Home / New Mexico / Carlsbad
1905 West Pierce Street, Carlsbad, NM 88220 · Eddy County · (575) 885-3161
112 certified beds, about 78 residents a day · Non profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1992
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 325087 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on May 21, 2026, inspectors cited 11 health deficiencies (the New Mexico average is 17.9, the national average 9.2).
None of its 34 health citations since March 2024 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.81 hours per resident per day, against 3.54 across New Mexico and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.79 of those hours.
50.0% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (New Mexico average 53.3%).
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 34 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to post nurse staffing data daily at the beginning of the shift that included the following:- Facility name.-The current date.-The total number and the actual hours worked by the following categories of licensed and unlicensed nursing staff directly responsible for resident care per shift.1. Registered nurse,2. Licensed practical nurse,3. Certified nurse aides,4. Resident census. The deficient practice has the potential to affect all 77 residents as identified by the census provided by the Administrator (ADM) on 05/17/26 and could likely result in residents and visitors not having the staffing information readily available.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews, the facility failed to properly store medications and medical supplies located in the facility medication storage room when the staff failed to ensure: -Insulin multidose vials are dated when they are first used and dated 28 days after first use.-Blood collection tubes were not expired.-Lancets (small, sharp, sterile needle used to prick the skin) were not expired.-Hypodermic (under the skin) Injection needles were disposed of after expiration date.-Bluetooth glucose monitoring strips were not expired.-Intravenous (IV; into the vein) catheters were not expired.-Intravenous start kits were not expired. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to store and serve food under sanitary conditions when staff failed to ensure:Expired food was disposed of and food items were labeled and dated. Refrigerator temperature logs were not complete. Perform hand hygiene during servingThese deficient practices have the potential to affect all 77 residents as identified by the census provided by the Administrator (ADM) on 05/17/26. If food is not being stored properly and safe food handling practices are not followed then the residents could be at risk of getting foodborne illnesses and becoming ill.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview the facility failed to conduct regular inspections of all bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails, if any, as part of a regular maintenance program to identify areas of possible entrapment. This deficient practice has the potential to affect all 77 residents as identified by the census provided by the Administrator on 05/17/26 and could likely result could likely result in serious injury or death if residents become trapped between the mattress, side rail, footboard and headboard.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain corridor handrails for one identified location, this deficiency could compromise safe navigation and support for all 77 residents as identified by the census provided by the Administrator (ADM) on 05/17/26 who use handrails. A. On 05/17/26 at 9:48 am during an observation, a rail along the corridor in west hall just past the main entrance could be easily pulled away from the wall. B. On 05/17/26 at 10:05 am, during an interview with Physical Therapy Assistant (PTA), she confirmed the rail was loose and was easily pulled away from the wall. C. On 05/21/26 at 10:12 am, during an interview with Director of maintenance, he confirmed the rail was loose and needed to be repaired.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident or their representative were aware of a medication taken by the resident, which included the risks and benefits associated with that medication for 3 (R #18, R #37, and R #56) of 4 (R #8, R #18, R #37, and R #56) residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. If residents and/or their representative are not informed of the risks and benefits of each medication, then they are likely not able to make informed decisions.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure all residents that have a personal funds account with the facility can access their funds on weekends/evenings. This deficient practice is likely to affect all residents having an account with the facility. If residents are unable to access their funds when desired, then residents are likely to not be able to participate in activities and purchase food or personal items when they choose. A. On 05/19/26 at 9:32 am, during an interview with the Resident Council members [R #8, R #16, R #17, R #25, R #31, R #38, R #39, R #46, R #59, R #65, R #72, R #77, and R #78], they stated that they are not allowed to get money when the front office is closed (evenings and weekends). The residents stated the only way to request money is in advance. B. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to develop and implement an adequate baseline care plan (minimum healthcare information necessary to properly care for a resident immediately upon their admission to the facility) within 48 hours of admission for 3 (R #12, R #20, and #58) of 6 (R #2, R #7, #12, R #20, R #58, and #80) residents reviewed for baseline care plans. If the facility fails to develop and implement an adequate baseline care plan within 48 hours of admission for residents, then staff may lack necessary guidance to provide appropriate care which could lead to an adverse event (undesirable experience, preventable or non-preventable, that causes harm to a resident due to medical care or lack of medical care).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to maintain an ongoing infection prevention and control program (a program that is used to prevent, recognize, and control the onset and spread of infections) for 3 (R #2, R #17, and R #58) of 6 (R #1, R #2, R #7, R #8, R #17, and R #58) residents reviewed by not:1. Ensuring staff followed proper infection prevention protocols for R #2 who had contact precautions (used for individuals with infections that can spread through direct or indirect contact with the patient or their environment) in place and for R #17 who had enhanced barrier precautions (EBP; an infection control intervention designed to reduce transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms that employs targeted gown and glove use during high contact resident care activities) in place.2. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure staff revised the care plan for 1 (R #10) of 2 (R #10 and R #11) residents reviewed when staff failed to update R #10's care plan to include a security alarm bracelet. This deficient practice is likely to result in residents' care and needs not being addressed if care plans are not updated.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure call lights in residents' rooms were within resident's reach for 1 (R #2) of 4 (R #2, R #7, R #12, R #20) residents reviewed for call lights. This deficient practice could likely result in residents being unable to notify staff when they need assistance.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to safeguard resident's personal health information by leaving a list of residents with their associated vital sign readings in plain view. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all 38 people residing in the rooms on the East 1 and East 2 halls by allowing unauthorized people access to their personal health information.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS; a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by facility staff)) was accurate for 1 (R #1) of 1 (R #1) resident reviewed for MDS assessment accuracy. This deficient practice could likely result in the facility not having an accurate assessment of the residents' needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure food was prepared and served under sanitary conditions when staff failed to wear hairnets while in the kitchen. This deficient practice is likely to affect all 79 residents listed on the resident census list provided by the Administrator on 04/02/25.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to develop and implement an accurate, person-centered comprehensive care plan for 2 (R #33 and R #51) of 4 (R #1, R #3, R #33 and R #51) residents reviewed for care plans. This deficient practice is likely to result in staff being unaware of the current and actual needs of the residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure staff revised the care plan for 2 (R #34, and R #51) of 4 (R #3, R #33, R #34, and R #51) residents reviewed when staff failed to: 1. Revise #34's care plan for the use of assist bars. 2. Revise #51's care plan for hospice care. This deficient practice is likely to result in residents' care and needs not being addressed if care plans are not updated.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR; a screening to help ensure that individuals are not inappropriately placed in nursing homes for long term care) assessment was accurate for 1 (R #58) of 2 (R #51 and R #58) residents reviewed for PASRR accuracy. This deficient practice is likely to result in the residents not receiving the services they need.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interviews, the facility failed to ensure all treatment carts were locked while unattended. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all 18 people residing in the 200 through 216 rooms by allowing unauthorized people access to their medical supplies and personal health information.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to serve food under sanitary conditions by professional standards of food service safety. This failure could potentially affect all 76 residents in the facility who eat food prepared in the kitchen. Residents were identified by the Resident Matrix provided by the Administrator on 03/25/24. When they failed to: 1. Have staff perform hand hygiene when distributing food trays to residents in the H Unit. 2. Have staff perform hand hygiene when assisting residents in the main dining room. If the facility fails to adhere to safe food handling practices and hygiene practices, residents could likely be exposed to foodborne illnesses (illness caused by food contaminated with bacteria, viruses, parasites, or toxins).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure staff implemented a comprehensive antibiotic stewardship program (a set of commitments and actions designed to optimize the treatment of infections while reducing the adverse events associated with antibiotic use). This deficient practice has the potential to affect all 76 residents in the facility. Residents identified on the matrix provided by the Administrator on 03/25/24. This deficient practice could likely result in the inappropriate use of antibiotics that can lead to resistance of multi-drug resistant organisms.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to provide reasonable accommodation of resident needs for 2 (R #37 and R #41) of 2 (R #37 and R #41) residents reviewed for care when the facility failed to ensure that resident's bedside table with frequently used items were within the resident's reach. This deficient practice could result in the residents' needs not being met, leaving them at risk for accidents and falls.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure that residents, their representatives, and the Ombudsman (a resident advocate that is a government employee who investigates and tries to resolve complaints, usually through recommendations or mediation) received a written notice of transfer as soon as practicable for 6 (R #16, R #24, R #34, R #37, R #59, and R #65) of 6 (R #16, R #24, R #34, R #37, R #59, and R #65) residents reviewed for hospitalization. This deficient practice could likely result in the resident and/or their representative not knowing the reason or location the resident was discharged .
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that residents and their representatives received a written notice of the bed hold policy which indicated the duration the bed would be held for 6 (R #16, R #24, R #34, R #37, R #59, and R #65) of 6 (R #16, R #24, R #34, R #37, R #59, and R #65) residents reviewed for hospitalization. This deficient practice could likely result in the resident and/or their representative being unaware of the bed hold policy upon return from the hospital.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure care plan revision and care plan meeting requirements occurred for 10 (R #4, R #12, R #16, R #24, R #31, R #37, R #39, R #59, R #65, and R #179) of 13 (R #4, R #12, R #16, R #24, R #31, R #37, R #39, R #52, R #57, R #58, R #59, R #65, and R #179) residents reviewed for care plans when they failed to: 1. Have the required Interdisciplinary Team (IDT, team members from different disciplines working collaboratively, with a common purpose, to set goals, make decisions and share resources and responsibilities, and includes other appropriate staff or professionals in disciplines as determined by the resident's needs) members (Hospice and R #39) as well as resident representatives participate in the care plan meeting for R #31 and R #39. 2. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for 2 (R #59 and R #65) of 2 (R #59 and R #65) residents when they failed to: 1. Start antibiotics for R #59 until five days after the positive urine culture (test result that shows the presence of bacteria in the urine) received. 2. Place compression stockings on R #65's legs as ordered by physician. These deficient practices could likely lead to residents needs not being met and/or a worsening of their condition.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to keep residents free from accidents for all 53 residents in the East Unit and H Unit. Residents were identified by the resident Census provided by the Administrator on 03/25/24, when they failed to: 1. Keep treatment carts (a movable piece of equipment used in healthcare facilities to store, transport, and dispense treatment supplies and tools.) locked when not supervised by staff. 2. Ensure the fall mat (a safety feature that is placed along the side of the bed to prevent injury) was placed next to R #41's bed. These deficient practices could likely result in injury to residents due to falling without a fall mat or residents obtaining medical equipment which can cause injury/death.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the the physician provided rationale for not following the pharmacist's recommendation for 2 (R #36 and R #41) of 2 (R #36 and R #41) residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. This deficient practice could likely result in residents receiving medications that are no longer necessary and may cause unnecessary drug interactions or adverse side effects.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to: 1. Initiate a gradual dose reduction (GDR; decreasing a dose to determine if symptoms, conditions, or risks can be managed by a lower dose or if the medication can be discontinued altogether) of medication as recommended by the pharmacist and ordered by the facility provider. 2. Ensure the medical record has documented rationale as to why the facility provider does not want to complete a GDR. for 2 (R #24 and R #41) of 5 (R #15, R #16, R #24, R #36, and R #41) residents reviewed for unnecessary medication. If consultant pharmacist recommendations and physician's orders are not implemented in a timely manner, residents are likely to be administered medications they do not need and could likely suffer from adverse side effects.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to store medications properly and ensure medication carts were locked for all 53 residents in the East Unit and in the H Unit/ Residents were identified by the resident census list provided by the Administrator on 03/25/24, when they failed to: 1. Secure a medication cart on the H Unit. 2. Ensure the medication carts did not contain loose medications. 3. Ensure that insulin is stored per manufacturer's instructions. These deficient practices could likely result in residents obtaining or being administered medication not prescribed to them, residents receiving medications that are less effective and may result in adverse side effects.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow proper infection control practices for 3 (R #14, R #65 and R #179) of 3 (R #14, R #65 and R #179) residents identified during random observation when the facility failed to ensure resident's nasal cannulas (a device that delivers extra oxygen through a tube and into your nose) were labeled with the date that they were changed. This deficient practice could likely result in the spread of contagious and resistant illnesses to other residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure call lights worked and that the pull cords for the call lights in the resident's bathrooms were in reach to allow residents to call for help using the call light system, for 10 (R #5, R #11, R #21, R #28, R #30, R #36, R #37, R #41, R #54 and R #68) of 10 (R #5, R #11, R #21, R #28, R #30, R #36, R #37, R #41, R #54 and R #68) residents randomly sampled for call light function, when the facility failed the following: 1. To have the pull cords for the call light system in the resident's bathrooms in reach from the floor for R #5, R #11, R #21, R #28, R #30, R #36, R #37, R #41, R #54 and R #68. 2. The alarm sound for the call lights in R #36 and R #68's rooms worked. 3. Ensure the call light were within reach for R #37 and R #41. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide abuse, neglect, and exploitation (ANE) training and Dementia Management training to 4 (CNA #26, LPN #21, LPN #22, and RN #21) of 6 (CNA #25, CNA #26, CNA #27, LPN #21, LPN #22, and RN #21) staff sampled for training. This deficient practice could likely result in staff not knowing who, what, and when to report abuse, neglect, and exploitation.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS; assessment instrument completed by facility staff) was accurate for 1 (R #58) of 6 (R #4, R #7, R #24, R #52, R #57, and R #58) residents reviewed for MDS accuracy. This deficient practice could likely result in the facility not having an accurate assessment of resident's care needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview the facility failed to provide a homelike environment for all 76 residents. Residents were identified by the resident matrix provided by the Administrator on 03/25/24, when they failed to repair the broken roof tiles in the activity room. If residents do not have a homelike environment, they could likely become depressed and anxious and feel not valued.
18 fire safety citations on file: 4 on April 5, 2025, 6 on March 29, 2024, 8 on April 7, 2023.
CMS lists no fines or payment denials against this home in the last three years. The national average is 0.9 fines per home.
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 | New Mexico | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.81 | 3.54 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.79 | 0.63 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.13 | 3.10 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.68 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.35 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 50.0% | 53.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 33.3% | 53.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
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 4.09 on weekdays and 3.13 on weekends, 23% 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 3.74 in April to June 2025 to 3.81 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 | 3.81 | 0.79 | 4.09 | 3.13 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 78 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.92 | 0.90 | 4.08 | 3.51 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 77 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.83 | 0.81 | 4.03 | 3.33 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 79 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.74 | 0.83 | 3.96 | 3.19 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 79 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| New Mexico, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.52 | 0.60 | 3.69 | 3.10 | 14.2% | 1.7% 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| New Mexico, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $18.94 | $17.94 to $21.83 | 4,750 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $28.52 | $18.93 to $35.14 | 2,460 |
| Registered nurses | $45.36 | $38.92 to $49.40 | 17,980 |
| 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 | New Mexico | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 15.2 | 11.3 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.6 | 0.9 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 7.9 | 0.9 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 8.4 | 3.5 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.1 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 15.4 | 11.7 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 11.6 | 5.2 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.3 | 14.5 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 23.2 | 22.0 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 0.0 | 15.7 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.3 | 1.6 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.5 | 2.8 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Northgate Unit of Lakeview Christian Home's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (44.6% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
44.6% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · New Mexico: 15 better, 4 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. 69 eligible stays.
9.9% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · New Mexico: 0 better, 2 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. 96 eligible stays.
9.6% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · New Mexico: 0 better, 0 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 63 eligible stays.
71.4% this home
Median of homes: New Mexico66.5% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 35 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: New Mexico0.0% · 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. 47 residents counted.
7.3% this home
Median of homes: New Mexico2.5% · 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. 47 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: New Mexico97.2% · 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. 1 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: LAKEVIEW CHRISTIAN HOME OF THE SOUTHWEST, INC..
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Deines, Timothy | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/1993 | |
| Knox, Joanna | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/1993 | |
| Ross, James | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/10/1993 | |
| Sevcik, Denise | Corporate officer | Individual | 10/27/2011 | |
| Wood, Alan | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/01/1993 | |
| Knox, Joanna | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/01/1993 | |
| Karimian, Siavash | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/27/2025 | |
| Knox, Joanna | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/1993 |
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 New Mexico. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.