Home / Colorado / Grand Junction
2845 N 15th St., Grand Junction, CO 81506 · Mesa County · (970) 245-0022
130 certified beds, about 107 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1994
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 065331 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on May 21, 2026, inspectors cited 6 health deficiencies (the Colorado average is 8.7, the national average 9.2).
Of 33 health citations since December 2022, 3 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $28,685 in the last three years; the largest was $17,505, and the latest is dated August 21, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.40 hours per resident per day, against 3.72 across Colorado and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.69 of those hours.
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 33 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure food was stored, prepared, distributed and served under sanitary conditions in the main kitchen. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure staff followed appropriate hand hygiene practices during the meal service.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and interviews the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible for two (#60 and #84) out of six residents reviewed out of 41 sample residents and eight of 12 resident rooms reviewed. Specifically the facility failed to:-Implement a fall risk care plan for Resident #60;-Ensure thorough root cause analysis were completed for Resident #84 after multiple falls; -Ensure Resident #84's fall interventions were consistently in place and documented on his care plan; and, -Ensure tap water in the facility was kept within a safe temperature range.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to provide and document sufficient discharge preparation for two (#111 and #12) of two residents reviewed for a safe and orderly discharge out of 41 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure a written discharge bed hold notice was provided to Resident #111 and Resident #12 or their representative completed at the time Resident #111 and Resident #12 were transferred to the hospital.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to provide the necessary treatment and services to prevent and treat pressure injuries for one (#9) of six residents reviewed for pressure injuries out of 41 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure staff consistently implemented care planned interventions for Resident #9, who had an unstageable pressure injury to her right heel.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to maintain an effective infection prevention and control program to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment to help prevent the development and transmission of disease on one out of six units. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure hand hygiene was conducted appropriately during wound care for Resident #9 and Resident #55.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to establish an effective antibiotic stewardship program to include antibiotic use protocols and a system to monitor antibiotic use for one (#92) of two residents reviewed for antibiotic stewardship out of 41 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Resident #92's antibiotic therapy for doxycycline medication was reviewed for continued use on an ongoing basis.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure care for residents was provided timely and in a manner that maintained or enhanced the residents' dignity for one (#1) of three residents reviewed for dignity out of four sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Resident #1's behavior contract was not used as a threat.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interviews the facility failed to ensure that one (#2) of three residents were free from abuse out of four sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to protect Resident #2 from verbal abuse by Resident #1
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, and interviews, the facility failed to periodically update resident contact information for one (#2) out of three residents reviewed out of five sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to obtain and Resident #2's power of attorney's (POA) phone number.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure one (#1) of three residents out of six sample residents received prompt efforts to resolve grievances. Specifically, the facility failed to timely address, communicate and attempt to resolve concerns related to not receiving a hair cut for Resident #1.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure two (#2 and #1) of three residents out of five sample residents received dental services timely. Specifically, the facility failed to:-Identify and refer Resident #2 to the dentist timely after she lost her left upper canine tooth; and, -Resident #1 was offered routine dental care.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure one (#1) of three residents were provided the care and services necessary to ensure a safe discharge from the facility to the community out of seven sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to:-Allow Resident #2 to return to the facility after an unplanned discharge to the hospital;-Provide documentation made by Resident #2's physician, including the specific resident needs the facility could not meet, the facility's efforts to meet those needs and the specific services the receiving facility would provide to meet the needs of the resident which could not be met at the current facility; and,-Reassess Resident #2 for readmission after he was stabilized at the hospital and ready to return to the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to revise and implement an effective discharge plan for one (#2) of three residents reviewed for discharge planning out of seven sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to:-Ensure the discharge planning was process was documented, including the reason for discharge in Resident #2's electronic medical record (EMR); -Notify Resident #2 and/or Resident #2's representative, in writing, of the discharge, including the reason for the move, the effective date of discharge, the location where the resident was being discharged to, a statement of the resident's appeal rights and the name, address and telephone number of the office of the state long term care ombudsman; and,-Notify the facility's ombudsman of Resident #2's discharge in writing in a timely manner.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a copy of medical records were provided in a timely manner for one (#1) of three residents out of five sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure medical records were provided in a timely manner upon request for Resident #1 from his resident representative.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure three (#1, #8 and #6) of three residents were kept free from abuse out of nine sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Protect Resident #1 and Resident #8 from being sexually abused by Resident #2; and, -Protect Resident #6 from physical abuse by Resident #5.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in a sanitary manner in the main kitchen. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure: -Appropriate hand washing and glove usage in the main kitchen; -The cook wore a beard net while serving food; -Food was reheated appropriately; and, -Hand hygiene was offered to residents during meal times.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the self administration of medications was clinically appropriate for two (#7 and #46) of eight residents reviewed for medication errors out of 38 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to implement an interdisciplinary team (IDT) approach to assess if Resident #7 and #46 were clinically safe and appropriate for self-administration of medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents received proper respiratory treatment and care for three (#37, #55 and #77) of four residents reviewed for supplemental oxygen use out of 38 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Administer oxygen in accordance with the physician's order for Resident #55 and Resident #77; and, -Ensure Resident #37 had a physician's order for oxygen use.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure all drugs and biologicals were properly labeled and stored in accordance with professional standards in one of two medication storage rooms and two of five medication storage carts. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure all medications and biologicals were stored appropriately in a secure location; -Ensure medications were appropriately labeled with resident names and dates they were opened; and, -Ensure medications were not expired.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and interviews the facility failed to ensure nine (#3, #1, #22, #71, #59, #14, #41, #20 and #44) of 13 residents with an order for an altered mechanical soft texture, out of 38 sample residents received food and fluids prepared in a form designed to meet their needs per physician orders.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure care for residents in a manner and in an environment that maintains or enhances each resident's dignity and respect, in full recognition of his or her individuality for two (#186 and #193) of three residents reviewed for respect and dignity out of 38 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure Resident #186 had privacy when she slept in a shirt and briefs; and, -Ensure staff answered Resident #193's call light timely to prevent the resident from experiencing an incontinent episode.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the right to participate in the development and implementation of his or her person-centered plan of care was provided for one (#44) of two residents out of 38 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to notify or involve the resident and/or the appointed medical durable power of attorney (MDPOA) of care conference discussions for Resident #44.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure two (#6 and #52) of two residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL) out of 38 sample residents received appropriate treatment and services to maintain or improve his or her abilities. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Resident #52 and Resident #6, who were dependent on staff for care, were provided showers consistently with their plan of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was less than five percent. Specifically, the facility had a medication error rate of 16.00%, which was four errors out of 25 opportunities for error.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from significant medication errors for two (#46 and #193) of eight residents reviewed for medication errors out of 38 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Administer Resident #46's midodrine (a medication used to treat low blood pressure) appropriately according to manufacturer's guidelines, and; -Administer Resident #193's insulin according to the physician's order.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to provide routine and emergency dental services to meet the needs of each resident for one (#43) of one resident reviewed for dental services out of 38 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure a timely response to replacing Resident #43's missing dentures and identify the potential impact on her eating and swallowing due to her history of swallowing difficulties;. -Ensure Resident #42 was provided with proper oral care to identify potential mouth sores as a result of her missing bottom dentures; and, -Ensure proper communication between staff members, departments, and facility vendors regarding Resident #43's needs and/or concerns related to her missing dentures.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to inform one (#41) of three out of 38 sample residents of changes in their services covered by Medicare Part A in a timely manner. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Provide a Notice of Medicare Provider Non-Coverage (NOMNC) to Resident #41 two days prior to discharge of Medicare Part A funded services; and, -Provide the Skilled Nursing Facility-Advance Beneficiary Notice (SNF ABN) when Resident #41 continued to reside in the facility following his discharge from Medicare Part A services.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure one (#1) of three residents remained free from accident hazards out of 16 sample residents. The facility failed to ensure a safe environment and prevent major injury for a resident at risk for elopement and falls. Resident #1 was let out of the facility doors by a facility visitor on 11/17/23. The resident was wearing a wander guard device but the device was not functioning properly and the wander guard system door panel did not sound an alarm to alert staff the resident was exiting the facility. The resident rolled out in the parking lot with her wheelchair and hit a parking lot bumper. Resident #1's wheelchair tipped over and the resident landed on the parking lot asphalt. A facility vendor who was outside observed the resident in the parking lot and alerted staff. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure care for residents was provided in a manner and in an environment that maintained or enhanced the residents' dignity and respect in full recognition of their individuality. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure residents did not wait for extended periods of time after the posted meal time to receive their meals.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that all residents were free from abuse, neglect, and exploitation, for two residents (#14 and #420) in two allegations of abuse of five allegations reviewed out of 26 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and effective interventions to prevent repeated incidents of resident-to-resident verbal altercations between Residents #14 and #420. Resident #420 and Resident #14 were roommates at one point in time while living in the same facility. As time went by the two stopped getting along, and Resident #14 moved to a new room on the opposite side of the facility. Still Resident #420 continued to target Resident #14 when he saw him in common areas. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure two (#60 and #47) of four residents reviewed for pressure injuries received care and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to prevent development and promote healing of pressure injuries, out of 26 sample residents. Resident #60, who was at risk for wound development due to immobility, admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of cerebral infarction (stroke), hemiplegia/hemiparesis (paralysis), enteral feeding, dysphagia and excoriation to her coccyx/sacrum. Resident #60 developed and redeveloped wounds to her sacral area (see record review below). On 11/16/22 Resident #60 developed a stage 3 wound to her coccyx/sacrum. The facility failed to complete weekly wound assessments in their entirety to promote wound healing from 11/16/22 to 12/9/22. [...]
Inspectors wroteIII. Unsanitary room cleaning A. Facility policy The Maintaining a Clean Environment Policy/Procedure, revised September 2022, was provided by the director of nurses (DON) on 12/21/22 at 8:00 a.m. It revealed, in pertinent part, Items and surfaces that collect dust or secretions may harbor microorganisms that can be transmitted to and potentially infect susceptible residents, visitors or employees. Points commonly and frequently touched, such as call buttons, and light switches. These items also will be a major focus when there is known illness in the facility. B. Observations On 12/20/22 at 11:15 a.m., housekeeper (HSK) #1 was observed beginning the cleaning task of room #F8. She performed hand hygiene then donned gloves. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to provide necessary respiratory care consistent with professional standards of practice in coordination with the resident's care plan, goals and preferences for two (#5 and #64) out of 26 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure appropriate oxygen titration orders were written, implemented, and care planned for Resident #5; and, -Ensure Resident #64 had complete orders for use of continuous positive airway pressure therapy (CPAP) to include machine setting duration of use and orders for cleaning the device between resident use.
21 fire safety citations on file: 11 on May 21, 2026, 5 on April 11, 2024, 5 on December 22, 2022.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| August 21, 2025 | Fine | $17,505 |
| January 3, 2024 | Fine | $11,180 |
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 | Colorado | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.40 | 3.72 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.69 | 0.82 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.75 | 3.29 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.28 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.43 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | not reported | 47.1% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | not reported | 44.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.29 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 3.66 on weekdays and 2.75 on weekends, 25% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 3.7% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.97 in April to June 2025 to 3.40 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 | 3.40 | 0.69 | 3.66 | 2.75 | 3.7% | 0 of 90 | 107 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.85 | 0.79 | 4.04 | 3.35 | 2.4% | 0 of 92 | 101 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 4.00 | 0.73 | 4.23 | 3.41 | 6.2% | 0 of 92 | 101 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.97 | 0.73 | 4.21 | 3.39 | 0.2% | 0 of 91 | 96 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Colorado, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.59 | 0.76 | 3.75 | 3.18 | 5.9% | 0.2% 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Colorado, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $22.78 | $21.42 to $24.00 | 22,240 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $35.52 | $29.76 to $38.37 | 4,920 |
| Registered nurses | $48.20 | $40.67 to $52.37 | 54,490 |
| 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 | Colorado | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 23.4 | 13.4 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.0 | 0.6 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.9 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.6 | 3.4 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.4 | 1.6 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 26.1 | 13.3 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.3 | 3.4 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 15.7 | 20.0 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 25.3 | 20.3 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 13.6 | 12.1 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.1 | 1.4 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.1 | 1.7 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Larchwood Health and Rehab LLC's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (55.0% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
55.0% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Colorado: 39 better, 8 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. 85 eligible stays.
9.3% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Colorado: 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. 109 eligible stays.
6.2% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Colorado: 4 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. 79 eligible stays.
63.1% this home
Median of homes: Colorado65.0% · 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. 65 residents counted.
2.4% this home
Median of homes: Colorado0.0% · 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. 82 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Colorado0.0% · 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. 82 residents counted.
100.0% this home
Median of homes: Colorado99.5% · 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. 34 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: LARCHWOOD INNS INC.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jiles, Jeanane | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 50% | 12/01/2014 |
| Jiles, Jon | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 50% | 12/01/2014 |
| Jiles, Jeanane | Corporate director | Individual | 12/01/2014 | |
| Jiles, Jon | Corporate director | Individual | 12/01/2014 | |
| Wood, Melissa K. | Corporate director | Individual | 01/31/2012 | |
| Jiles, Jon | Corporate officer | Individual | 12/01/2014 | |
| Wood, Melissa K. | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/31/2012 |
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 Colorado. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.