12100 W 109th Street, Overland Park, KS 66210 · Johnson County · (913) 469-4210
120 certified beds, about 100 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1989
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 175182 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on January 28, 2026, inspectors cited 4 health deficiencies (the Kansas average is 9.5, the national average 9.2).
None of its 50 health citations since September 2022 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
CMS lists 4 fines totaling $23,261 in the last three years; the largest was $6,369, and the latest is dated February 20, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.43 hours per resident per day, against 4.07 across Kansas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.49 of those hours.
38.0% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Kansas average 48.1%).
CMS links it to Delmar Gardens, an affiliated group of 12 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 50 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure routine catheter (a flexible tube inserted through a narrow opening into a body cavity, particularly the bladder, for removing fluid) care was performed per professional standards of practice for Resident (R)1.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 97 residents, with one kitchen and dining room. Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to follow sanitary dietary standards related to food and equipment storage.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 97 residents. The sample included 21 residents, with one resident reviewed for quality of care. Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to follow a physician order for daily weights to monitor for fluid overload for Resident (R) 9.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 97 residents. The sample included 21 residents, with one resident reviewed for respiratory care. Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure Resident (R) 4's nebulizer (a device that changes liquid medication into a mist easily inhaled into the lungs) mask was stored in a sanitary manner.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 97 residents. The sample included 21 residents, with one resident reviewed for trauma-informed care (treatment or care directed to prevent re-experiencing or reducing the effects of traumatic events). Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to identify trauma-based triggers related to Resident (R) 6's post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD- a mental disorder characterized by an acute emotional response to a traumatic event or situation involving severe environmental stress) and failed to implement individualized interventions to prevent re-traumatization.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 81 residents. Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to designate a staff member with the required qualification and certification as the Infection Preventionist, who was responsible for the facility's Infection Prevention and Control Program. This deficient practice placed all residents at risk for lack of identification, tracking/trending, and treatment of infections.
Inspectors wroteThe facility reported a census of 81 residents. The sample included 21 residents. Five Certified Nurse Aides (CNA) were sampled for prevention of abuse, neglect, and exploitation training. Based on record review, and interviews the facility failed to provide evidence of the required prevention of abuse, neglect, and exploitation training for the two of the five CNAs that were sampled.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 81 residents. The sample included 21 residents and five Certified Nurse Aides (CNAs) reviewed for required in-service training. Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure five of the five CNA staff reviewed had the required 12 hours of in-service education and two of the five CNA staff had the required in-service education for dementia (a progressive mental disorder characterized by failing memory, confusion) care. This placed the residents at risk for inadequate care.
Inspectors wroteThe facility reported a census of 81. Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews, the facility failed to adequately address and resolve recurring issues reported by the Resident Council. This deficient practice placed the residents at risk for decreased psychosocial well-being and impaired quality of life. Findings Included: - A review of the Facility's Council Minutes from 03/2023 through 03/2024 indicated the council had recurring concerns with missing property and clothing, slow call light response and staff response time, staff cell phone use, lack of healthy snacks, specialized diets, and grievances not being resolved. The 03/2023 Resident Council Minutes documented recurring concerns related to call lights not being answered in the evening and missed showers for residents. [...]
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 81 residents. The sample includes 21 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to implement a system to allow residents and/or their representatives to file grievances anonymously. The facility additionally failed to maintain the results of all grievances for the required three years. This deficient practice placed the residents at risk for decreased psychosocial well-being and unresolved grievances and concerns. Findings Included- - A review of the facility's Grievance Logs from March 2023 through March 2024 revealed the facility was missing logs from November 2023 through February 2024. The facility was unable to provide the missing documentation as requested on 03/13/24. [...]
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 81 residents. The sample included 21 residents. Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to fully complete the comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment Section V, Care Area Assessment Summary (CAA) for Resident (R) 1, R3, R16, R17, R30, R3, R50, R52, R67, R80, R81, and R286 to include an analysis and rationale for care planning decisions. This placed these residents at risk for not accurately reflecting each resident's needs to develop an individualized comprehensive plan of care.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 81 residents. The sample included 21 residents with three residents reviewed for accident/fall prevention. Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to ensure an environment free from accident hazards when staff failed to secure chemicals in a safe, locked area, and out of reach of the thirteen cognitively impaired, independently mobile residents. The facility additionally failed to utilize safe assistive techniques related to Resident (R)61's wheelchair foot pedals and safe mechanical lift transfer techniques for R17 and R30. This deficient practice placed the residents at risk for preventable accidents and injuries. Findings Included: - On 03/11/24 at 07:14 AM a walkthrough of the facility was completed. [...]
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 81 residents. The sample included 21 residents and two medication carts. Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to provide a consistent reconciliation of controlled drugs at the end of each work shift on one cart. This placed the 16 residents with controlled substances on the cart at risk for misappropriation of medications.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 81 residents. The facility had one main kitchen and three dining areas. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure food was appropriately labeled and dated during storage. The facility failed to ensure tableware was stored appropriately before meal service. The facility failed to ensure dining staff handled plates in a sanitary manner. This placed the residents at risk for foodborne illness.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 81 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure proper infection control standards were followed related to the disinfecting of shared equipment and the sanitary storage of respiratory equipment. The facility failed to ensure the appropriate chemicals were used to clean a clostridium difficile (C-diff: contagious bacteria characterized by foul-smelling frequent loose bowel movements) isolation room and failed to post the correct type of isolation precautions for Resident (R) 236, who had a C-diff infection. This deficient practice placed the residents at risk for complications related to infectious diseases.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 81 residents. The sample included 21 residents with two residents reviewed for dignity. Based on observation, record review, and interviews the facility failed to provide care in a respectful, dignified manner for Resident (R) 286 when staff failed to place R286's catheter (a flexible tube inserted through a narrow opening into a body cavity, particularly the bladder, for removing fluid) urine collection bag inside a dignity bag and failed to provide a dignified dining experience for R16 when staff stood beside R16 while assisting with a meal. This placed the residents at risk for impaired dignity and quality of life.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 81 residents. The sample included 21 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to include Resident (R) 12 in the development and planning of the resident's care plan, which placed R12 at risk of impaired care and autonomy.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 81 residents. The sample included 21 residents with two reviewed for reasonable accommodation of needs related to assistive devices. Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure Resident (R)80's call light remained within his reach. The facility additionally failed to honor R12's preferences related to his bathing. This deficient practice left both residents vulnerable to impaired care and decreased autonomy. Findings Included: [...]
Inspectors wroteThe facility reported a census of 81 residents. The sample included 21 residents with two residents reviewed for personal property. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident (R) 81's right to private communications when R81's package was opened. This placed R81 at risk for impaired privacy and decreased autonomy.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 81 with 21 residents included in the sample. The facility identified seven residents who were discharged from Medicare Part A services. Based on interview and record review the facility failed to issue CMS (Center for Medicare/Medicaid Services) Skilled Nursing Facility Advance Beneficiary Notification (SNF ABN) form 10055 (the form used to notify Medicare A participants of potential financial liability when a Medicare Part A episode ends) for Resident (R) 12 and R 18. This failure placed the residents at risk for decreased autonomy and impaired decision-making.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 81 residents. The sample included 21 residents with three residents sampled for discharge. Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to provide notification to the State Long-term Care Ombudsman (LTCO) for Resident (R) 43 and R16's facility-initiated transfers. The facility failed to provide written notice of transfer as soon as practicable to R43 and R16 or their representative for their facility-initiated transfers. This deficient practice had the risk of miscommunication between the facility and resident/family and possible missed opportunities for healthcare service for R43 and R16.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 81 residents. The sample included 21 residents with three residents sampled for discharge. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide a bed hold with the required information to Resident (R) 43 and R16 and/or to their family representative when they were transferred to the hospital. This deficient practice placed the residents at risk for impaired ability to return to the facility or his same room.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 81 residents. The sample included 21 residents. Based on observation, record review and interviews, the facility failed to complete a comprehensive Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment of Resident (R) 24 after the addition of hospice services to identify needs, in order to develop an individualized comprehensive plan of care.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 81 residents. The sample included 21 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to complete an accurate Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident (R) 47's status regarding the use of a restraint. This deficient practice placed R47 at risk for inappropriate care planning and care needs.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 81 residents. The sample included 21 residents with 21 residents reviewed for baseline care plans. Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to identify Resident (R)82's required level of care assistance and her high-risk medication (Seroquel- antipsychotic medication used to treat major mental conditions that cause a break from reality) on her care plan. The facility additionally failed to complete a baseline care plan for R81. This deficient practice placed both residents at risk for preventable falls and injuries due to uncommunicated care needs.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 81. The sample included 21 with 21 reviewed for comprehensive care plans. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to develop comprehensive care plans for Resident (R)80, R30, and R81. The deficient practice placed the residents at risk for impaired care due to uncommunicated care needs. Findings Included: -R80 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. [...]
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 81 residents. The sample included 21 residents with 21 residents reviewed for care plan revisions. Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to revise Resident (R)61's plan of care to include her spironolactone medication (diuretic- medication to promote the formation and excretion of urine) and R24's plan of care to include her Eliquis medication (anticoagulant- used to treat and prevent blood clots). The facility additionally failed to revise R52's Care Plan to include her ordered left-hand splint. The deficient practice placed the residents at risk for impaired care due to uncommunicated care needs. Findings Included: - R61 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. [...]
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 81 residents. The sample included 21 residents with five residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs). Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to provide the necessary assistance with personal hygiene for Resident (R) 30. This deficient practice placed R30 at risk for poor hygiene, decreased self-esteem, and impaired dignity.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 81 residents. The sample included 21 residents with five residents reviewed for quality of care. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide services to maintain Resident (R) 31's highest practicable level of physical function and promote comfort. The facility further failed to implement the protective sleeve (sleeve used to protect the skin on the arms and legs against damage caused by friction and shearing) to R67's right arm per the order and care plan. This deficient practice placed R31 at risk for increased impairment, pain, and contractures (abnormal fixation of a joint or muscle) and placed R67 at risk for skin injury.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 81 residents. The sample included 21 with five reviewed for pressure ulcers (localized injury to the skin and/or underlying tissue usually over a bony prominence, as a result of pressure, or pressure in combination with shear and/or friction). Based on interviews, observations, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure Resident (R)80's low air-loss mattress pump was set to a tolerable comfort level and correct for his current weight. The facility additionally failed to utilize pressure-relieving boots for R30. This deficient practice placed both residents at risk for complications related to skin breakdown and pressure ulcers. Findings Included: [...]
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 81 residents. The sample included 21 residents with five residents reviewed for position, and mobility. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident (R) 52's splint was applied as directed, to prevent an avoidable reduction of range of motion (ROM) and/or mobility of her left hand. This deficient practice left R52 at risk for further decline and decreased ROM or mobility.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 81 residents. The sample included 21 residents with two residents reviewed for respiratory care. Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to provide adequate respiratory care and services for Resident (R)12 when staff failed to ensure orders to clarify settings and failed to ensure sanitary storage for R12's respiratory equipment. This placed R12 at an increased risk for respiratory infection and complications.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 81 residents. The sample included 21 residents of which two residents were reviewed for pain. Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to recognize, evaluate, manage, and treat the underlying cause of pain for Resident (R) 286. This deficient practice resulted in unmanaged pain which also placed the resident at risk for impaired mobility and diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 81 residents. The sample included 21 residents with five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to ensure the Consultant Pharmacist (CP) identified and reported Resident (R) 1 and R16's medications lacked an indication for use. The deficient practice placed the residents at risk of unnecessary medication administration and adverse side effects.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 81 residents. The sample included 21 residents with five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to identify Resident (R) 1 and R16's medications lacked an indication for use. The deficient practice placed the residents at risk of unnecessary medication administration and adverse side effects.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 81 residents. The sample included 21 residents with five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident (R) 16's psychotropic (alters mood or thought) medications had an indication for use. The deficient practice placed the residents at risk of unnecessary medication administration and adverse side effects.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 81 residents. The sample included 21 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide and serve food substitutions that accommodated Resident (R) 3's preferences. This placed the resident at risk for impaired autonomy and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 81 residents. The sample included 21 residents with five residents reviewed for immunizations. Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure that Resident (R) 16 and R82 were offered and educated regarding the Prevnar 20 (PCV20) pneumococcal (type of bacterial infection) vaccination or assessed by the physician to determine if contraindicated as recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). This deficient practice placed these residents at risk of acquiring, transmitting, or experiencing complications from pneumococcal disease.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 88 residents. The sample included 18 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to follow-up or resolve resident grievances. This deficient practice placed residents at risk for unresolved concerns.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 88 residents. The sample included 18 residents with four residents reviewed for behaviors. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failure to provide the necessary behavior cares and services for Resident (R) 87 (refer to F740) affected the quality of life for R16, R35, R53, R60 who were affected by R87's behaviors. This placed the affected residents at risk for increased stress, discomfort and social isolation.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 88 residents. The sample included 18 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to secure chemicals in a safe, locked area out of reach of the 19 cognitively impaired, independently mobile residents. This deficient practice placed the affected residents at risk for accidents.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 88 residents. The sample included 18 residents. Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to dispose of expired Juven (therapeutic nutrition powder) and antibiotic (medication used to treat infections caused by bacteria) medication. This deficient practice had the risk for physical complications and ineffective treatment for affected residents.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 88 residents. The sample included 18 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to follow a recipe during puree preparation for five residents who received a pureed diet. This deficient practice had the risk for altered nutritional status, unpalatable food, and unwarranted physical complications.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 88 residents. The sample included 18 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to store, prepare, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for the 84 residents who received their meals from the facility kitchen. This placed the 84 residents at risk for foodborne illness.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 88 residents. The sample included 18 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide respect and dignity during the meal for Resident (R) 83. This placed the resident at risk for impaired psychosocial well-being.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 88 residents. The sample included 18 residents with four reviewed for behaviors. Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS) to reflect Resident (R) 87's behaviors and as a result did not capture the affect the behaviors had on R87 and other residents. This placed the resident at risk for continued and worsened behaviors.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 88 residents. The sample included 18 residents with four residents reviewed for behaviors. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to implement interventions in an attempt to redirect or de-escalate Resident (R) 87's behaviors as directed by her plan of care. This placed the resident at risk for continued and worsened behaviors.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 88 residents. The sample included 18 residents with five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Consultant Pharmacist (CP) identified and reported to the facility the staff's failure to correctly hold or administer blood pressure medication for Resident (R) 18, as directed by the physician. This deficient practice placed R18 at risk for uncontrolled blood pressures and unnecessary medication use.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 88 residents. The sample included 18 residents with five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to correctly hold or administer blood pressure medication for Resident (R) 18, as directed by the physician. This deficient practice placed R18 at risk for uncontrolled blood pressures and unnecessary medication use.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 88 residents. The sample included 18 residents with five reviewed for unnecessary medications. Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to provide a stop date or a rationale for extended use for an as needed (PRN) psychotropic medication (medication used to treat moods and behaviors) for Resident (R) 2, and a stop date for a PRN antipsychotic medication (medication used to treat psychosis and other mental conditions) for R87. This placed the residents at risk for unnecessary psychotropic medications and adverse side effects.
27 fire safety citations on file: 11 on January 28, 2026, 13 on March 13, 2024, 3 on September 15, 2022.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| February 20, 2024 | Fine | $6,369 |
| February 12, 2024 | Fine | $5,790 |
| January 22, 2024 | Fine | $5,698 |
| December 26, 2023 | Fine | $5,404 |
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 | Kansas | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.43 | 4.07 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.49 | 0.71 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.08 | 3.60 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.41 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.52 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 38.0% | 48.1% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 16.7% | 42.0% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.43 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 3.57 on weekdays and 3.08 on weekends, 14% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 1.1% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.06 in April to June 2025 to 3.43 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 | 3.43 | 0.49 | 3.57 | 3.08 | 1.1% | 0 of 90 | 100 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.46 | 0.53 | 3.58 | 3.17 | 4.0% | 0 of 92 | 104 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.32 | 0.54 | 3.63 | 2.53 | 2.3% | 0 of 92 | 97 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.06 | 0.62 | 3.88 | 1.03 | 0.1% | 0 of 91 | 90 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Kansas, Jan to Mar 2026 | 4.01 | 0.67 | 4.19 | 3.56 | 4.8% | 0.6% 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.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kansas, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $18.27 | $17.41 to $21.24 | 24,610 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $29.69 | $27.05 to $33.40 | 7,530 |
| Registered nurses | $38.14 | $35.24 to $45.53 | 33,800 |
| 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 | Kansas | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 23.9 | 17.9 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.2 | 1.6 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.5 | 2.9 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.4 | 4.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.4 | 1.9 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 10.0 | 16.2 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.4 | 4.4 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 14.3 | 18.1 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 26.3 | 22.4 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 10.6 | 11.5 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 4.9 | 1.8 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.8 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Delmar Gardens of Overland Park's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (53.7% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
53.7% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Kansas: 42 better, 17 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. 43 eligible stays.
13.1% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Kansas: 3 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. 86 eligible stays.
8.4% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Kansas: 3 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. 42 eligible stays.
52.4% this home
Median of homes: Kansas55.7% · 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. 21 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Kansas0.0% · 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. 33 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Kansas2.1% · 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. 33 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: Newly certified nursing home with less than 12-15 months of data available or the nursing opened less than 6 months ago, and there were no data to submit or claims for this measure.
Median of homes: Kansas99.3% · 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.
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: DELMAR GARDENS OF OVERLAND PARK OPERATING LLC. CMS links this home to Delmar Gardens, a group of 12 nursing homes averaging 3 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Delmar Gardens Enterprises Inc | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 03/11/2003 |
| Gabe Grossberg and George Grossberg, Trustees of the Henry and Barbara | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 8% | 03/11/2003 |
| George Grossberg and Gabe Grossberg, Trustees of the Henry and Barbara | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 8% | 03/11/2003 |
| Goldberg-Nom LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 25% | 03/11/2003 |
| Non-Gst Family Trust Est U/W of Israel Goldberg Fbo Janice Bitanski | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 6% | 04/10/2013 |
| Non-Gst Family Trust Established U/W of Israel Goldberg Fbo Harry Zvi | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 6% | 04/10/2013 |
| Non-Gstfamily Trust Est U/W Israel Goldberg Fbo Diane Fredman | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 6% | 04/10/2013 |
| Grossberg, Gabe | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 16% | 03/11/2003 |
| Grossberg, George | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 11% | 03/11/2003 |
| Conekin, Tammy | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 07/10/2023 | |
| Hill, Amanda | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 09/10/2021 | |
| Grossberg, Gabe | Corporate officer | Individual | 03/11/2003 | |
| Marx, Kenneth | Corporate officer | Individual | 06/11/2019 | |
| Oppenheimer, Howard | Corporate officer | Individual | 03/11/2003 | |
| Delmar Gardens Management Services Inc | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 04/01/2005 |
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.