445 W. Holcomb Lane, Reno, NV 89511 · Washoe County · (775) 851-0123
198 certified beds, about 122 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1991
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 295050 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on July 1, 2025, inspectors cited 26 health deficiencies (the Nevada average is 9.7, the national average 9.2).
None of its 53 health citations since August 2023 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $22,885 in the last three years; the largest was $14,175, and the latest is dated July 20, 2026.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.91 hours per resident per day, against 4.34 across Nevada and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 1.17 of those hours.
31.3% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Nevada average 45.1%).
CMS links it to Life Care Centers of America, an affiliated group of 194 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 53 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteResident #229 Resident #229 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with a diagnosis of encounter for surgical aftercare following surgery on the digestive system. Resident #229's clinical record documented the resident was moved to a different room in the facility on 02/19/2025 and on 02/21/2025. A Room Change Notification form dated 02/19/2025, documented Resident #229 was moved from room [ROOM NUMBER]-1 to 208-1. The reason for the room change was documented as resident request. The form was signed by the resident. A Diet Order and Communication form dated 02/21/2025, included a handwritten checkbox labeled Room Change. The form lacked documentation related to the reason for the room change, the resident being informed prior to the room change, and a signature from the resident. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure 1) handwashing stations were in working order and stocked with soap and disposable gloves, 2) dry food was sanitarily stored, 3) a griddle's grease trap was maintained in clean working condition, and 4) a refrigerator was monitored for safe storage temperatures. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents in the facility by increasing the risk of infection and foodborne illnesses.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, document review, and interview the facility failed to demonstrate effective administration by not ensuring the facility had a process for written notification of resident room changes and the facility's influenza (flu) and pneumonia (PNA) vaccination program included 1) screening residents for eligibility to receive the vaccines, 2) the provision of education related to the risk and benefits of the vaccines to residents and/or the resident's representative preventing the resident or the resident's representative from making an informed decision regarding the vaccines, 3) a process for determining/selecting the correct PNA vaccine for each resident per the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance. This failure resulted in substandard quality of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and document review, the facility's Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee failed to ensure corrective action was implemented to address identified problems related to the lack of screening and education for influenza and pneumococcal vaccinations. This deficient practice had the potential to result in the exposure of all residents, staff and visitors to harmful infectious agents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review, document review, and interview, the facility's Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI)/Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) Committee failed to identify, develop and implement plans of action for systemic issues related to resident room changes and the facility bowel and bladder program.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure that 38 of 38 residents (Resident #46, #270, #72, #83, #55, #421, #75, #277, #85, #54, #68, #61, #10, #222, #69, #4, #78, #20, #171, #1, #32, #38, #223, #48, #16, #35, #27, #19, #74, #96, #93, #34, #7, #2, #15, #9, #25, and #91) reviewed for immunizations were appropriately screened for eligibility to receive influenza (flu) and pneumococcal vaccines (PNA). The facility did not consistently determine the correct vaccine for each resident, provide education regarding the specific vaccines for which residents were eligible, or ensure that informed consent forms were properly completed and signed. Additionally, residents who were eligible to receive influenza or pneumococcal vaccines did not consistently receive the vaccinations as required. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, clinical record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure consents for psychotropic medications were obtained for 1 of 24 sampled Residents (Resident #421). The deficient practice had the potential to deprive a resident/resident representative of the right to be informed of the medications' purpose, risks, benefits, and potential side effects.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure a Minimum Data Set 3.0 (MDS) assessment was accurate for 3 of 24 sampled residents (Resident #421, #2 and #171). This deficient practice had the potential to deprive residents of necessary care and services relative to current health management needs in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure an initial Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) was completed prior to a resident's admission for 1 of 24 sampled residents (Resident #421). The deficient practice had a potential for a newly admitted resident not to receive the necessary screening for the appropriateness to be admitted to a skilled nursing facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, document review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a baseline care plan was developed to address the care and interventions for mental health diagnoses for 1 of 24 sampled residents (Resident #421) and to ensure the proper care and services for a resident with a Foley catheter for 1 of 24 sampled residents (Resident #69). The deficient practice had the potential to deprive a resident of proper care and services related to mental health conditions and the potential to place the resident at risk for not receiving appropriate care related to a Foley catheter.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, clinical record review, and document review, the facility failed to develop a person-centered Comprehensive Care Plan for the needed care and services related to 1) a Foley catheter for 1 of 24 sampled residents (Resident #69), 2) bowel and bladder retraining for 2 of 24 sampled resident (Resident #9 and #54), and 3) pain management for 1 of 24 sampled residents (Resident #223). This deficient practice had the potential to delay adequate care and interventions to properly manage concerns related to Foley catheter care, bowel and bladder retraining, and pain management.
Inspectors wroteBased on personnel record review, document review and interview, the facility failed to ensure an employee had current cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training. This deficient practice placed residents at risk from an employee not having completed all employment eligibility requirements.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure communication was maintained between the facility and the hospice agency providing care to 1 of 1 hospice residents residing in the facility (Resident #27) This deficient practice had the potential to result in the facility not being updated regarding the care the resident was receiving from the hospice agency, changes in the resident's condition, changes to frequency of care, new physician orders, and instructions for new physician orders.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, clinical record reviews, and document reviews, the facility failed to ensure the environment was free from accident hazards by not assessing and addressing the risk of entrapment for 1 of 24 sampled residents (Resident #270). The resident's bed was positioned with the right side pushed up against an air conditioning unit, leaving a gap of approximately six to eight inches between the mattress and the window and wall. This deficient practice had the potential to result in serious injury, including entrapment, by placing the resident at risk for preventable harm.
Inspectors wroteResident #9 Resident #9 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with a principal diagnosis of pneumonia due to other gram-negative bacteria. Resident #9's Minimum Data Set 3.0 (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], section H (Bladder and Bowel) documented the following: -A trial of a toileting program had not been attempted. -The resident was always incontinent of bladder. -The resident was always incontinent of bowel. -A toileting program was not being used to manage the resident's bowel incontinence. Resident #9's evaluation for bowel and bladder training dated 05/21/2025, documented the resident was a candidate for toileting and timed or scheduled voiding. On 06/26/2025 at 2:13 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) verbalized the purpose of a bowel and bladder program was to increase the continence level of the residents. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, clinical record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure a resident with a known history of significant weight loss was monitored for further weight loss upon readmission to the facility for 1 of 24 sampled residents (Resident #74). This deficient practice had the potential to result in serious health complications for the resident.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, clinical record review and document review the facility failed to determine and document a resident's tolerable level of pain and administer pain medication according to a physician's order for 1 of 24 sampled residents (Resident #223). This deficient practice had the potential for unrelieved pain, discomfort, and inadequate pain management.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, interview and document review the facility failed to maintain completed dialysis communication forms for 3 of 24 sampled residents (Resident #2, #85 and #61). This deficient practice had the potential to result in a lack of critical information shared between the facility and the dialysis provider with the potential to have lead to delays or errors in care, adversely having affected resident health and safety.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, clinical record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure all of a resident's medications were signed and dated during provider visits for 1 of 24 sampled residents (Resident #421). This deficient practice had the potential to result in medication errors, compromising the resident's health and safety.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, clinical record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure social services staff assessed the impact of a room relocation on the resident's psychosocial status for a resident with a room change per facility policy for 1 of 24 sampled residents (Resident #171). This deficient practice had the potential to result in avoidable psychosocial harm.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and document review the facility failed to ensure expired medications were removed from 2 of 3 medication carts inspected and a medication bottle was labeled with an expiration date in 1 of 3 medication carts inspected. This deficient practice had the potential to result in administration of expired medications, posing a risk to resident safety.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, personnel record review, document review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure compliance with the State of Nevada Revised Statute (NRS) 449.174 related to fingerprinting and Nevada Automated Background System (NABS) clearance for an employee having access to a sampled resident's record (Resident #83). This deficient practice placed residents at risk from an employee not having completed all employment eligibility requirements.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure written notification was provided to the State Agency (SA) when the facility had a change in Director of Nursing (DON). This deficient practice had the potential to result in lack of oversight to ensure the facility employed a qualified DON.
Inspectors wroteBased on document review and interview the facility failed to maintain the required Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI)/Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) committee members to include the Director of Nursing and the Medical Director.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review, document review, and interview, the facility failed to adhere to proper infection control protocols by allowing a resident's catheter tubing to drag on the floor while the resident was seated in a wheelchair for 1 of 24 sampled residents (Resident #69). This deficient practice had the potential to result in contamination of the catheter tubing, urinary tract infections and increasing the risk of other complications for the resident.
Inspectors wroteBased on document review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the Facility Assessment accurately documented the training requirements for all direct care staff. This deficient practice had the potential to have placed residents at risk due to employees not having completed identified training requirements.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, clinical record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure resident information was not visible on an unattended computer screen and at a nursing station facing a public area. This deficient practice had the potential for unauthorized access to residents' protected health information.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure the outside receptacle area was kept free of trash, leaves, seepage from the receptacle container, leakage of an air conditioning hose causing a build-up of a thickened substance, and flies.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and document review the facility's Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee failed to identify the facility lacked a process to ensure bowel and bladder assessments were completed upon admission for determination of candidacy to a bowel and/or bladder retraining program and to offer a bowel and bladder retraining program for residents assessed to be candidates for a bowel and bladder retraining program resulting in the potential to affect residents' ability to maintain their highest continent status.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, clinical record review and document review, the facility failed to 1) complete bowel and bladder assessments upon admission for determination of candidacy to a bowel and/or bladder retraining program for 12 of 24 sampled residents (Resident #26, #32, #39, #40, #68, #86, #94, #105, #117, #185, #440, and #442) and 2) offer a bowel and bladder retraining program for residents assessed to be candidates for retraining for 10 of 24 sampled residents (Resident #2, #12, #13, #51, #52, #55, #60, #76, #235, and #443). This deficient practice had the potential to affect residents' ability to maintain their highest continent status.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review, interview, and document review the facility failed to ensure Controlled Drug Records (CDR) were correctly completed for 2 of 3 inspected medication carts to reflect an accurate reconciliation of controlled medications for 8 of 24 sampled residents (Resident #96, #5, #89, #93, #77, #102, #94, and #109).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review, interview, and document review the facility failed to ensure the bed controls for 1 of 24 sampled residents (Resident #94) was in working order and the resident was physically able to work the control, resulting in emotional distress and increased pain for the resident.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, and document review the facility failed to provide the required documentation for discharge when a resident was emergently transferred to an acute care hospital for 1 of 24 sampled residents (Resident #76).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview, and document review the facility failed to submit for evaluation of the Pre-admission Screening and Annual Resident Review (PASRR or PASARR) level II to the state designated authority for 1 of 24 sampled residents (Resident #76) when the resident had a new diagosis of schizophrenia. The failure had the potential to deprive the resident of the care and services necessary to meet their mental health needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, clinical record review and document review the facility failed to ensure Oxygen was administered as ordered for 1 of 24 sampled residents (Resident #442).
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, document review, and personnel record review, the facility failed to ensure a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) had a performance evaluation completed annually for 1 of 3 CNAs employed greater than one year sampled for personnel record review (Employee #13).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review, interview, and document review the facility failed to ensure 1) loose and unlabeled medications were removed from 2 of 3 inspected medication carts, and 3) medications were not left unattended and unsecured in a resident room for 1 of 24 sampled residents Resident (#40).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, document review, and interview, the facility failed to complete Treatment Administration Records (TAR) for the administration of a skin protective ointment for 1 of 24 sampled residents (Resident #2).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, clinical record review, and document review the facility failed to ensure Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) were implemented for a resident with a chronic wound for 1 of 94 unsampled residents (Resident #26).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, interview and document review, the facility failed to prevent a resident's roommate (Resident #2) from urinating on the floor regularly and to ensure the resident had a right to a clean, comfortable environment for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #1).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, interview and document review, the facility failed to coordinate a resident's care with the hospice provider for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #1).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure a hand washing sink in the Kitchen was stocked with disposable hand towels.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, interview and document review, the facility failed to prevent resident to resident abuse for 2 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #1 and #2).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, interview and document review, the facility failed to prevent a controlled substance medication from being diverted for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #3).
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, clinical record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure a resident gave informed consent prior to administration of a psychotropic medication for 2 of 22 sampled residents (Resident #535 and #81).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, document review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a baseline care plan was created timely for the use of melatonin medication, treatment, and care needs for 1 of 22 sampled residents (Resident #81) and use of oxygen, treatment and care needs for 1 of 3 closed records (Resident #538).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, clinical record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure a resident was care planned with interventions to ensure a resident's safety when the resident's bed was close to the wall and wall heater and a resident was care planned for the use of Intravenous (IV) antibiotics and Transmission Based Precautions (TBP) for 2 of 22 sampled residents (Resident #1 and #486).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, clinical record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's bed was not pushed up against a wall heater and was far enough away from a wall to not create a potential entrapment risk for 1 of 22 sampled residents (Resident #1).
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and Personnel Record Review, the facility failed to ensure Certified Nursing Assistants employed greater than one year had a performance review completed annually for 3 of 3 CNAs reviewed for completed performance review.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, clinical record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure residents did not receive unnecessary psychotropic medications when the facility lacked monitoring of the behaviors associated with the psychotropic medications, and monitoring for adverse side effects for 3 of 22 sampled residents receiving psychotropic medications (Resident #535, #537 and #81).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure medications were not left unsecured on top of a medication cart.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure employees wore the appropriate hair restraints in the kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review, interview, and document review the facility failed to ensure 1) sterile technique was correctly performed when changing a Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC) line dressing for 1 of 22 sampled residents (Resident # 228), 2) an insulin pen was disinfected prior to administering insulin to 1 of 3 residents observed for medication administration (Resident #193), and 3) appropriate Presonal Protective Equipment (PPE) was worn by staff when entering the room of a resident on contact isolation (Resident #107).
21 fire safety citations on file: 7 on July 1, 2025, 5 on August 1, 2024, 9 on August 17, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| July 20, 2026 | Fine | $8,710 |
| July 20, 2026 | Fine | $14,175 |
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 | Nevada | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.91 | 4.34 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 1.17 | 1.12 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.17 | 3.86 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.02 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.72 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 31.3% | 45.1% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 21.4% | 43.4% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 4.48 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 4.21 on weekdays and 3.17 on weekends, 25% 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 3.96 in April to June 2025 to 3.91 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 | 3.91 | 1.17 | 4.21 | 3.17 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 122 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.72 | 1.08 | 3.91 | 3.21 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 120 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.94 | 1.08 | 4.16 | 3.37 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 115 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.96 | 1.18 | 4.18 | 3.41 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 114 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Nevada, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.88 | 0.85 | 4.05 | 3.46 | 2.7% | 0.1% 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nevada, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $21.87 | $18.80 to $23.07 | 8,100 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $36.62 | $31.70 to $38.26 | 3,350 |
| Registered nurses | $49.84 | $41.76 to $57.82 | 27,070 |
| 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 | Nevada | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 8.2 | 12.6 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.0 | 1.6 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.8 | 1.9 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.6 | 2.0 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.4 | 1.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.2 | 13.5 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 7.2 | 5.4 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 9.8 | 17.1 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 26.2 | 23.2 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 9.6 | 9.6 | 12.0 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Life Care Center of Reno's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it better than the national rate (61.7% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
61.7% this home
Better than the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Nevada: 9 better, 7 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. 804 eligible stays.
11.4% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Nevada: 0 better, 5 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. 731 eligible stays.
5.3% this home
Better than the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Nevada: 1 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. 444 eligible stays.
90.6% this home
Median of homes: Nevada60.3% · 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. 203 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Nevada0.4% · 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. 506 residents counted.
1.8% this home
Median of homes: Nevada1.6% · 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. 506 residents counted.
90.6% this home
Median of homes: Nevada91.8% · 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. 171 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: WEDGWOOD GROUP LLC. CMS links this home to Life Care Centers of America, a group of 194 nursing homes averaging 3.4 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Life Care Affiliates II | Direct ownership interest | Organization | 06/01/1993 | |
| Preston, Forrest | Direct ownership interest | Individual | 03/30/1989 | |
| Developers Investment Company Inc | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 06/01/1993 | |
| Preston, Forrest | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 06/01/1993 | |
| Butner, Nancy | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 09/16/2018 | |
| Pope, Curtis | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/09/2026 | |
| Wagner, Michelle | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 04/07/2026 | |
| Lay, Lisa | Corporate director | Individual | 04/24/2017 | |
| Swanker, Richard | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2022 | |
| Cross, Cindy | Corporate officer | Individual | 04/21/1994 | |
| Lay, Lisa | Corporate officer | Individual | 02/09/2018 | |
| Swanker, Richard | Corporate officer | Individual | 04/01/2011 | |
| Thurmond, Joan | Corporate officer | Individual | 09/22/2000 | |
| Developers Investment Company Inc | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 12/16/2025 | |
| Life Care Centers of America, Inc. | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 09/01/1991 | |
| Wedgwood Group LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 09/01/1991 | |
| Butner, Nancy | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 09/16/2018 | |
| Fletcher, Todd | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/16/2025 | |
| Julian, David | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/01/2017 | |
| Pope, Curtis | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/09/2026 | |
| Preston, Aubrey | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/16/2025 | |
| Wagner, Michelle | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/07/2026 | |
| Ziegler, James | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/16/2025 | |
| Life Care Affiliates II | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 08/31/2000 | |
| Life Care Centers of America, Inc. | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/20/2025 | |
| Wedgwood Group LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 08/31/2000 | |
| Julian, David | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/07/2025 | |
| Pope, Curtis | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/10/2026 | |
| Preston, Forrest | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 08/31/2000 |
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.