No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Worland Health and Rehabilitation

1901 Howell Ave, Worland, WY 82401 · For profit - Corporation · 87 certified beds · (307) 347-4285 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Special Focus candidate (CMS is watching this home)Flagged for abuse1 immediate-jeopardy citation2 actual-harm citations CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)$41,746 in federal fines
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

Worth asking about
  • CMS lists it as a Special Focus candidate — not on the watch list itself, but among the homes CMS is watching because of its recent inspection history
  • CMS has flagged it for abuse
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Feb 2026
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
  • inspectors recorded 2 serious findings as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (15) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $41,746 in federal fines (most recent 2026-02-26)
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
  • CMS ownership filings flag it as owned by a private-equity firm or REIT — a category that performs worse on staffing on average, though that average says nothing certain about this home, and CMS filings undercount these ties, so other homes here may have them unflagged (what the research actually shows →)

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.

1/5
CMS overall
1 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 1 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 2 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1405 Howell Ave · (307) 347-2555 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1801 Big Horn Ave · (307) 347-2281 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
1801 Big Horn Ave · (307) 347-8500 · Call to confirm hours
Park
1000 Obie Sue Ave · (307) 347-8948 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 2 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 2 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 3 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 fell from 2 to 1 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.

Overall rating1★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased34.2%16.8%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight9.0%5.9%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.3%1.5%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.9%3.1%2.0%typical
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms7.2%6.5%6.5%worse
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury5.7%4.7%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened27.8%15.3%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication11.5%15.4%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine95.5%94.3%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers3.3%4.6%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control31.7%22.7%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table19.0%21.8%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication3.4%1.2%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%77.0%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission12.4%18.9%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit18.6%16.7%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.181.291.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.272.271.80worse

§ 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.

33.8% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 106 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

33.8%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.4%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
57.1%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.08U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.03hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.03hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.02hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 57.1% 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 49 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 0.08 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 4% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 18% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF33.8%CMS range 24.6–43.051.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.4%CMS range 7.3–17.210.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge57.1%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge53.1%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge49.0%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 settingnot 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 discharge100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.1%CMS range 4.1–13.57.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.261.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

0.44
RN hours/ resident / day
0.56
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.24
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.25
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.30
RN hoursweekends
Total nursing turnover
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 87 beds and averages 67.3 residents a day — about 77% occupied, or roughly 20 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 3.25 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.44 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.24 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 3.36 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.50 to 0.30 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

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

4
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-03-06)
1
at the previous standard inspection (2023-12-21)

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

15 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Immediate jeopardy · Kcited before2026-02-26 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — pattern
    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 observation, staff interview, medical record review, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure residents received adequate supervision and devices to prevent accidents for 5 of 5 sample residents (#1, #9, #10, #11, #15) reviewed for accident hazards. This failure resulted in actual harm to resident #1 who received burns from hot liquid. The failure resulted in a determination of immediate jeopardy due to a lack of implementation of interventions, including adequate supervision and use of safety equipment. The census was 67. The findings were:1. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #1 had a BIMS score of 9, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment, and had diagnoses which included stroke, hemiplegia, and dysphagia. Further review showed the resident required setup or cleanup help with eating. Review of the care plan last revised on 2/22/26 showed interventions which included use of a Kennedy cup (spill-proof cup with a lid) for all hot beverages,…

    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
  • Actual harm · Gcited before2026-02-26 · 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, staff interview, review of incident and facility documentation, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from physical abuse by another resident for 1 of 7 sample residents (#2) reviewed for abuse. This failure resulted in actual harm to resident #2. The facility had implemented corrective action prior to the survey and was found to be in substantial compliance as of 9/11/25. The findings were:1. Review of the 11/14/25 quarterly MDS assessment showed resident #2 had severely impaired memory, and had verbal behavioral symptoms directed toward others. Further review showed the resident had a diagnosis of non-Alzheimer's dementia. Review of the 8/8/25 admission MDS assessment showed resident #3 had a BIMS score of 10 out of 15, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. Further review of the resident's medical record showed diagnoses which included dementia and anxiety. The following concerns were identified: a. Review of 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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Actual harm · Gcited before2024-10-24 · 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, review of incident and facility documentation, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from physical abuse by other residents for 1 of 9 sample residents reviewed. This failure resulted in actual harm to resident #1. The findings were: The facility had implemented corrective action prior to the survey and was determined to be in substantial compliance as of 9/27/24. 1. Review of the 10/6/24 admission MDS assessment showed resident #1 (victim) had a BIMS of 3, which indicated severely impaired cognitive skills, and had diagnoses of non-Alzheimer's dementia and pelvic fractures. Further review showed the resident had limited ability to make concrete requests and exhibited verbal behavioral symptoms toward others. 2. Review of the 7/22/24 admission MDS assessment showed resident #2 (perpetrator) had a BIMS score of 4, which indicated severely impaired cognitive skills. Further review of the resident's medical record revealed a diagnosis of unspecified dementia, severe, with other behavioral…

    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 · D2026-04-30 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, medical record, and staff and resident interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were safely stored for 1 of 3 residents (#1) reviewed for medication administration. The census was 64. The findings were: Based on observation, medical record, and staff and resident interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were safely stored for 1 of 3 residents (#1) reviewed for medication administration. The census was 64. The findings were: 1. Review of the medical record showed resident #1 had diagnoses that included chronic kidney disease, hypertension, and atherosclerotic heart disease. The following concerns were identified: a. Observation on 4/30/26 at 12:14 PM showed resident #1 had an unlabeled medication cup that contained 1 unmarked white pill. b. Interview with resident #1 on 4/30/26 at 12:14 PM revealed a traveling nurse gave him/her a sodium chloride salt pill a few months ago. The resident reported s/he had high blood pressure (BP) and noticed the pill was not the sodium bicarbonate that s/he had been prescribed, and stated s/he refused 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-30 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure infection control techniques were utilized in 1 of 4 units. The findings were: 1. Observation on 4/30/26 at 6:01 AM showed CNA #1 exited room [ROOM NUMBER] with unbagged, soiled bed linens in her hands. She walked down the hall with the soiled linens and put them in the dirty linen bin. 2. Interview with the DON on 4/30/26 at 10:40 AM confirmed soiled linens should be put in a bag before leaving the room. 3. Review of the facility policy titled Soiled Laundry and Bedding last revised February 2026 showed .3. Place and transport contaminated laundry in bags or containers in accordance with established policies governing the handling and disposal of contaminated items .

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-02 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff and resident representative interview, medical record review, facility investigation review, Office of Healthcare Licensing and Surveys ([NAME]) incident report log review, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to report an injury of unknown source within 2 hours to the State Agency for 1 of 3 sample residents (#1) reviewed for allegations of abuse. The census was 64. The findings were:1. Review of the 11/30/25 quarterly MDS assessment showed the resident had diagnoses which included non-Alzheimer's dementia, anxiety, and depression. The resident had a BIMS assessment of 0 which indicated severe cognitive impairment. The resident was coded as having no falls since admission/entry or the prior assessment. The following concerns were identified:a. Review of a facility reported incident (FRI) dated 3/4/26 showed an allegation of an injury of unknown source occurred on 3/3/26 at 9:40 PM. The staff was made aware on 3/3/26 at 9:43 PM, and the administrator was made aware on 3/3/26 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-02 · tag F0627 — isolated
    Ensure the transfer/discharge meets the resident's needs/preferences and that the resident is prepared for a safe transfer/discharge.
    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 provider interview, the facility failed to ensure a safe and orderly discharge from the facility for 1 of 3 sample residents (#2) reviewed for discharge. The findings were:1. Review of the 3/19/26 admission MDS assessment showed resident #2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of the initial care plan showed the resident had diagnoses which included nontraumatic hematoma of soft tissue, congestive heart failure (CHF), urinary tract infection (UTI), and mild cognitive impairment. Review of the medical record showed the resident was discharged from the facility on 3/30/26 at 1:30 PM. The following concerns were identified:a. Review of the Physician Medicare Certification dated 3/19/26 and signed by the physician on 3/24/26 showed the resident required daily care for skilled rehab and skilled nursing, and the physician recommended post-SNF care at an assisted living facility (ALF).b. Review of the care conference minutes dated 3/20/26 showed 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-06 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, resident and staff interview, facility incident investigation review, state survey agency incident database review, and policy review, the facility failed to report allegations of misappropriation of resident property for 1 of 3 sample residents (#59) reviewed for abuse, neglect, and misappropriation. The findings were: 1. Review of the annual MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #59 had a brief interview for mental status score of 14 out of 15 which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. The following concerns were identified: a. Interview with the resident on 3/4/25 at 11:23 AM revealed s/he had $200 which was missing and had told a housekeeper about it. The resident revealed the money went missing about 3 weeks ago and the money had not been found, returned, or replaced. b. Review of the state survey agency incident database review showed no evidence the allegation of missing money was reported. c. Review of an Investigator Interview Form dated 2/10/25 showed 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
  • Potential for harm · D2025-03-06 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolated
    Provide activities to meet all resident's needs.
    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 activities calendar review and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to provide an activities program designed to support residents in their choice of activities for 1 of 2 sample residents (#48) with activity concerns. The findings were: 1. Review of the admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #48 had a diagnosis of dementia with behavioral symptoms such as hitting, kicking and wandering. Further review showed it was very important to the resident to do things with groups of people, very important to go outside when the weather was good, and somewhat important to do his/her favorite activities. The resident had a brief interview for mental status score of 5 out of 15, which indicated severe cognitive impairment. Review of the care plan last revised on 2/26/25 showed [the resident is] dependent on staff for meeting emotional, intellectual, physical, spiritual and social needs interventions which included Provide 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-03-06 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolated
    Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
    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 and resident interview, the facility failed to ensure resident diet orders were followed for 1 of 3 sample residents (#50) reviewed for food and nutrition. The findings were: 1. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #50 had a brief interview for mental status score of 15 out of 15, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact, and diagnoses which included diabetes mellitus. Further review showed the resident was coded for a therapeutic diet. Review of the resident's physician orders showed the resident was to receive a controlled carbohydrate diet, had fingerstick blood sugar checks before meals and as needed, and received insulin per a sliding scale based on fingerstick blood sugar levels. The following concerns were identified: a. Observation on 3/4/25 at 8:36 AM showed the resident received a full cinnamon roll with glaze that was visible on top of the roll and on the plate. Review of the diet card provided with 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-06 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, medical record review, staff interview, professional standard review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure infection prevention practices were implemented for 1 of 2 sample residents (#2) observed during personal care. The findings were: 1. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #2 had a brief interview for mental status score of 5 out of 15, which indicated severe cognitive impairment, and diagnoses which included cerebrovascular accident and hemiplegia or hemiparesis. Further review showed the resident was frequently incontinent of bowel and bladder and was dependent on staff for toileting hygiene and personal hygiene. The following concerns were identified: a. Observation on 3/5/25 at 2:22 PM showed CNA #1 and OT #1 assisted the resident into bed. The staff members removed the resident's soiled pants and CNA #1 placed the pants on the floor by the bed. The CNA performed incontinence care and, without removing the soiled gloves, the CNA touched 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-12-21 · 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 and staff interview, facility investigation review, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from sexual abuse by another resident for 1 of 3 sample residents (#65) reviewed for abuse. The facility implemented corrective actions and was determined to be in substantial compliance as of 11/22/23. The findings were: 1. Review of the admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #65 had moderate memory impairment and diagnoses which included non-Alzheimer's dementia, depression, and generalized muscle weakness. Further review showed the resident required extensive physical assistance of one person for mobility, transfers, dressing, toileting, and locomotion off the unit. Review of the behavior care plan provided by the DON on 12/20/23 showed Resident was involved in an event with a [male/female] resident where the [male/female] resident began to touch [him/her] inappropriately. Although resident is alert 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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · E2022-10-27 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, staff interview, review of facility policy, and review of the 2017 U.S. Public Health Service food code, the facility failed to ensure sanitary meal service during 1 of 2 meal observations (evening meal on 10/24/22). The facility census was 64. The findings were: 1. Observation on 10/24/22 at 5:32 PM showed dietary aide #1 delivered several trays to residents. During the observation the dietary aide placed plates of food for the residents on the table and assisted with dinner ware. The aide adjusted resident clothing, touching the residents' faces, arms, and hands. After coming in contact with residents' clothing, face, arms, and hands, the dietary aide assisted 2 additional residents with their food by placing her hands on the residents' sandwiches and cutting them in half. No hand hygiene was performed prior to touching the sandwiches. 2. Interview with the infection preventionist on 10/26/22 at 1:57 PM revealed all staff were trained in hand hygiene on an annual basis and there was an active hand hygiene monitoring program in place. Further interview…

    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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-10-27 · 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 observation, medical record review, staff interview, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure appropriate safety devices were utilized during transfers for 1 of 3 sample residents (#9) reviewed for falls. The findings were: 1. Review of the admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #9 had short-term and long-term memory problems and diagnoses which included arthritis, malnutrition, abnormalities of gait and mobility, pain, and fatigue. Further review showed the resident required extensive physical assistance of 2 or more people for bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toilet use and personal hygiene. Review of the ADL care plan last revised on 7/27/22 showed the resident had abnormal gait, cognitive deficits, increased risk for falls, a decline in abilities, and history of complaints of discomfort to the left shoulder joint. Interventions included .Transfer: The resident requires (limited to extensive assistance by (1) staff to move between surfaces as necessary .Toilet…

    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 before2022-10-27 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, medical record review, staff interview and policy review the facility failed to ensure appropriate infection prevention practices during 1 of 2 observations of wound dressing changes (which affected resident #166). The findings were: 1. Review of the admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed resident #166 was admitted with diagnoses which included cardiorespiratory debility condition, dementia, and stage 2 pressure ulcer. Further review showed the resident was admitted with one unstageable pressure injury. Review of the progress notes for resident #166 showed dressing changes for two open wound areas on the buttocks were performed twice a week on Tuesdays and Fridays. Observation on 10/25/22 at 5:20 PM showed RN #1 performed a dressing change on the resident's pressure injury and an abrasion to the resident's coccyx area. Observation showed the dressing change team were gowned and gloved in preparation to do the procedure. RN #1 prepared the work area while the assistant positioned 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.

    Infection Control 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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$41,746 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

  • $34,958 — penalty dated 2026-02-26
  • $6,788 — penalty dated 2024-10-24

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 EVERGREEN HEALTHCARE GROUP — 44 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 1 of 52.5-1.5 vs chain
Health inspection 1 of 52.4-1.4 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 53.3-1.3 vs chain
Quality measures 2 of 53.0-1.0 vs chain
The other 43 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.5★, per CMS)
1 of 5Alaska Gardens Health and RehabilitationTacoma, WA 1 of 5El Jen Skilled CareLas Vegas, NV 1 of 5Firesteel Healthcare CenterMitchell, SD 1 of 5Gardnerville Health & Rehabilitation CenterGardnerville, NV 1 of 5Laurel Health & Rehabilitation CenterLaurel, MT 1 of 5Livingston Health & Rehabilitation CenterLivingston, MT 1 of 5Palisade Healthcare CenterGarretson, SD 1 of 5Portland Health And RehabilitationPortland, OR 1 of 5Riverview Healthcare CenterFlandreau, SD 1 of 5Shepherd of the Valley Rehabilitation and WellnessCasper, WY 2 of 5Aspen Meadows Health And Rehabilitation CenterBillings, MT 2 of 5Canterbury HouseAuburn, WA 2 of 5Enumclaw Health and RehabilitationEnumclaw, WA 2 of 5Granite Rehabilitation and WellnessCheyenne, WY 2 of 5Independence Health And RehabilitationIndependence, OR 2 of 5Laramie Health and RehabilitationLaramie, WY 2 of 5Mountain View Health And RehabilitationCarson City, NV 2 of 5North Cascades Health and RehabilitationBellingham, WA 2 of 5Seattle Medical Post Acute CareSeattle, WA 2 of 5Shelton Health and RehabilitationShelton, WA 2 of 5Village Health CareGresham, OR 2 of 5Wind River Rehabilitation and WellnessRiverton, WY 3 of 5Fountain Springs HealthcareRapid City, SD 3 of 5La Grande Post Acute RehabLa Grande, OR 3 of 5Pahrump Health And RehabilitationPahrump, NV 3 of 5Prairie View Healthcare CenterWoonsocket, SD 3 of 5Rawlins Rehabilitation and WellnessRawlins, WY 3 of 5Royal Park Health and RehabilitationSpokane, WA 3 of 5Sage View Care CenterRock Springs, WY 3 of 5Thermopolis Rehabilitation and WellnessThermopolis, WY 3 of 5Wheatcrest Hills Healthcare CenterBritton, SD 3 of 5Windsor Health And RehabilitationSalem, OR 4 of 5Americana Health and RehabilitationLongview, WA 4 of 5Buena Vista HealthcareColville, WA 4 of 5Frontier Rehabilitation and Extended CareLongview, WA 4 of 5Hillsboro Health And RehabilitationHillsboro, OR 4 of 5Hot Springs Health & Rehabilitation CenterHot Springs, MT 4 of 5Missoula Health & Rehabilitation CenterMissoula, MT 4 of 5Polson Health & Rehabilitation CenterPolson, MT 4 of 5The Dalles Health And RehabilitationThe Dalles, OR

Showing 40 of 43; lowest-rated first.

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

Investor-owned

CMS ownership filings flag an owner of this facility as a real-estate investment trust (REIT). That’s a fact worth knowing: peer-reviewed research links private-equity and REIT ownership to lower staffing and more citations on average — though any individual home can run well or poorly regardless. Read the inspection and staffing record above on its own merits.

  • DIVERSIFIED HEALTHCARE TRUST — REIT · 100.00% share · 5% Or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest
  • CHARLES SCHWAB INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT, INC. — investment firm · 5.97% share · 5% Or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest
  • BLACKROCK INC — investment firm · 7.77% share · 5% Or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest
  • FLAT FOOTED LLC — investment firm · 9.77% share · 5% Or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest
  • ABP TRUST — REIT · 9.67% share · 5% Or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest
  • VANGUARD GROUP INC — investment firm · 8.35% share · 5% Or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest
  • H/2 SPECIAL OPPORTUNITIES IV L.P. — investment firm · 6.20% share · 5% Or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest
  • D.E. SHAW & CO., L.P. — investment firm · 5.73% share · 5% Or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest

Source: CMS SNF ownership filings (PECOS). These flags are self-reported and undercount — federal auditors (GAO) and researchers find CMS captures only a fraction of true private-equity and REIT ties, so the absence of a flag on other homes is not proof they lack investor owners. How investor ownership affects care →

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
MORRISON, ROBERTIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 09/30/2025
SIMMONS, BENJAMINIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/30/2025
CONNELL, ERICIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/30/2025
COUVE FINANCIAL SERVICES LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/30/2025
COUVE HEALTHCARE CONSULTING LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/30/2025
WORLAND SNF OPERATIONS LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/30/2025
WY2 SNF OPERATIONS MANAGER LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/30/2025
GLANZ, HEIDIIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/30/2025
SPIELMAN, SHIMONIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/30/2025
WINTERHOLLER, DAVIDIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 09/30/2025
YENOWITZ, YITZCHOKIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/30/2025
ZIMMERMAN, EDWARDIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/30/2025
WORLAND SNF REALTY LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/17/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 25 rows in the source record cover these 13 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.

5 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.

$7.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+1.7%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 51%Medicare 14%Other / private 35%

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

$279per resident / day
operating cost
$8,479per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$284per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in Wyoming
$9,916/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$10,923/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,325/mo
Assisted living

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 535048. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-03-06, 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.

What to do next