Powell Valley Care Center

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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 100 beds and averages 45.1 residents a day — about 45% occupied, or roughly 55 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the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026.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 5.08 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.93 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.00 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 4.70 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.24 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 2.08 to 1.55 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 24% is below the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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.

• Actual harm · Gcited before2025-12-02 · 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

  Based on medical record review, 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 a resident for 2 of 11 sample residents (# 2, #4) reviewed for allegations of abuse. This failure resulted in actual harm to resident #2 and resident #4. The findings were: 1. Review of the 10/21/25 annual MDS assessment showed resident #1 had a BIMS score of 0, indicating severe cognitive impairment, and diagnoses which included Alzheimer's disease, non-Alzheimer's dementia, anxiety, and depression. Review of the care plan, initiated 5/23/23, showed the resident had impaired thought processes and impaired decision making. Review of the 10/28/25 quarterly MDS assessment showed resident #2 had a BIMS score of 0, indicating severe cognitive impairment, and diagnoses that included Alzheimer's disease, non-Alzheimer's dementia, and depression. Review of the care plan, initiated 11/12/24, showed the resident had the potential for a behavioral problem due to severely impaired cognition. 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Actual harm · G2023-12-07 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, staff interview, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to implement interventions to ensure resident safety for 1 of 3 sample residents (#100) reviewed for falls. This failure resulted in actual harm to resident #100 who sustained fractures and was hospitalized . The findings were: 1. Review of the significant change MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #100 had a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score of 3 out 15, which indicated severe cognitive impairment, and diagnoses which included non-Alzheimer's dementia and anxiety disorder. Further review showed the resident required extensive physical assistance of 2 or more people for transfers and extensive physical assistance of 1 person for toileting and personal hygiene. Review of the self-care deficit care plan last revised on [DATE] showed interventions which included .Transfer: I recently sustained major injury post fall and am now an extensive/total assist of two staff members at all times. Staff…

  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 · D2025-01-31 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolated
  Ensure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
  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 residents received services to maintain or improve their ability to carry out activities of daily living for 1 of 3 residents (#21) reviewed for activities of daily living. The findings were: 1. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #21 had short-term and long-term memory problems and diagnoses which included Alzheimer's disease. The review showed the resident required substantial/maximal assistance with oral hygiene, toileting hygiene, upper and lower body dressing, rolling left and right, sitting to standing, sitting to lying, lying to sitting, and transfers. Further review showed during the look-back period the resident had 2 or more falls with no injury, a fall with minor injury, and did not receive therapy services or restorative nursing programs. Review of the ADL self-care performance deficit care plan last revised on 11/26/24 showed .restorative staff to encourage…

  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 · D2023-12-07 · 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, staff interview, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure care plans were implemented for 1 of 3 sample residents (#100) with falls. The findings were: 1. Review of the significant change MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #100 had a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score of 3 out 15, which indicated severe cognitive impairment, and diagnoses which included non-Alzheimer's dementia and anxiety disorder. Further review showed the resident required extensive physical assistance of 2 or more people for transfers and extensive physical assistance of 1 person for toileting and personal hygiene. Review of the self-care deficit care plan last revised on 8/10/23 showed interventions which included .Transfer: I recently sustained major injury post fall and am now an extensive/total assist of two staff members at all times. Staff may use Sara lift [sit-to-stand type mechanical lift] for transfer with two person assist or staff can pivot transfer me as…

  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 · D2023-12-07 · 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 observation, medical record review, staff interview, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure as needed (PRN) orders for psychotropic medications were limited to 14 days for 1 of 5 sample residents (#42) and failed to ensure appropriate target symptoms were identified and monitored, and gradual dose reductions were performed for 1 of 5 sample residents (#4) reviewed for unnecessary medications. The findings were: 1. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #42 had a brief interview for mental status score (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact, and had diagnoses which included non-alzheimer's dementia. Further review showed the resident had behaviors of delusions and hallucinations and received an antidepressant medication. The following concerns were identified: a. Review of the physician's orders showed the resident received an order for Ativan (antianxiety) 0.5 mg as needed one time per day for body spasms 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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-11-14 · 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 observation, medical record review, staff interview, facility incident report review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from physical and mental abuse by residents for 1 of 3 sample residents (#7) reviewed for abuse allegations. The findings were: 1. Review of the admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #7 had a BIMS score of 4 out of 15, which indicated severe cognitive impairment, and diagnoses which included Alzheimer's disease, non-Alzheimer's dementia, anxiety disorder, and depression. The following concerns were identified related to one incident of abuse: a. Review of the facility incident report dated 10/25/23 and timed 6:40 PM showed resident #5 had removed a puppy from the room of resident #7. When the stuffed animal was returned to resident #7 in his/her room, resident #5 returned to the room and staff found resident #5 with his/her hands around resident #7's throat and coffee had been spilled on resident #7. Further…

  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

“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

$29,120 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

• $20,930 — penalty dated 2025-12-02
• $8,190 — penalty dated 2023-11-14

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Who owns this facility

The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

What families pay in WY