Summit Ridge Skilled Nursing & Rehabilitation

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.

43.1% 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 36 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 46.1% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 26 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.41 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 70% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 22% 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 60 beds and averages 46.0 residents a day — about 77% occupied, or roughly 14 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.37 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.69 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.11 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 2.97 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.53 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.79 to 0.43 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 33% is below 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 unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.

28 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 16 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · Gcited before2025-09-17 · 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 representative and staff interview, facility investigation review, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to protect the residents' right to be free from physical abuse by another resident for 2 of 4 sample residents (#2, #4) reviewed for abuse. This failure resulted in actual harm to resident #2 and resident #4. The findings were: 1. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #4 had a BIMS score of 5 out of 15, which indicated severe cognitive impairment, and had diagnoses which included dementia, anxiety disorder, and hypertension. The following concerns were identified:a. Review of the facility investigation report dated 1/21/25 and timed 5:58 PM showed on 1/21/25 at 5:22 PM resident #3 grabbed resident # 4 by the arm while attempting to take his/her food tray. b. Review of a progress note for resident #4 dated 1/21/25 and timed 6 PM showed a CNA had observed resident #3 attempting to take a dinner tray from resident #4 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Actual harm · G2024-11-15 · tag F0740 — failed to provide behavioral / mental-health care — isolated
  Ensure each resident must receive and the facility must provide necessary behavioral health care and services.
  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 residents with dementia received the appropriate treatment and services to attain their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 2 of 4 residents (#4, #97) reviewed for behavioral and emotional needs. This failure resulted in actual harm to resident #97. The findings were: 1. Review of the 7/17/24 MDS discharge assessment for resident #97 showed s/he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and was discharged to a short-term general hospital on 7/17/24 with a return to the facility not anticipated. Review of the 4/23/24 quarterly MDS assessment showed the resident had diagnoses which included non-traumatic brain dysfunction and non-Alzheimer's dementia. Further review showed the resident had a staff assessment for mental status which indicated moderate cognitive impairment, disorganized thinking which fluctuated in severity, exhibited verbal behavioral symptoms directed towards others 1 to 3…

  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 · E2026-06-18 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
  Honor 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 observation, resident and staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure comfortable and safe temperature levels between the temperature range of 71 to 81 degrees F, in 1 of 2 dining areas (main dining room). The census was 49. The findings were: 1. Interview with Resident #35 on 6/15/26 at 4:11 PM revealed the temperature was sometimes cold, especially in the dining room. S/he revealed the facility ran the air conditioner all the time in the dining room. 2. Interview with Resident #2 on 6/15/26 at 4:02 PM revealed the dining room was cold and facility staff had to provide something on his/her shoulders during meals. 3. Interview with 6 residents during the resident council meeting on 6/16/26 at 10:29 AM revealed the dining room and hallways were always cold. 4. Observation on 6/15/26 at 5:07 PM showed the main dining room felt cold in temperature. Observation showed 9 residents in the dining room at that time, 1 was wearing a coat, 1 had a blanket wrapped around his/her shoulders, and 2 residents had blankets on their laps. 5. Observation on 6/17/26 at…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-30 · 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

  Based on observation, medical record review, and staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to ensure timely activities of daily living (ADL) care for dependent residents in 1 of 4 sampled residents (#3) reviewed for ADL care. The findings were:1.Review of the 4/14/26 cognitive evaluation showed resident #3 had a BIMS score of 13 out of 15, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. Review of a provider note dated 4/21/26 showed the resident required assistance with personal cares, was not ambulatory, and was unable to perform ADL's independently due to a recent above the knee amputation. Review of the care plan dated 4/13/26 showed the resident was dependent upon staff for incontinence care and had interventions which included .Provide incontinence care after each incontinent episode. and .ADL needs will be met each day. The following concerns were identified:a. Observation on 4/28/26 at 1:56 PM showed resident #3's call light was on. At 1:58 PM an unidentified staff member entered the room and was told by the resident that two staff members were required to…

  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 before2025-09-17 · 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, resident representative, and staff interview, medical record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who required assistance for activities of daily living (ADL) received appropriate services to maintain grooming and hygiene for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#1) reviewed for ADLs. The findings were: 1. Review of the significant change MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #1 had a BIMS score of 15 out of 15, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact, and had diagnoses which included hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and arthritis. Further review showed the resident required partial to moderate assistance with bathing and was wheelchair bound. Review of the resident's care plan dated 8/26/25 showed that the resident had alterations in ADL function secondary to weakness and pain and required assistance completing ADL task's The following concerns were identified:a. Interview with the resident on 9/16/25 at 11:33 AM revealed the resident,…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-01-03 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to manage his or her financial affairs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on review of resident trust fund account statements, staff interview, and Medicaid eligibility review, the facility failed to ensure residents' right to manage their personal funds for 2 of 13 (#1, #2) sample residents with accounts at the facility. The findings were: 1. Review of the resident trust fund account statement for resident #1, with a start date of 11/15/22 showed the resident had a balance of $50.02 in the account on 4/30/24. The following concerns were identified: a. On 5/3/24 the facility received a payment of $1,267.00 from the Social Security Administration (SSA) which was deposited into the resident's account. On 5/7/24 a payment was made to the facility for $1,317.02 which left a zero balance in the resident's account. There was no evidence the resident had received his/her $50 personal needs allowance. b. On 6/3/24 the facility received a payment of $1,267.00 from the SSA which was deposited into the resident's account. On 6/3/24 a payment was made to the facility for $1,270.70 which left a balance of minus $.70 in the resident's account. There was 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-03 · 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 staff interview, medical record review, facility incident investigation review, facility performance improvement plan review, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from physical abuse by a resident for 1 of 5 (#3) residents involved in a resident-to-resident altercations. The facility implemented corrective action prior to the survey and was determined to be in substantial compliance as of [DATE]. The findings were: 1. Review of the [DATE] quarterly MDS assessment for resident #3 showed the resident had short-term and long-term memory problems and diagnoses which included non-traumatic brain dysfunction, Alzheimer's disease, and dementia. The resident did not exhibit any behaviors, rejection of care, or wandering during the look-back period. The following concerns were identified: a. Review of a [DATE] and timed 9:57 PM progress note showed the resident was sitting at a table in the dining area when a resident (identified as resident #4) walked…

  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 · D2025-01-03 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
  Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on the facility's abuse investigation forms, State Survey Agency incident database review, policy and procedure review, and staff interview, the facility failed to develop and/or implement policies and procedures for ensuring the reporting of the reasonable suspicion of a crime in for 2 of 5 sample residents (#3, #7) reviewed for allegations of abuse. The findings were: 1. Review of the facility's policy Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation, implemented on 5/30/23, showed .Reporting/Response .1. Reporting of all alleged violations to the Administrator, state agency, adult protective services and to all other required agencies (e.g., law enforcement when applicable) within specified timeframes: a. Immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation is made, if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury . The following concerns were identified: a. Review of the facility's Resident Abuse Investigation Report Form showed a resident-to-resident altercation occurred on 12/9/24 at 6:55 PM and was reported to facility administration at 7…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2024-11-15 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — widespread
  Provide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
  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 nursing staff schedule review and staff interview, the facility failed to have a system in place to document licensed nurses in the facility on a 24-hour basis. The findings were: 1. Review of the PBJ (payroll-based journal) Staffing Data Report for July 1 through [DATE] showed the following concerns: a. The PBJ showed the facility failed to provide nursing coverage 24 hours/day on 7/21, 7/23, and 7/30. b. Review of the working schedule showed on 7/21 the DON was on duty for 12 hours starting at 6 AM. On 9/10, 9/23, and 9/30 the DON was shown as working a 12-shift starting at 6 PM. The other days noted on the PBJ were covered by nursing staff. 2. Review of the PBJ Staffing Data Report for October 1 through December 31, 2023 showed the following concerns: a. The PBJ showed the facility failed to provide nursing coverage 24 hours/day on 10/1, 10/8, 10/29, 11/23, 12/2, 12/3, and 12/9. b. Review of the working schedule showed on 10/29 the DON worked a 12-hour shift starting at 6 AM. On 11/23 the DON worked…

  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.

  Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2024-11-15 · tag F0801 — widespread
  Employ sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the dietary manager met the required qualifications. The facility census was 43. The findings were: 1. Interview with the dietary manager on 11/14/24 at 2:08 PM revealed she had not completed the Certified Dietary Manager coursework; however, planned to have it done soon. Further interview with the dietary manager revealed the facility had a dietician on site every Tuesday for 8 hours.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-11-15 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
  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 staff interview and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to implement a water management program to prevent, detect, and control the risk of water-borne pathogens. In addition, the facility failed to conduct an annual review of its infection prevention and control program (IPCP). The census was 43. The findings were: 1. Review of the facility's Infection Prevention and Control Program policy showed it was implemented on 5/22/23. There was no evidence the facility had conducted an annual review of its IPCP and updated their program, if necessary. 2. Review of the 5/22/23 IPCP policy showed .17. Water Management: a. A water management program has been established as part of the overall infection prevention and control program. b. Control measures and testing protocols are in place to address potential hazards associated with DCC's water systems. c. The Maintenance Director along with the Safety Committee serves as the leader of the water management program. Review of the 5/2021 Legionella Surveillance policy showed .2. In the absence of Legionella infections for a…

  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 · Dcited before2024-11-15 · tag F0661 — isolated
  Ensure necessary information is communicated to the resident, and receiving health care provider at the time of a planned discharge.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, 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 complete a discharge summary which included a recapitulation of the resident's stay for 1 of 4 resident-initiated discharges (#97) reviewed. The findings were: Review of the 7/17/24 MDS discharge assessment for resident #97 showed s/he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and was discharged to a short-term general hospital on 7/17/24 with a return to the facility not anticipated. Further review of the medical record showed no evidence a discharge summary had been completed. Interview on 11/14/24 at 5:15 PM with the NHA confirmed the discharge summary had not been completed.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning 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

$34,646 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

• $14,950 — penalty dated 2025-09-17
• $19,696 — penalty dated 2024-11-15

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.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to ROCKY MOUNTAIN CARE — 10 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 22 rows in the source record cover these 15 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.

2 organizational owners 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 $252K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent 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 WY