure reasonable care for the protection of the resident's property from loss or theft for 1 of 4 sample residents (#31) reviewed for missing items. The findings were:1. Interview with resident #31 on 04/06/26 at 4:51 PM revealed s/he stated concerns of a missing short fuchsia colored jacket s/he had only one day and it's been missing since then. The resident stated s/he had mentioned it at the last care plan meeting and nothing had been done.2. Review of a progress notes for resident #31 dated 1/23/26 and timed 2:28 PM showed Per CNA resident refused [his/her] bath and stated I will not take a bath until my purple magnetic jacket is found. Staff has been looking for jacket and laundry has been notified.3. Interview with the SSD on 4/9/26 at 10:38 AM revealed she was not aware of a fuchsia jacket that was missing from resident #31. She stated when clothing went missing the process was to notify laundry.4. Review of the grievance log for the past year revealed no grievances…
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 · E2024-08-22 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — patternEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, resident record review, staff interview, professional standard review, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure administered resident medications were taken in the presence of nursing staff for 1 of 2 resident units (200 unit). The census was 58. The findings were: 1. Observation on 8/19/24 at 5:22 PM showed resident #30 had a medication cup, with medications in it, on the table in front of the resident. Further, observation showed no nurse was present. The resident revealed LPN #1 had dropped it off. 2. Observation on 8/19/24 at 5:55 PM showed resident #47 had a medication cup, with medications in it, sitting in front of resident in dining room. Further, observation showed RN #1 reminded the resident, at 6 PM, to take medication. The RN stated she thought the resident took the medication. 3. Interview with the DON on 8/21/24 at 9:30 AM revealed neither resident was assessed for self-administration of medication and they were not to self-administrator medications. 4. Review of the policy and procedure titled Medication Processing 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.
- Potential for harm · E2024-08-22 · 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
Based on observation, resident record review, staff interview, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure nursing staff dispensed resident medications according to facility policy and procedure for 1 of 2 resident units (200 unit). The census was 58. The findings were: 1. Observation on 8/19/24 at 5:22 PM showed resident #30 had a medication cup, with medications in it, on the table in front of the resident. Further, observation showed no nurse was present. The resident revealed LPN #1 had dropped it off. 2. Observation on 8/19/24 at 5:55 PM showed resident #47 had a medication cup, with medications in it, sitting in front of resident in dining room. Further, observation showed RN #1 reminded the resident, at 6 PM, to take medication. The RN stated she thought the resident took the medication. 3. Interview with the DON on 8/21/24 at 9:30 AM revealed neither resident was assessed for self-administration of medication and they were not to self-administrator medications. 4. Review of the policy and procedure titled Medication Processing and Administration provided…
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 · D2024-08-22 · 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 observation, medical record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure care plans were developed and implemented for 1 of 2 sample residents (#34) observed during personal care. The findings were: 1. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #34 had a BIMS score of 7 out 15, which indicated severe cognitive impairment, and diagnoses which included renal insufficiency, neurogenic bladder, hypertensive chronic kidney disease, history of traumatic brain injury, and benign prostatic hyperplasia with lower urinary tract symptoms. Further review showed the resident had an indwelling catheter and was dependent on staff for toileting hygiene, personal hygiene, and chair/bed-to-chair transfer. Review of the enhanced barrier precautions care plan initiated on 4/23/24 showed interventions which included .Staff will perform proper donning and doffing of PPE guidelines . The following concerns were identified: a. Observation on 8/21/24 at 10:27 AM showed the resident was…
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 before2024-08-22 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, medical record review, staff interview, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure infection prevention practices were implemented for 2 of 2 sample residents (#18, #34) observed during personal care. The findings were: 1. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #18 had a BIMS score of 11 out 15, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment, and diagnoses which included hemiplegia or hemiparesis, non-Alzheimer's dementia, and weakness. Further review showed the resident was dependent on staff for toileting hygiene, dressing, and personal hygiene. Review of the ADL self-care performance deficit care plan last revised on 6/12/24 showed interventions which included . [resident name] requires total assist with a full lift for toileting and incontinence care. [s/he] wears a full brief . and . [resident name] is totally dependence [sic] by 1 staff with personal hygiene . The following concerns were identified: a. Observation on 8/21/24 at 10:14 AM…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-06 · tag F0678 — failed to provide CPR when needed — isolatedProvide basic life support, including CPR, prior to the arrival of emergency medical personnel , subject to physician orders and the resident’s advance directives.
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, incident log review, and incident investigation review the facility failed to ensure basic life support and advance directives were followed in 1 of 5 sample residents (#1) reviewed for advance directives. Corrective measures were implemented by the facility prior to the survey and compliance was determined to be met on [DATE]. The findings were: 1. Review the admission minimum data set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #1 had a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score of 12 out of 15, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment, and diagnoses which included medically complex conditions, atrial fibrillation or other dysrhythmias, pneumonia, depression, respiratory failure, and anxiety disorder. Review of a provider comprehensive 30 day note dated [DATE] and timed 10:52 AM showed .Code status: Full Code . [S/he] was admitted [DATE] - [DATE] for sepsis due to multifocal community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) with acute hypoxic respiratory failure…
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 · F2023-07-13 · 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, staff interview, review of the US Food Code, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure the food storage equipment was maintained in a clean and sanitary manner in 1 of 1 kitchens. The census was 52. The findings were: 1. Observation on 7/11/23 at 7:04 AM showed the top of the Blodgett oven, Rational Self-Cooking Center, and the Metro c5 1 series proofing cabinet were soiled with dark discolored dust and grime. Further observation showed extra racks were stored on top of the rational self-cooking center and a cookie sheet was stored on top of the Blodgett oven, and had discolored dust and grime on them. 2. Observation on 7/13/23 at 10:53 AM showed the top of the Blodgett oven, Rational Self-Cooking Center, and the Metro c5 1 series proofing cabinet remained soiled with dark discolored dust and grime. Further observation showed the extra racks remained on top of the rational self-cooking center and a cookie sheet remained on top of the Blodgett oven, and continued to have discolored dust and grime on them. 3. Interview with the executive chef…
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 · D2023-07-13 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide 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, staff interview, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure baths or showers were provided routinely for 1 of 6 sample residents (#109) who required assistance with ADLs. The findings were: 1. Review of the admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #109 admitted to the facility on [DATE], had a brief interview for mental status score of 13 out 15 (which indicated the resident was cognitively intact), and diagnoses which included atrial fibrillation, coronary artery disease, heart failure, hypertension, arthritis and osteoporosis. The following concerns were identified: a. Review of the ADL self-care performance care plan last revised on 4/19/23 showed the resident required limited assistance by 1 staff person with bathing/showering as necessary. Further review showed no indication of the resident's bathing preferences related to the frequency of bathing. b. Review of the progress notes showed the resident discharged from the facility on 4/21/23 c.…
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 · D2023-07-13 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on review of medical records, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a monthly medication regimen review was performed by a licensed pharmacist at least once monthly for 1 of 5 sample residents (#8) reviewed for unnecessary medications. The findings were: 1. Review of the electronic health records for resident #8 showed there was no evidence a monthly medication regimen review was performed for the months of April 2023 and June 2023. 2. Interview with the director of pharmacy on 7/13/23 at 8:29 confirmed the monthly medication regimen review was not completed for resident #8 during April 2023 or June 2023 and the medication regimen review should be completed monthly. 3. Review of the policy and procedure titled Medication Regimen Review (MRR) Pharmacy provided by the facility on 7/13/23 showed .A pharmacist will perform a medication regime review and clinical review on each Long Term Care resident at the time of the resident's admission to the facility, at least monthly, and when requested by facility staff or attending/consulting provider .
- Potential for harm · D2023-07-13 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure 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 policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure medications were properly labeled to include expiration dates for 1 of 2 medication storage areas (second floor medication cart). The findings were: 1. Observation on 7/12/23 at 2:26 PM showed a bottle of Carbidopa/levodopa (decarboxylase inhibitor) 25-100 milligrams (mg) capsules and a bottle of hydrochlorothiazide (diuretic) 25 mg tablets for resident #52 did not have expiration dates. Interview with LPN #1 and RN #1 at that time confirmed neither bottle had an expiration date and revealed both medications were being administered to the resident from the bottles. 2. Interview with the administrator on 7/13/23 at 4:06 PM revealed the facility expected the admitting nurse and pharmacist to verify the medication bottles, brought to the facility by residents had proper labels before the medications were administered. 3. Review of the policy titled Medication Processing and Administration, provided by the facility on 7/13/2023, showed .c) Labeling requirements for medication for LTCC…
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 before2023-07-13 · 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, staff interview, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure appropriate infection prevention practices during observations of care for 1 of 8 sample residents (#35). The findings were: 1. Observation on 7/12/23 at 3:12 PM showed LPN #1 and RN #1 entered the room of resident #35. At 3:13 PM, LPN #1 exited the room wearing gloves and holding her hands at shoulder height. The LPN walked down the hallway to the nurse's station, without touching items in the hall, and encountered a CNA. The CNA obtained a measuring tool from the nurse's station and walked with the LPN to the resident's room. Upon reentry to the resident's room, RN #1 assisted the resident to roll to his/her right side and the LPN lowered the resident's brief. The LPN used the measuring tool to measure a small open area near the resident's coccyx. At that time, the LPN touched the resident's skin with her gloved hands and manipulated the measuring device and the resident's skin, to obtain wound measurements. When she finished measuring the area and without changing gloves, the LPN…
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WEST PARK HOSPITAL DISTRICT | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | 100% | since 02/03/2009 |
| JOHNSON, ANGELA | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/13/2024 |
| NELSON, RICHARD | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2024 |
| MCRAE, MARY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2020 |
| DEITER ENRIGHT, TARRA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/27/2022 |
| MOORE, LAURA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/02/2021 |
| TALICH, JENNIFER | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/04/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 19 rows in the source record cover these 7 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
What families pay in WY
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 Wyoming 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 535027. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-09, 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.