600 S 27th St., Billings, MT 59101 · Yellowstone County · (406) 259-8000
100 certified beds, about 77 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1987
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 275120 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on February 26, 2026, inspectors cited 9 health deficiencies (the Montana average is 11.2, the national average 9.2).
Of 54 health citations since September 2023, 2 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $21,847 in the last three years; the largest was $21,847, and the latest is dated June 6, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.34 hours per resident per day, against 4.05 across Montana and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.76 of those hours.
72.5% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Montana average 54.8%).
CMS links it to The Charly Bello Family, the Maze Family, the Swain Family, & Walter Myers, an affiliated group of 20 nursing homes.
Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.
Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.
CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 54 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to report an allegation of resident abuse in the required timeline for 2 (#s 6 and 8) of 12 residents sampled for timeliness of reporting abuse allegations.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a thorough investigation of a resident-to-resident physical altercation that was completed for 2 (#s 6 and 8) of 12 residents sampled for abuse. This deficient practice could place the residents involved, or others, at risk for abuse, neglect, and negative physical and psychosocial outcomes from abuse.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure the physician was notified of a resident's change in condition of her mental status for 1 (#1) of 17 sampled residents. This deficient practice resulted in resident #1 being discharged from the facility involuntarily on 5/18/26 at 9:50 p.m. for behaviors related to threatening others in the building, to an unsafe environment.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was involuntarily discharged was discharged to a safe environment; and failed to ensure the medical record included physician documentation of the dangers of the resident remaining in the facility would pose, interventions attempted, and efforts to meet resident's needs for 1 (#1) of 17 sampled residents. This deficient practice resulted in resident #1 being discharged to a home with a caregiver who had expressed she was unable to care for resident #1.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to initiate and implement a baseline care plan for 1 (#1) of 17 sampled residents. This deficient practice resulted in resident #1's needs not being addressed by staff when resident #1 had behaviors.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure infection control processes were followed during wound care to promote healing of a pressure wound for 1 (#15) of 3 sampled residents. This deficient practice had the potential to increase the risk of infection in the resident's Stage III pressure wound.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident, who was at risk of elopement, was supervised and doors were secured for 1 (#5) of 5 sampled residents. This deficient practice resulted in resident #5 eloping from the facility overnight, and found by police the next day.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to report allegations of abuse to the State Survey Agency (SSA) within the required timeframe of an allegation of sexual abuse for 1 (#73); and failed to report the investigative findings for allegations of abuse for 4 (#s 10, 46, 67 and 76) of 25 sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete Quarterly MDS assessments in the required timeframe of 14 days after the ARD for 6 (#s 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, and 55) of 25 sampled resident assessments.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to investigate an allegation of resident-to-resident inappropriate nonconsensual contact for 2 (#s 46 and 73) of 25 sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete a Comprehensive MDS assessment in accordance with the required timeframe of the 14th day of the residents stay for 1 (#67) of 25 sampled residents. The failure had the potential to prevent the resident from achieving their highest practicable level of function.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility licensed nursing staff, assigned to complete treatments on a resident's burn, failed to provide services in accordance with professional standards of nursing practice related to wound assessments, treatments, and documentation of the wound details and current status, for 1 (#73) of 25 sampled residents. The failure placed the resident at elevated risk for the delayed identification of complications and or ineffective treatments not being addressed promptly, due to the lack of wound information in the resident's medical record.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to adhere to a resident's individualized plan of care regarding repositioning and elevation of the heels to prevent skin breakdown for 1 (#79) of 25 sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate an unavoidable accident to the level necessary to ensure appropriate measures were implemented to prevent recurrences for 1 (#73) of 25 sampled residents. The resident spilled soup on himself, causing burn(s), but it was unclear (upon watching video footage) who the person was who provided the resident with the hot soup, and or what action was taken to investigate the incident further in an attempt to prevent future recurrences of this nature. The facility treated the resident's burn(s), which did heal.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop an individualized care plan reflecting a resident's past trauma, did not address his desire for sexual activities on the individualized care plan, or initiate behavior monitoring for potential sexual behaviors; and the facility did not identify the need for additional mental health trauma-based services timely for 1 (#73) of 25 sampled residents. This deficient practice increased the resident's risk of negative outcomes and or behaviors continuing to be unaddressed or unmonitored, which could affect 2 residents (#s 22 and 46).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications to be administered matched the dose on the medication administration record for 2 (#s 14 and 51), and failed to ensure the medication, Voltaren gel, was measured appropriately for 1 (#14) of 25 sampled residents. This deficient practice resulted in a medication error rate of 10.34%.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's right to be free from physical restraints for 1 (#4) of 6 sampled residents, when the resident's stump was secured to the wheelchair with an elastic compression wrap that the resident could not release. There was no physician's order authorizing the use of the restraint, no assessment of the resident's need or risk for the restraint, and no monitoring for the restraint was documented. This deficient practice had the potential to cause an increased risk for impaired skin integrity, falls, and injury.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to complete a baseline care plan within the 48-hour required time frame, that included resident specific needs for activities of daily living for 1 (#3) of 6 sampled residents. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all new admissions into the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record reviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a person-centered, comprehensive care plan that assessed the dental status for 1(#4) of 6 sampled residents. This deficient practice had the potential for resident needs to be unmet by staff.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to revise a resident's care plan, based on the resident's refusal to wear a [NAME] brace, and the staff's application of a compression wrap to maintain stump positioning on the wheelchair leg rest, for 1 (#4) of 6 sampled residents. The care plan did not reflect the restraint assessment findings, risks, or resident preferences related to the refusals of the [NAME] brace.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure grievances were resolved in a timely manner related to delayed meal service for 3 (#s 18, 51, and 62) of 28 sampled residents. The failure placed the residents at elevated nutritional, psychosocial, and medication management risk.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide timely notice to the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman of discharge/transfer for 3 (#s 79, 89 & 91) of 28 sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident meals were served timely for 5 (#s 4, 18, 20, 32, and 72) of 28 sampled and supplemental residents. This deficient practice led to frustration and distress over missing and/or being late to functions.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident was supervised to prevent an elopement for 1 (#31) of 28 sampled residents. Resident #31 eloped from the facility without staff knowledge and was found by police in the park across the street from the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff performed proper suprapubic catheter care and maintenance for 1 (#35) of 28 sampled residents. This deficient practice resulted in an unidentified and untreated skin breakdown around the resident's suprapubic catheter.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow up on a re-weigh, document refusals, and implement interventions aimed at addressing a severe weight loss for 1 (#64) of 28 sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff followed proper infection control practices related to hand hygiene and proper use of PPE during suprapubic catheter care for 1 (#35) of 28 sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to prevent and protect 4 residents (#s 7, 8, 11, and 13) from abuse, and failed to sufficiently monitor #8 when grabbing or intruding on the space of other residents. Resident #8's behavior preempted altercations with #13 when he tried to push or remove #8 from his room. Both resident #8 and #13 sustained injuries in the altercations or when falling during the fighting. The 4 residents identified were out of 6 sampled residents reviewed for resident to resident altercations.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications were given on time, no more than one hour before or one hour after the administration time, for 4 (#s 4, 15, 16, and 19); and failed to give the right medication to the right resident for 2 (#s 15 and 16) of 4 residents sampled for appropriate medication administration.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an accurate and complete medical record for 3 (#s 7, 8, and 13) of 21 sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident was free from neglect, when leaving a resident on the toilet without a call light within reach, for 40 minutes, for 1 (#14); and neglected to ensure dignity was upheld for a resident while being transported to the shower for 1 (#52) who felt humiliated, of 29 sampled residents. This deficient practice caused emotional distress for resident #14 and #52; and increased the risk of skin break down or a fall to occur for resident #14.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store food in accordance with professional standards for food service. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents receiving food from the kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to complete maintenance services necessary to maintain a clean, safe, and sanitary environment for 3 (#s 28, 29, and 72) of 29 sampled residents. Two residents, #s 28 and 29, were aware and not happy about the concerns identified in their rooms.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to cover catheter bags for 2 (#s 2 and 24) of 29 sampled residents, and staff were aware the covers should be utilized for resident dignity, and one resident was not ok with the bag being uncovered.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to supervise the self-administration of insulin for 1 (#29) of 29 sampled residents. This deficient practice increased the risk of a negative outcome if the resident in the event the medication and monitoring were not handled properly by the resident.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to complete a thorough investigation for an event with a staff member accepting money from a resident, in exchange for craft items, for 1 (#41) and failed to identify missing items for 2 (#s 37 and 280) of 29 sampled residents. Residents #37 and #280 were frustrated and concerned about the missing items, and resident #41 was upset and worried about a staff member accepting money from a resident.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to report an abuse allegation to the State Survey Agency within the required timeframe for 1 resident (#14); and failed to report their investigative findings to the State Survey Agency in a timely manner for 1 resident (#52), of 29 sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a complete investigation of a facility reported incident was completed, and failed to maintain and provide thorough investigation of the findings for 1 resident (#52) of 29 sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to accurately assess the dental needs of a resident on the comprehensive MDS assessment for 1 (#29) of 29 sampled residents. This deficient practice increased the risk to cause dental related complications due to lack of accurate assessment.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a baseline care plan, to include pertinent information to safely address resident care needs, within 48 hours of admission, for 2 (#75 and #282) of 29 sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement a comprehensive care plan to include dialysis for 1 (#72); and, failed to include a resident's dental and respiratory needs on the comprehensive assessment, for 1 (#29) of 29 sampled residents. This deficient practice caused staff to not complete cares required post dialysis for resident #72 resulting in a risk for harm related to post-dialyzed complications, and increased the risk for resident #29 having respiratory issues and difficulty with eating.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to thoroughly complete an elopement evaluation for a resident who was an elopement risk, and had attempted to elope. The resident was oriented to person only, upon admission, for 1 (#282) of 29 sampled residents. This deficient practice caused resident #282's responsible party to worry about his safety.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to change oxygen tubing as ordered for 1 (#29) of 29 sampled residents. This deficient practice had the potential to increase the risk of respiratory infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide pre and post assessment care for a resident receiving dialysis for 1 (#72) of 3 sampled residents receiving dialysis. This deficient practice caused staff to not complete cares required post dialysis for resident #72 resulting in a potential for harm, including hypotension, renal failure, and infection at the access site.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure scheduled subcutaneous medications were administered by staff licensed to administer the medications, for 1 (#3) of 29 sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to meet the resident's oral health needs for 1 (#29) of 29 sampled residents. This deficient practice had the potential to cause the resident to choke on their food.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide food that accommodated a resident's intolerances and preferences for 1 (#29) of 29 sampled residents. This deficient practice caused resident #29 to feel frustrated at his preferences not being met.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide written notice of the reason for a facility-initiated transfer to a resident or the resident's representative, for 3 (#s 29, 42, and 56) of 29 sampled residents
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, facility staff failed to provide a Notice of Bed Hold to a resident or the resident's representative, for 2 (#s 29 and 56) of 29 sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, a facility staff member failed to communicate the location of a resident, when the resident was dropped off for an appointment at the dialysis center and left in the bathroom unattended, and the resident was cognitivey impaired, and elopement risk, and unable to assist himself out of dangerous situations. The resident later located in the bathroom and missed his dialysis appointment, for 1 (#1) of 7 sampled residents transported by facility staff for offsite medical appointments.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provided pain medication as ordered to relieve chronic pain, this failure caused the resident to voice pain, for 1 (#69) of 3 sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to prevent Immediate Jeopardy level neglect by refusing to allow a resident re-entry to the facility after transferring to the hospital, then he went AMA, and attempted to return to the facility, which resulted in the resident sitting outside of the facility for several hours in inclement weather, and placing the resident at high risk of a serious adverse outcome, for 1 (#1) of 3 residents sampled for discharge. On 6/6/24 at 1:06 p.m., the facility Administrator and administrative staff were notified of an Immediate Jeopardy involving resident #1, pertaining to F600 - Freedom from Abuse and Neglect. The facility provided an acceptable plan to remove the immediacy for the resident involved, and the time the immediacy was removed was at 4:58 p.m. on 6/6/24. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to report to the State Survey Agency a facility reported event involving a resident who was denied reentry after discharging against medical advice from an acute hospital for 1 (#1) in the required timeframe; and failed to report incident findings to the State Survey Agency within the five-day required time frame for 11 (#s 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14) of 14 sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, facility staff failed to protect 2 (#s 15 and 66) of 9 residents sampled for abuse and neglect; and #66 had extended fear due to conflicts with the room mate, and #15 incurred a fall due to neglect by the staff member.
25 fire safety citations on file: 9 on February 26, 2026, 8 on August 14, 2025, 8 on February 27, 2025.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| June 6, 2024 | Fine | $21,847 |
A payment denial means Medicare and Medicaid stopped paying for new admissions for that period.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | Montana | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.34 | 4.05 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.76 | 0.98 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.84 | 3.59 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.20 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.38 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 72.5% | 54.8% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 66.7% | 48.3% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | not reported |
CMS expects 3.58 hours a day for residents as sick as this home's (its case-mix figure). The staffing star compares the two.
Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In January to March 2026, nursing staff hours per resident were 3.55 on weekdays and 2.84 on weekends, 20% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 2.75 in April to June 2025 to 3.34 in January to March 2026.
| Quarter | All nursing staff | Registered nurses | Weekdays | Weekends | Contract staff share | Days with no RN hours | Residents a day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.34 | 0.76 | 3.55 | 2.84 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 77 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.29 | 0.68 | 3.45 | 2.88 | 1.3% | 0 of 92 | 79 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.22 | 0.73 | 3.37 | 2.85 | 16.4% | 0 of 92 | 79 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 2.75 | 0.56 | 2.91 | 2.32 | 5.8% | 0 of 91 | 80 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Montana, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.91 | 0.89 | 4.10 | 3.46 | 11.6% | 0.4% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Montana, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $19.67 | $18.29 to $22.86 | 4,390 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $29.91 | $27.95 to $32.14 | 1,620 |
| Registered nurses | $41.00 | $38.56 to $48.46 | 10,950 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Montana | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 19.8 | 18.7 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.4 | 2.1 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.3 | 2.9 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.7 | 4.4 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.3 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 16.4 | 17.2 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 7.9 | 6.3 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 19.1 | 20.4 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 19.0 | 19.2 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 19.0 | 14.5 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.9 | 1.4 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.6 | 2.2 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Billings Rehabilitation and Nursing LLC's Medicare short-stay residents. How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
US median of homes 51.5% · Montana: 7 better, 2 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 20 eligible stays.
9.2% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Montana: 0 better, 0 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 33 eligible stays.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
US median of homes 7.1% · Montana: 0 better, 0 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 22 eligible stays.
71.4% this home
Median of homes: Montana58.5% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 42 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Montana0.3% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 59 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Montana2.8% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 59 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Montana97.0% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 17 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: BILLINGS REHABILITATION AND NURSING LLC. CMS links this home to The Charly Bello Family, the Maze Family, the Swain Family, & Walter Myers, a group of 20 nursing homes averaging 1.7 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Charly Bello Family Limited Partnership | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 30% | 07/01/2023 |
| Cashmer LLC | Direct ownership interest | Organization | 07/01/2023 | |
| Fey, Kristin | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 24% | 07/01/2023 |
| Fey, Daniel | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 07/01/2023 | |
| Swain, Cameron | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 07/01/2023 | |
| Swain, Serene | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 07/01/2023 | |
| Myers, Walter | Corporate officer | Individual | 07/01/2023 | |
| Swain, Jared | Corporate officer | Individual | 07/01/2023 | |
| Cottonwood Healthcare LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 07/01/2023 | |
| Professional Business Advisors LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 07/01/2023 | |
| Wipfli LLP | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 07/01/2023 | |
| Anderson, Wendy | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/01/2023 | |
| Riggin, Andrew | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/01/2023 | |
| Severa, Larry | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/01/2023 | |
| Cottonwood Healthcare LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/14/2025 | |
| Professional Business Advisors LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/07/2025 | |
| Wipfli LLP | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/07/2025 | |
| Anderson, Wendy | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/01/2023 | |
| Riggin, Andrew | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/01/2023 | |
| Severa, Larry | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/01/2023 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in Montana. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.