Platte County Legacy Home
100 19th St, Wheatland, WY 82201 · Non profit - Other · 50 certified beds · (307) 322-7351 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605, F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
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 | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 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 | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 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 | 20.9% | 16.8% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 7.6% | 5.9% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 1.5% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 2.4% | 3.1% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 5.5% | 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 | 3.5% | 4.7% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 9.9% | 15.3% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 9.5% | 15.4% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.9% | 94.3% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 11.2% | 4.6% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 25.7% | 22.7% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 10.4% | 21.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 85.7% | 77.0% | 79.4% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.63 | 1.29 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.98 | 2.27 | 1.80 | better |
§ 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.
47.7% 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 68 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 75.0% 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 28 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 0.22 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 28% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 6% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 47.7%CMS range 36.3–60.2 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.6%CMS range 6.9–17.0 | 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 | 75.0% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 78.6% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 78.6% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 96.5% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 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 familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.1%CMS range 2.7–11.5 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.99 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 50 beds and averages 44.3 residents a day — about 89% occupied, or roughly 6 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. 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 3.63 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.96 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.13 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.15 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.82 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.10 to 0.60 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 52% is about the same as 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 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.
13 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Actual harm · G2026-02-20 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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, resident representative and staff interview, and facility incident review, the facility failed to ensure adequate supervision was provided to prevent resident injuries for 1 of 4 sample residents (#10) reviewed for accident hazards. The failure resulted in actual harm to resident #10. The findings were:1. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #10 had short-term and long-term memory impairment and diagnoses which included non-Alzheimer's dementia. The MDS assessment showed the resident had physical and verbal behaviors directed towards others, other behavioral symptoms not directed towards others, and wandering on 1 to 3 days during the look-back period. The following concerns were identified:a. Interview with the resident's representative on 2/18/26 at 10:55 AM revealed the resident had an accident recently where s/he fell down and hit his/her head on a planter. The representative revealed the incident was being looked into and he felt the facility…
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 · Ecited before2026-02-20 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, review of manufacturer's instructions, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to label medications with the date medications were opened and/or expired in 1 of 2 medication storage areas (south medication room). The census was 42. The findings were:1.Observation of the south medication storage room on [DATE] at 8:45 AM showed the general stock for PPD Tubersol vial had been opened, partially used, and no use by date had been written on vial. Further observation showed the general over the counter stock supply of acetaminophen suppositories had expired on 1/2026, and were still available for use.2. Interview with RN #1 on [DATE] at 8:45 am confirmed the Tubersol vial was in use and should have been labeled with a use by date. Further interview confirmed the acetaminophen suppositories were expired and available for use by residents and revealed they should have been discarded.3. Review of facility policy titled Storage of Medication dated [DATE] showed .4. 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 · D2026-02-20 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolatedPrevent 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 review, the facility failed to ensure adequate monitoring of psychotropic medications for 2 of 5 sample residents (#2, #10) reviewed for unnecessary medications. The findings were: 1. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #10 had short-term and long-term memory impairment and diagnoses which included non-Alzheimer's dementia. The MDS assessment showed the resident had physical and verbal behaviors directed towards others and other behavioral symptoms not directed towards other on 1 to 3 days during the look-back period. Further review showed resident received antipsychotic and antidepressant medications. Review of the current physician orders showed the resident was receiving lorazepam (antianxiety) 0.5 milligrams (mg) by mouth for pain and agitation daily. The following concerns were identified:a. Review of the medical record showed no evidence the facility had identified resident specific or medication specific target…
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 · D2026-02-20 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a bed-hold policy was provided in writing at the time of transfer for 1 of 3 sample residents reviewed (#46) for transfer and discharge. The findings were:1. Review of a progress note dated 12/10/25 and timed 11:03 PM showed resident #46 had small amounts of emesis at beginning of shift and the facility received an order to transport the resident to the emergency department for evaluation and treatment. Review of a progress note dated 12/11/25 and timed 2 AM showed the resident was admitted to the hospital related to a small bowel obstruction, gastrointestinal bleed, sepsis, and supraventricular tachycardia. Review of a Nursing Home Transfer and Discharge Notice dated 12/10/25 showed the resident was provided the transfer notice related to an immediate transfer or discharge required by the residents' urgent medical needs, which cannot be met in the facility. Further review showed the bed-hold policy was marked as attached to the notice; however, no bed-hold policy was attached. Review of the medical…
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 · D2026-02-20 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
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 ensure preadmission screening was performed and was accurate for 1 of 5 sample residents (#3) with qualifying diagnoses. The findings were: 1. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #3 had diagnoses which included post-traumatic stress disorder. The following concerns were identified:a. Review of a PASRR Level I completed on 7/30/23 showed no primary psychiatric diagnosis listed and the decision indicated a PASRR level II was not indicated due to no evidence of mental illness or intellectual disability. b. Interview with the social services director on 2/20/26 at 9:24 AM revealed the resident's diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder was identified after admission and a significant change was not completed. He confirmed a new PASRR should have been completed after the diagnosis was received.
- Potential for harm · F2024-07-25 · tag F0851 — widespreadElectronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on Payroll Base Journal (PBJ) review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the quarterly PBJ data was submitted timely for 1 of 4 quarters (4th quarter of 2023). The findings were: 1. Review of the four quarters showed the facility failed to submit the July 1, 2023 through September 30, 2023 (4th quarter of 2023) data. 2. Interview with the business office manager on 7/24/24 at 5:08 PM revealed she began submitting the PBJ in January and the facility had another staff member entering the data to PBJ prior to that. Further interview confirmed the 4th quarter of 2023 did not have data submitted.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-07-25 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, policy and procedure review, and manufacturer's recommendation review, the facility failed to ensure medication was labeled with an open date for 1 of 2 medication carts (300 - 400 medication cart). The findings were: 1. Observation on [DATE] at 3:24 PM of the 300 - 400 medication cart with RN #1 showed one Novolog flex pen 100 unit/milliliter with no date, and one Lantus Solostar 100 unit/milliliter with no date. Interview at that time with RN #1 revealed the medication was for resident use, and confirmed the insulins were not dated. She stated they were considered expired. 2. Interview with the administrator on [DATE] at 4:13 PM revealed insulin should have a date on it when it is taken out of the refrigerator. Further interview revealed if the insulin was not dated, staff should dispose of it. 3. Review of the policy and procedure Insulin Administration showed .Steps in the Procedure (Insulin Injections via Syringe) .4. Check expiration date, if drawing from an opened…
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 · D2024-07-25 · 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, resident and staff interview, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure residents received services to maintain good personal hygiene for 2 of 3 residents (#11, #24) reviewed for bathing. The findings were: 1. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #11 had a BIMS score of 3 out of 15 (severely cognitive impaired). Review of section GG showed the resident had a range of motion (ROM) impairment of 1 side both upper and lower extremities. Review of the functional abilities showed s/he was dependent for oral hygiene, toileting, showers, upper body dress, lower body dress, personal hygiene, and putting on footwear. Review of the care plan last revised 6/5/24 showed .for transfers mechanical lift (sit to stand) as needed with (2) staff assistance for toileting. Specifically, when transferring for baths or showers, please use full-lift as of 11/24/23 due to decreased ability to support own weight in sit-to-stand . Further review showed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-25 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for 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, and resident and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents received services to increase range of motion for 1 of 2 residents (#11) reviewed for restorative services. The findings were: 1. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #11 had a BIMS score of 3 out of 15 (severely cognitive impaired). Review of the resident's range of motion (ROM) showed impairment of 1 side both upper and lower extremities. Review of the functional abilities showed s/he was dependent for oral hygiene, toileting, showers, upper body dress, lower body dress, personal hygiene, and putting on footwear. Further review showed the resident had diagnoses which included stroke, hemiplegia, affecting right dominant side, seizure, and cerebrovascular accident (CVA) and the resident's therapy ended on 3/25/22. Review of the care plan last initiated on 3/1/23 showed [resident name] has limited physical mobility related to CVA. NURSING REHAB/RESTORATIVE: PASSIVE ROM Program…
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 · D2024-07-25 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure hand hygiene was done during wound care for 1 of 2 sample residents (#35) who received wound care. The findings were: 1. Observation of wound care on 7/23/24 at 9:28 AM for resident #35 showed LPN #2 changed the dressing on the right upper shoulder without concern. The LPN then doffed her gloves after dating the dressing, and donned gloves and dressed the left lower arm with out hand hygiene in between. 2. Interview with LPN #2 on 7/23/24 at 9:46 AM revealed this was how she always done the dressing changed. She stated she thought she did hand hygiene between doffing and donning. 3. Interview with administrator on 7/23/24 at 3:07 PM revealed staff were expected to perform hand hygiene before donning and when doffing their gloves. 4. Review of policy and procedure Handwashing/Hand Hygiene showed .Applying and Removing Gloves. 1. Perform hand hygiene before applying non-sterile gloves. 3. When removing gloves, [talks about how to removed the gloves included in to 4. ] . 5. Perform hand hygiene.
- Potential for harm · F2023-05-04 · 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 review of the dishwasher temperature log sheet, policy and procedure, the 2017 U.S. Public Health Service Food Code, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the water temperature of the dishwasher was at the proper temperature for sanitization to occur on 22 of 61 days reviewed. The census was 41. The findings were: 1. Review of the dishwasher temperature log sheet showed the temperature of the dishwasher was to be recorded in the morning and in the evening on each day of use. The following concerns were identified: a. Review of the March 2023 dishwasher temperature log sheet showed no temperature was recorded on 3/1, 3/2, 3/3, 3/4, 3/18, 3/26, 3/27, and 3/28. b. Review of the April 2023 dishwasher temperature log sheet showed no temperature was recorded on 4/2, 4/11, 4/14, 4/15, 4/16, 4/17, 4/18, 4/21, 4/22, 4/26, 4/27, 4/28, 4/29, and 4/30. 2. Interview with the certified dietary manager (CDM) on 5/4/23 at 8:42 AM revealed the facility used a dishwasher which required a high temperature of water to ensure the sanitizer was properly dissolved. The CDM stated 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 · E2023-05-04 · tag F0574 — patternThe resident has the right to receive notices in a format and a language he or she understands.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on resident interview, staff interview, and review of the admission packet, the facility failed to ensure residents were given the required notices. The census was 41. The findings were: 1. Interview with 8 residents of the resident council on 5/2/23 at 10:30 AM revealed the facility had not made them aware of the contact information for, or their right to file a complaint with, the State Survey Agency. 2. Review of the admission packet showed it failed to include the address (email and mailing) and telephone number of the State Survey Agency. In addition, the admission packet failed to include a statement that a resident could file a complaint with the State Survey Agency. 3. Interview with the social worker on 5/2/23 at 10:54 AM confirmed the information in the admission packet did not include all of the required notices.
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-04 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, facility investigation review, State Survey Agency incident report log review, policy review, and staff interview, the facility failed to develop and/or implement policies and procedures for ensuring the reporting of a reasonable suspicion of a crime in accordance with Section 1150B of the Act for 1 of 4 allegations of abuse reviewed (involving resident #145). The findings were: 1. Review of the facility's policy Abuse Prevention, last reviewed 8/6/20, showed PROCEDURE: 1. If abuse or suspicious injuries of unknown origin is suspected: The facility staff will immediately (including nights, weekends, and holidays) report all alleged violations involving mistreatment, neglect or abuse, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of property, to the Administrator or his or her designee. a. The Administrator/designee will make notification of reported allegation within 2 hours if the events that cause the suspicion result in serious injury 24 hours if the events that cause the allegation do not involve abuse and do not result in serious…
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PLATTE COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT BOARD | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | 100% | since 01/01/2023 |
| FREDERICK, CHARLES | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 02/04/2013 |
| MODESITT, LORI | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 08/24/2010 |
| BROCKMAN, JALEA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/09/2024 |
| PALMER, LAURI | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/09/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 9 rows in the source record cover these 5 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.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in WY
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 535053. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-20, 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.