Hearth Record

Excell Home Care

A home health agency in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73139

1200 SW 104th Street, Suite D, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73139. (405) 631-0521.

CMS’s own record, on Care Compare

Watch and the shortlist are kept with a free account, on every device. Your watch list. CMS’s own record is on Care Compare.

The short answer

Record last released by CMS on Oct 21, 2026.

The last 24 months 9 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Jan 2026. Most serious: Standard-level. Every month

Each figure’s source sits beside it, in its section below.

What these words mean3
Star ratings
CMS rates some kinds of place from 1 to 5 stars, more stars meaning better on CMS’s own measures for that kind: for a nursing home, its health inspections, staffing and quality measures. A rating is CMS’s summary of those measures; it doesn’t promise good care. Source: CMS, Care Compare and the Five-Star Quality Rating System.
Inspection (survey)
A visit by state inspectors, often unannounced, who check a place against the rules it must meet. For nursing homes and other places Medicare pays, CMS calls these visits surveys: a standard survey of a nursing home comes at least every 15 months, and a complaint survey whenever a complaint calls for one. Source: CMS; 42 CFR 488.308.
Deficiency, citation, violation
What inspectors write up when a place didn’t meet a rule: the rule, what they saw, and when. CMS calls it a deficiency; states may say citation or violation. It is the inspectors’ finding, not a court’s, and the place is usually asked for a plan to correct it. Source: CMS, statement of deficiencies (Form CMS-2567); each state’s licensing agency.

What did inspectors find?

The last inspection on record was on Jan 29, 2026: a complaint and recertification inspection.

9 deficiencies cited in the last three years.

Source:

CMS, QCOR home health inspection reports. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

When those deficiencies happened

9 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Jan 2026. Most serious: Standard-level. The last 3 years, to Oct 24, 2026.

9 deficiencies by month over the last 3 years. Each cell is one month.
JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2023 NovDec
2024 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2025 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2026 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOct

Hover or focus a month to read it.

No visit on record Visited, nothing cited A stronger orange is more serious, on its source’s own levels, read onto four bands: from the least serious it publishes to the most
Source:

Hearth Record drew this from the dates and levels in the source’s own records.

Each deficiency, as cited

Rule titles as CMS’s inspectors cite them, set in sentence case.

Source:

CMS, QCOR home health inspection reports. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

Jan 29, 2026: complaint and recertification inspection9 deficiencies
  • Program Scope

    The inspectors’ words, 168 words

    “Program scope CFR(s): 484.65(a)(1),(2) Standard: Program scope. (1) The program must at least be capable of showing measurable improvement in indicators for which there is evidence that improvement in those indicators will improve health outcomes, patient safety, and quality of care. (2) The HHA must measure, analyze, and track quality indicators, including adverse patient events, and other aspects of performance that enable the HHA to assess processes of care, HHA services, and operations. This Standard is not met as evidenced by: Based on record review and interview, the agency failed to ensure QAPI Program activities included efforts that analyzed causes and implemented actions to identify problems, improve care, services and operations for all patients and employees. Findings: A review of QAPI Program records showed no program activities for calendar year 2024 and 2025 that included efforts to analyze causes and implement actions to improve care, services and operations. On 01/29/26 at 1:30 p.m., Staff B stated QAPI program records did not show analysis and interventions of the data.”

    Rule G0642. Standard-level. From a complaint.

  • Performance Improvement Projects

    The inspectors’ words, 154 words

    “Performance improvement projects CFR(s): 484.65(d)(1)(2) Standard: Performance improvement projects. Beginning July 13, 2018 HHAs must conduct performance improvement projects. (1) The number and scope of distinct improvement projects conducted annually must reflect the scope, complexity, and past performance of the HHA’s services and operations. (2) The HHA must document the quality improvement projects undertaken, the reasons for conducting these projects, and the measurable progress achieved on these projects. This Standard is not met as evidenced by: Based on record review and interview, the agency failed to ensure the review and reporting of ongoing PIP data through the QAPI program for all patients and employees. Findings: A review of QAPI program records showed no PIP data reporting in 1st quarter and 2nd quarter in calendar year 2025. On 01/29/26 at 1:30 p.m., Staff B stated QAPI program records showed no reporting of the PIP data in 1st quarter and 2nd quarter in calendar year 2025.”

    Rule G0658. Standard-level. From a complaint.

  • Infection Control

    The inspectors’ words, 162 words

    “Infection control CFR(s): 484.70(b)(1)(2) Standard: Control. The HHA must maintain a coordinated agency-wide program for the surveillance, identification, prevention, control, and investigation of infectious and communicable diseases that is an integral part of the HHA’s quality assessment and performance improvement (QAPI) program. The infection control program must include: (1) A method for identifying infectious and communicable disease problems; and (2) A plan for the appropriate actions that are expected to result in improvement and disease prevention. This Standard is not met as evidenced by: Based on record review and interview, the agency failed to ensure its infection control program surveillance monitoring and reporting was included in QAPI program activities for all patients and employees. Findings: A review of QAPI and Infection Control records showed no infection control program surveillance monitoring and reporting as a part of QAPI program activities for calendar year 2024. On 01/29/26 at 1:30 p.m., Staff B stated infection surveillance reporting was not included in QAPI activities in 2024.”

    Rule G0684. Standard-level. From a complaint.

  • Patient/Payer Will No Longer Pay For Services

    The inspectors’ words, 117 words

    “Patient/payer will no longer pay for services CFR(s): 484.50(d)(2) The patient or payer will no longer pay for the services provided by the HHA; This Element is not met as evidenced by: Based on record review and interview, the agency failed to ensure HHCOC notice prior to physical therapy discharge from agency services were provided to one (Patient #10) of 17 patients. Findings: Patient #10 A review of the clinical record showed no home health change of care notice prior to the physical therapy discharge from the agency services on 12/23/25 for no insurance authorization. On 01/29/26 at 12:17 p.m., Staff B stated the patient was not provided a notice prior to the physical therapy service discharge.”

    Rule G0456. Element-level. From a complaint.

  • Plan Of Care Must Include The Following

    The inspectors’ words, 671 words

    “Plan of care must include the following CFR(s): 484.60(a)(2)(i-xvi) The individualized plan of care must include the following: (i) All pertinent diagnoses; (ii) The patient’s mental, psychosocial, and cognitive status; (iii) The types of services, supplies, and equipment required; (iv) The frequency and duration of visits to be made; (v) Prognosis; (vi) Rehabilitation potential; (vii) Functional limitations; (viii) Activities permitted; (ix) Nutritional requirements; (x) All medications and treatments; (xi) Safety measures to protect against injury; (xii) A description of the patient’s risk for emergency department visits and hospital re-admission, and all necessary interventions to address the underlying risk factors. (xiii) Patient and caregiver education and training to facilitate timely discharge; (xiv) Patient-specific interventions and education; measurable outcomes and goals identified by the HHA and the patient; (xv) Information related to any advanced directives; and (xvi) Any additional items the HHA or physician or allowed practitioner may choose to include. This Element is not met as evidenced by: Based on record review and interview, the agency failed to ensure individualized patient POC’s included: Medical provider reporting parameters for management of peripheral edema for seven (Patient #3, 4, 5, 13, 14, 15 and #17) of 17 patients. Medical provider reporting parameters for management of blood sugar levels for one (Patient #10) of 17 patients. Medical provider reporting parameters for weight management for two (Patients #13 and #17) of 17 patients. Findings: Patient #3 A review of a POC dated 11/21/25 to 01/19/26 showed interventions and goals for SN to assess, manage and instruct on the management of peripheral edema. The POC showed no peripheral edema reporting parameters. On 01/29/26 at 11:50 a.m., Staff B stated the POC did not include reporting parameters for peripheral edema. Patient #4 A review of a POC dated 01/08/26 to 03/08/26 showed interventions and goals for SN to assess, manage and instruct on the management of peripheral edema. The POC showed no peripheral edema reporting parameters. On 01/29/26 at 12:02 p.m., Staff B stated the POC did not include reporting parameters for peripheral edema. Patient #5 A review of a POC dated 01/17/26 to 03/17/26 showed interventions and goals for SN to assess, manage and instruct on the management of peripheral edema. The POC showed no peripheral edema reporting parameters. On 01/29/26 at 12:06 p.m., Staff B stated the POC did not include reporting parameters for peripheral edema. Patient #10 A review of a POC dated 12/04/25 to 02/01/26 showed interventions and goals for SN to assess, manage and instruct on the management of blood sugar levels. The POC showed no blood sugar levels reporting parameters. On 01/29/26 at 12:14 p.m., Staff B stated the POC did not include reporting parameters for peripheral edema. Patient #13 A review of a POC dated 12/07/25 to 02/04/26 showed interventions and goals for SN to assess, manage and instruct on the management of peripheral edema and weight. The POC showed no peripheral edema or weight reporting parameters. On 01/29/26 at 12:55 p.m., Staff B stated the POC did not include reporting parameters for peripheral edema. Patient #14 A review of a POC dated 10/17/25 to 12/15/25 showed interventions and goals for SN to assess, manage and instruct on the management of peripheral edema. The POC showed no peripheral edema reporting parameters. On 01/29/26 at 1:00 p.m., Staff B stated the POC did not include reporting parameters for peripheral edema. Patient #15 A review of a POC dated 06/22/25 to 08/20/25 showed interventions and goals for SN to assess, manage and instruct on the management of peripheral edema. The POC showed no peripheral edema reporting parameters. On 01/29/26 at 1:02 p.m., Staff B stated the POC did not include reporting parameters for peripheral edema. Patient #17 A review of a POC dated 11/28/25 to 01/26/26 showed interventions and goals for SN to assess, manage and instruct on the management of peripheral edema and weight. The POC showed no peripheral edema or weight reporting parameters. On 01/29/26 at 1:16 p.m., Staff B stated the POC did not include reporting parameters for peripheral edema.”

    Rule G0574. Element-level. From a complaint.

  • Communication With All Physicians

    The inspectors’ words, 387 words

    “Communication with all physicians CFR(s): 484.60(d)(1) Standard: Coordination of Care. The HHA must: (1) Assure communication with all physicians or allowed practitioners involved in the plan of care. This Element is not met as evidenced by: Based on record review and interview, the agency failed to ensure care was coordinated between the agency and physician for three (Patients #3, 4 and #15) of 17 patients. Findings: Patient #3 A review of the clinical record showed a communication note dated 01/09/26 for the patient to discharge to hospice services. The clinical record showed no discharge assessment, no discharge summary, no patient refusal of discharge and no follow up communication to the medical provider. On 01/29/26 at 11:50 a.m., Staff B stated the nurse should have communicated to the physician the patient did not discharge to hospice services. Patient #4 A review of the POC dated 01/08/26 to 03/08/26 showed orders for SN to assess peripheral edema every visit. SN visit notes dated 01/12/26 and 01/19/26 showed the patient had 2-3+ pitting peripheral edema and showed no medical provider communications or coordination of care notes and no changes in orders. On 01/29/26 at 12:02 p.m., Staff B stated the nurse did not communicate the patient’s pitting edema to the medical provider. Patient #15 A review of the POC dated 06/22/25 to 08/20/25 showed orders for SN to assess, monitor and instruct patient’s weight every visit for management of congestive heart failure and SN to assess, monitor and instruct patient’s blood sugar levels and report blood sugar levels greater than 300 every visit for management of diabetes type II. SN visit notes dated: 11/28/25 showed a weight of 252.2 pounds 11/30/25 showed a BS of 350 12/02/25 showed a weight of 250 pounds 12/03/25 showed a weight of 250 pounds 12/04/25 showed a weight of 251 pounds 12/05/25 showed a weight of 249.4 pounds 12/07/25 showed a weight of 246.8 pounds 12/08/25 showed a BS of 322 and 333 12/11/25 showed a BS of 341 12/12/25 showed a BS of 376 12/03/25 showed a weight of 247 pounds SN visit notes showed no medical provider communications or coordination of care notes and no changes in orders. On 01/29/26 at 1:02 p.m., Staff B stated the nurse did not communicate the patient’s weight or blood sugar levels to the medical provider.”

    Rule G0602. Element-level. From a complaint.

  • Provide Services In The Plan Of Care

    The inspectors’ words, 564 words

    “Provide services in the plan of care CFR(s): 484.75(b)(3) Providing services that are ordered by the physician or allowed practitioner as indicated in the plan of care; This Element is not met as evidenced by: Based on record review and interview, the agency failed to ensure: SN to notify medical provider for patient reported pain levels greater than the reporting parameters for two (Patients #1 and #2) of 17 patients. SN visit frequencies were conducted as ordered for one (Patients #1) of 17 patients. SN to monitor BS every visit and notify medical provider for patient blood sugar levels outside of the reporting parameters for two (Patients #1 and #2) of 17 patients. ST evaluation was conducted for one (Patient #9) of 17 patients. MSW evaluation was conducted for one (Patient #11) of 17 patients. Findings: Patient #1 A review of the POC dated 12/08/25 to 02/05/26 showed orders for SN frequency of one time a week for two weeks and notify medical provider for patient reported pain levels greater than the reporting parameter of six and monitor BS every visit and notify medical provider for patient blood sugar levels outside of the reporting parameters of greater than 300. A review of the clinical records showed during the week of 12/21/25 to 12/27/25 no SN visit was scheduled (one visit ordered, no visit conducted). SN visit notes dated: 12/08/25 show no BS monitoring and a pain level of 7 12/15/25 show no BS monitoring and a pain level of 7 12/23/25 show no BS monitoring and a pain level of 7 12/29/25 show no BS monitoring and a pain level of 7 12/31/25 show no BS monitoring and a pain level of 7 01/16/26 show no BS monitoring and a pain level of 7 01/22/26 show no BS monitoring and a pain level of 9 The SN visit notes showed no patient/caregiver refusal of BS monitoring, no medical provider notifications, and no change in orders. On 01/29/26 at 11:40 a.m., Staff B stated the nurse did not monitor the patient’s blood sugar and did not notify the physician for pain levels that were greater than six. Patient #2 A review of the POC dated 11/20/25 to 01/18/26 showed orders for SN notify medical provider for patient reported pain levels greater than the reporting parameter of six. SN visit notes dated: 11/25/25 show a pain level of 10 01/15/26 show a pain level of 7 The SN visit notes showed no medical provider notifications, and no change in orders. On 01/29/26 at 11:48 a.m., Staff B stated the nurse did not notify the physician for pain levels that were greater than six. Patient #9 A review of the POC dated 01/09/26 to 03/09/26 showed orders for ST to evaluate one time a week for one week effective 01/20/26. The clinical record showed no ST evaluation was conducted, showed no medical provider notifications and no changes in the order. On 01/29/26 at 12:15 p.m., Staff B stated the patient did not have an ST evaluation. Patient #11 A review of the POC dated 11/17/25 to 01/15/26 showed orders for MSW to evaluate one time a week for one week effective 11/20/25. The clinical record showed no MSW evaluation was conducted, no medical provider notifications and no changes in the order. On 01/29/26 at 12:42 p.m., Staff B stated the patient did not have an MSW evaluation.”

    Rule G0710. Element-level. From a complaint.

  • Interventions And Patient Response

    The inspectors’ words, 568 words

    “Interventions and patient response CFR(s): 484.110(a)(2) All interventions, including medication administration, treatments, and services, and responses to those interventions; This Element is not met as evidenced by: Based on record review and interview, the agency failed to ensure SN visit note documentation was complete for three (Patients #3, 6 and #11) of 17 patients. Findings: Patient #3 A review of a POC dated 11/21/25 to 01/19/26 showed wound care orders to the left lower extremity as: cleanse wound with normal saline and apply Xerofoam dressing three times a week. A review of the clinical record showed no documentation of wound care procedure conducted by the nurse during SN visits dated: 11/24/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” 11/26/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” 12/10/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” 12/12/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” 12/15/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” 12/22/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” 12/24/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” 12/26/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” 12/29/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” 12/31/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” On 01/29/26 at 11:50 a.m., Staff B stated the nurse did not document the details of the wound care that was performed during the visits. Patient #6 A review of a POC dated 11/19/25 to 01/17/26 showed wound care orders to the left buttock as: cleanse wound with normal saline, apply calcium alginate and apply Mepilex dressing three times a week. A review of the clinical record showed no documentation of wound care procedure conducted by the nurse during SN visits dated: 12/08/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” 12/10/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” 12/12/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” 12/15/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” 12/17/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” 12/19/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” 12/22/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” 12/24/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” 12/26/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” 12/29/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” 12/31/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” On 01/29/26 at 12:07 p.m., Staff B stated the nurse did not document the details of the wound care that was performed during the visits. Patient #11 A review of a POC dated 11/17/25 to 01/15/26 showed wound care orders to the left heel as: cleanse wound with normal saline, apply Maxorb and apply ABD dressing two times a week. A review of the clinical record showed no documentation of wound care procedure conducted by the nurse during SN visits dated: 11/25/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” 12/03/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” 12/08/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” 12/10/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” 12/12/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” 12/15/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” 12/19/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” 12/22/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” 12/26/25 SN visit note showed “wound care per order” On 01/29/26 at 12:42 p.m., Staff B stated the nurse did not document the details of the wound care that was performed during the visits.”

    Rule G1014. Element-level. From a complaint.

  • Discharge And Transfer Summaries

    The inspectors’ words, 407 words

    “Discharge and transfer summaries CFR(s): 484.110(a)(6)(i-iii) (i) A completed discharge summary that is sent to the primary care practitioner or other health care professional who will be responsible for providing care and services to the patient after discharge from the HHA (if any) within 5 business days of the patient’s discharge; or (ii) A completed transfer summary that is sent within 2 business days of a planned transfer, if the patient’s care will be immediately continued in a health care facility; or (iii) A completed transfer summary that is sent within 2 business days of becoming aware of an unplanned transfer, if the patient is still receiving care in a health care facility at the time when the HHA becomes aware of the transfer. This Element is not met as evidenced by: Based on record reviews and interviews, the agency failed to ensure a completed transfer summaries were provided to the receiving service provider for five (Patients #2, 8, 11, 13 and #14) of 17 patients. Findings: Patient #2 A review of the clinical record showed transfer from the agency on 11/25/25 to inpatient hospital services. The clinical record showed no transfer summary was provided to the inpatient hospital provider. At 11:40 a.m., Staff A stated the transfer summary was not provided to the hospital. Patient #8 A review of the clinical record showed transfer from the agency on 12/24/25 to inpatient hospital services. The clinical record showed no transfer summary was provided to the inpatient hospital provider. At 11:40 a.m., Staff A stated the transfer summary was not provided to the hospital. Patient #11 A review of the clinical record showed transfer from the agency on 12/26/25 to inpatient hospital services. The clinical record showed no transfer summary was provided to the inpatient hospital provider. At 12:42 p.m., Staff A stated the transfer summary was not provided to the hospital. Patient #13 A review of the clinical record showed transfer from the agency on 12/18/25 to inpatient hospital services. The clinical record showed no transfer summary was provided to the inpatient hospital provider. At 12:55 p.m., Staff A stated the transfer summary was not provided to the hospital. Patient #14 A review of the clinical record showed transfer from the agency on 12/15/25 to inpatient hospital services. The clinical record showed no transfer summary was provided to the inpatient hospital provider. At 1:00 p.m., Staff A stated the transfer summary was not provided to the hospital.”

    Rule G1022. Element-level. From a complaint.

The one inspection in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
Jan 29, 2026Complaint and recertification inspection9 deficiencies cited

Is it certified?

  • Medicare-certified home health agency since Jun 24, 1996.
  • Ownership: proprietary (for profit).
  • No deficiency on record in the last three years.
Source:

CMS, Home Health Care Agencies. Released Oct 21, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, QCOR home health inspection reports. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

Has anything been proven against it?

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for home health agencies, so none are shown.
  • 9 deficiencies cited in the last three years came from inspections that included a complaint investigation.
Source:

CMS, QCOR home health inspection reports. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

Who does the caring?

  • Offers nursing care, physical therapy, occupational therapy, speech pathology, medical social services and home health aide services.
  • CMS doesn’t publish staffing levels for home health agencies.
Source:

CMS, Home Health Care Agencies. Released Oct 21, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Who owns it?

  • Cornerstone Healthcare Inc. owns 100% directly since Nov 1, 2017.
  • 7 owners or officers are people: Crystal Warner (managing employee (on the payroll), 0%); Brent Mills (corporate officer, 0%); Michelle Avery (managing employee (on the payroll), 0%); Brent Guerisoli (corporate director, 0%); Lori Lamb (managing employee (on the payroll), 0%); John Gochnour (corporate officer, 0%); Amber L Tueller (corporate officer, 0%).
  • No private-equity firm among the owners CMS lists.
  • No real-estate investment trust among the owners CMS lists.
Source:

CMS, Home Health Agency All Owners and Home Health Agency Enrollments. Released Sep 29, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Organisations CMS lists
OrganisationRoleShareSince
Cornerstone Healthcare Inc.Owns 5% or more directly100%Nov 1, 2017
The Pennant Group Inc.Owns 5% or more through other companiesOct 1, 2019

How do patients fare?

  • CMS rates its quality of patient care 4 of 5.
  • Patients rate it 4 of 5 in CMS’s patient survey (166 surveys completed): 89% rated it 9 or 10 out of 10, and 82% would definitely recommend it.
  • CMS compares it with the national rate: discharged to the community, better; potentially preventable hospital stays, the same; potentially preventable readmissions after discharge, the same.
Source:

CMS, Home Health Care Agencies and Home Health Patient Survey. Released Oct 21, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Ratings and measures, as published
MeasureRating
Quality of patient care ratingCMS star rating, 1 to 5 in half stars4 of 5
Patient survey ratingCMS star rating from its survey of the agency’s patients, 1 to 54 of 5
Discharged to the communityCMS’s risk-adjusted rate, compared with the national rate85.37% (better than the national rate)
Potentially preventable hospital staysCMS’s risk-adjusted rate, compared with the national rate12.90% (same as the national rate)
Potentially preventable readmissions after dischargeCMS’s risk-adjusted rate, compared with the national rate3.56% (same as the national rate)

How does it compare nearby?

  • Of the 59 agencies CMS’s data show serving patients in ZIP code 73139, where this agency’s office is, 52 have a quality of patient care rating; the middle one is 4 of 5, and this one is rated 4 of 5.
Source:

CMS, Home Health ZIP Codes and Home Health Care Agencies. Released Oct 21, 2026. Updated quarterly.

What the record doesn’t say

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for home health agencies, so none are shown.
  • Only complaints that led to a citation appear; complaints that didn’t aren’t published.
  • QCOR says some of its home health reports are accurate or available only through May 19, 2021, because of a systems migration.
  • Many home health agencies are inspected by a private accrediting organisation instead of the state, and QCOR’s home health file doesn’t appear to include those inspections: no inspection on record here doesn’t mean none took place.

Sources

If you believe something here is wrong, a correction starts with the agency whose record this copies: CMS. CMS’s own record is on Care Compare. If Hearth Record copied something wrongly, it will fix it and log the correction publicly, with its date: how corrections work.

Source:

This copy of the record was made on Oct 24, 2026.

From the agency

The public record above comes first. Anything the agency adds will appear here, below it, and say who wrote it.

Replies

None. Replies aren’t open yet. When they open, the agency will be able to answer any finding for free, and the reply will show beside that finding, unedited and dated.

Paid listing

None. Paid listings aren’t open yet. When they open, anything paid for will say “Paid by the agency”, and paying will never change a finding, a rating or the order of results.

How to read a record

Four things every record does, shown on an example record made up for this guide.

An example record, made up for this guide

An example nursing home

Made up for this guide: no real place is shown

Not fully inspected in over two years (CMS flag)

11 health citations at the latest inspection cycle

The state average is 14.3.

Source:

CMS, State and US Averages and Health Deficiencies. Released Oct 28, 2026. Updated monthly.

From the homeNone yet. Replies and paid listings aren’t open, and when they open they will sit here, below the record.

1 of 4

Every fact names its source.

Who published it, when, and how often it changes sit beside each fact, with a link to the agency’s own file.

Sign in

A free account keeps your watch list, shortlists, comparisons and saved searches on every device, and can email you when something you watch changes. Browsing never needs one.