Heart N Home Hospice & Palliative Care
A hospice in Fruitland, Idaho 83619
1104 Vermont Ave, Fruitland, Idaho 83619. (208) 452-2663.
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 23, 2026.
- 5 deficiencies cited in the last three years
- 4of 5 family caregiver rating
- 10of 10 CMS’s Hospice Care Index
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?
5 deficiencies cited in the last three years
The middle of the 14 hospices serving ZIP code 83619 had 5.
The last inspection on record was on May 20, 2026: a complaint inspection by the state.
CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.
CMS, Hospice ZIP Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.
When those deficiencies happened
5 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Aug 2024. Most serious: Standard-level. The last 3 years, to Oct 27, 2026.
| Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | Nov | Dec | ||||||||||
| 2024 | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec |
| 2025 | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec |
| 2026 | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct |
Hover or focus a month to read it.
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.
CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.
Aug 22, 2024: recertification inspection by the state5 deficiencies
-
Content of plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(c))
The inspectors’ words, 637 words
“Based on policy review, record review, and staff interview, it was determined the agency failed to ensure POCs were individualized for each specific patient for 2 of 19 patients (Patients #2 & #6) whose records were reviewed. This resulted in no interventions or goals related to the terminal illness addressed on patient’s POC and had the potential to affect all patients receiving services from the agency. Findings include: 3. Patient #8 was a 70-year-old female admitted to hospice on 8/16/24 with a primary diagnosis of moderate protein calorie malnutrition. She received SN, HHA, Chaplain and SW services. Her medical record, including the POC, was reviewed. A surveyor observational visit was conducted on 8/19/24 with the SW and this patient in the ALF. Patient #8s POC, dated 8/16/24, included the primary diagnosis of moderate protein calorie malnutrition but did not include a nutrition-based intervention or goal. The Regional Vice President (RVP)of the Hospice was interviewed on 8/22/24 at 10:00 AM, and Patient #8s medical record was reviewed in her presence. The RVP confirmed there were no interventions or goals created to address the primary diagnosis in the Patient #8s POC. The Agency failed to ensure that Patient #8s POC was comprehensive and addressed patients primary diagnosis. An agency policy titled, “;INITIAL & COMPREHENSIVE ADMISSION ASSESSMENT & PLAN OF CARE,” revised 4/01/22 stated, “;The purpose of the initial assessment visit will be to evaluate the patient’s physica4 psychosocia4 and emotional states related to the terminal illness and related conditions and to determine the patient’s immediate care and support needs. The information gathered in the initial assessment will be developed immediately into an initial plan of care.” This policy was not followed. Examples include: 1. Patient #2 was a 73 year old female admitted to the agency on 7/05/24 with a terminal diagnosis of “;nonspecific abnormal finding of lung field.” She had a mass in her left lung. She received SN, MSW, HHA, Chaplain, and volunteer services. Her record for the certification period 7/05/24 to 10/02/24 was reviewed. Patient #2s record included a POC that was completed on the SOC on 7/05/24. Orders for discipline and goals included generic hospice items including but not limited to pain reduction, education on pain scale, instructions on how to use medications, understanding of hospice services, and education on the hospice philosophy. There were no interventions or goals on the POC that were individualized to Patient #2s terminal diagnosis. Additionally, there were no respiratory interventions or goals related to Patient #2s terminal diagnosis of lung mass. The ED was interviewed on 8/21/24 beginning at 1:50 PM and Patient #2s POC was reviewed with her. She confirmed there were no respiratory interventions related to Patient #2s lung mass. She confirmed the POC was not individualized to Patient #2. 2. Patient #6 was a 58 year old female admitted to the agency on 7/05/24 with a primary diagnosis of dysphagia. Additional diagnoses included type 2 diabetes and alcohol abuse. She received SN, MSW, HHA, and chaplain services. Her record for the certification period 7/05/24 to 10/02/24 was reviewed. Patient #6s record included a POC that was completed on the SOC on 7/05/24. Orders for discipline and goals included generic hospice items including but not limited to pain scale, shortness of breath, vital sign assessment, and medication understanding. There were no interventions or goals on the POC that were individualized to Patient #6s terminal diagnosis. Additionally, there were no interventions or goals related to Patient #6s terminal diagnosis of dysphagia. The ED was interviewed on 8/21/24 beginning at 1:00 PM and Patient #6s POC was reviewed with her. She confirmed there was no interventions or goals related to Patient #6s terminal diagnosis of dysphagia. She confirmed Patient #6s POC was not individualized to Patient #6. The agency failed to ensure POCs were individualized for each specific patient.”
-
Content of plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(c)(1))
The inspectors’ words, 400 words
“Based on record review, and staff interview, it was determined the agency failed to ensure POCs included all interventions or goals necessary to manage symptoms for each specific patient for 1 of 19 patients (Patient #8) whose records was reviewed. This resulted in Patient #8’s POC not containing interventions or goals related to the identified symptoms. This had the potential to affect all patients receiving services from the agency. Findings include: . Patient #8 was a 70-year-old female admitted to hospice on 8/16/24 with a primary diagnosis of moderate protein calorie malnutrition. She received SN, HHA, Chaplain and SW services. Her medical record, including the POC, was reviewed. A surveyor observational visit was conducted on 8/19/24 with the SW and this patient in the ALF. Patient #8s medical record RN visits from 8/17/24 and 8/20/24. The visits documented a specific visual hallucination of a young boy in the Patient #8s bathroom. The MSWs visit on 8/19/24 included the same visual hallucination. The 8/19/24 notes included that the hallucinations were a concern for the patient. The medical recorded included, “;She was so fixed with the memory of the person in the mirror and with the young boy in her mind it was difficult to get other information.” Her medical record was reviewed. There was no documentation of intervention related to the hallucinations identified on any of the above visits to address these symptoms. The RVP of the hospice was interviewed on 8/22/24 at 10:00 AM and patient #8s medical record was reviewed in her presence. The RVP confirmed there were no interventions or goals created to address the hallucinations in the Patient #8s POC. Patient #8s POC, dated 8/16/24, documented included a primary diagnosis of moderate protein calorie malnutrition. RN visits on 8/17/24 and 8/20/24 completed by Hospice RNs did not include nutrition assessments. The medical record for both visits documented the field “;Was the patient nutritional status assessed” and the response “;No.” The subsequent field “;Why was the nutritional status not assessed?” had the response, “;Not appropriate at time of evaluation.” Patient #8s ongoing symptoms were not assessed. The Regional Vice President (RVP)of the Hospice was interviewed on 8/22/24 at 10:00 AM. The RVP confirmed nutrition assessments addressing primary diagnosis related symptoms were not completed during RN visits on 8/17/24 and 8/20/24. The Agency failed to ensure that Patient #8s health concerns and symptoms were addressed with interventions and assessments.”
-
Content of plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(c)(2))
The inspectors’ words, 220 words
“Based on record review and interview the agency failed to ensure the plan of care included all services necessary for the palliation and management of the terminal illness and related conditions for one of 19 patients (Patient #11) whose records were reviewed. Patient #11 was a 83 year old female admitted to hospice on 2/27/24 with a primary diagnosis of Chronic Kidney Disease. Additional diagnosis include protein calorie malnutrition, and type 2 DM. She received SN, HHA, Chaplain and SW services. Her medical record, including the POC, was reviewed. Patient #11s plan of care included “;Caregiver to putnystatin [sic] [put nystatin] on BID until resolved.” Nystatin is an antibiotic ointment used for the management of skin infections and rashes. There was no other detail or specificity to this order. It was unclear where the nystatin was to be applied and no detail on what was to be resolved. The RVP was interviewed on 8/22/24 beginning at 9:30 AM, and Patient #11s medical record was reviewed in her presence. She confirmed there was no documentation Patient #11s Nystatin order was specific to include necessary details. She stated she knew Patient #11 had a rash on her groin, but she confirmed there should be more documentation related to the Nystatin. The hospice failed to specify patient order to include all relevant information.”
-
Review of the plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(d))
The inspectors’ words, 363 words
“Based on record review and staff interview the agency failed to ensure the current and revised plan of care included updated goals and interventions or assessments for pain and symptoms for 2 of 19 patients (Patient #8 and #19) whose record was reviewed. This had the potential for needs to go unmet. 2. Patient #8s POC, dated 8/16/24, included a primary diagnosis of moderate protein calorie malnutrition. RN visits on 8/17/24 and 8/20/24 completed by Hospice RNs did not include nutritional assessments. The medical record for both visits included the field “;Was the patient nutritional status assessed” and the response “;No.” The subsequent field “;Why was the nutritional status not assessed?” documented the response, “;Not appropriate at time of evaluation.” It was unclear why a nutritional assessment was not completed. Patient #8s ongoing symptoms were not assessed. The RVP of the Hospice was interviewed on 8/22/24 at 10:00 AM. The RVP confirmed nutrition assessments addressing primary diagnosis related symptoms were not completed during RN visits on 8/17/24 and 8/20/24. The Agency failed to ensure that Patient #8s health concerns and symptoms were addressed with interventions and assessments. Patient #11 was a 83 year old female admitted to hospice on 2/27/24 with a primary diagnosis of Chronic Kidney Disease. Additional diagnosis include protein calorie malnutrition, and type 2 DM. She received SN, HHA, Chaplain and SW services. Her medical record, including the POC, was reviewed. Patient #11’s POC did not include updates to goals. Examples include: Patient #11s plan of care included, “;Patient pain [sic] will report pain at her comfort goal 4/10 or less through 3/22/24.” It was unclear what Patient #11s current measurable pain goal was after 3/22/24. Additionally, it was unclear why the current care plan, a document created on 6/13/24, included goals that had expired. The RVP was interviewed on 8/22/24 beginning at 9:30 AM, and Patient #11s medical record was reviewed in her presence. She stated she did not know why the current care plan showed goal that had expired. She stated she could not find documentation regarding Patient #11s updated pain goal. The agency failed to include Patient #11s POC included updated goals for the management of pain.”
-
Coordination of services (42 CFR 418.56(e)(2))
The inspectors’ words, 197 words
“Based on review of clinical record, and staff interview, it was determined that the hospice failed to follow orders outlilned on the plan of care for one of 19 patients (Patient #11) whose record was reviewed. Patient #11 was a 83 year old female admitted to hospice on 2/27/24 with a primary diagnosis of Chronic Kidney Disease. Additional diagnosis include protein calorie malnutrition, and type 2 DM. She received SN, HHA, Chaplain and SW services. Her medical record, including the POC, was reviewed. Patient #11s comprehensive care plan report included, “;Using aseptic technique, insert 16Fr 30ml Balloon catheter to continuous bedside drainage related to comfort. Catheter to be changed every 3 months and PRN per complications.” The order was dated at Patient #11s start of care and was on her current care plan for her current certification period. There was no documentation in Patient #11s medical record of her catheter being changed. The RVP was interviewed on 8/22/24 beginning at 9:30 AM, and Patient #11s medical record was reviewed in her presence. She confirmed there was no documentation Patient #11s catheter was changed as ordered. The hospice failed to provide services as order on Patient #11s POC.”
All 2 inspections in the last three years
| Date | Visit | What the record says |
|---|---|---|
| May 20, 2026 | Complaint inspection by the state | No deficiencies cited |
| Aug 22, 2024 | Recertification inspection by the state | 5 deficiencies cited |
Is it certified?
- Medicare-certified hospice since Jun 17, 2004.
- Ownership: other.
- No For hospices, home health agencies, hospitals and dialysis facilities, CMS writes deficiencies at two levels. Standard is the usual one; condition-level is the more serious, when a problem is serious enough that the provider doesn’t meet a whole condition of taking part in Medicare. Source: CMS, State Operations Manual. deficiency or CMS’s most serious finding: the place’s failure to meet a rule caused, or was likely to cause, serious injury, harm, impairment or death to someone in its care. Source: CMS; 42 CFR 489.3. on record in the last three years.
CMS, Hospice General Information. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.
CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.
Has anything been proven against it?
- CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for hospices, so none are shown.
- 0 deficiencies cited in the last three years came from inspections that included a complaint investigation.
CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.
Who does the caring?
- From Medicare claims (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024): 12.3 nurse care minutes per routine home care day, 11.1% of skilled nursing minutes at weekends and a visit near death for 94.5% of patients who died.
- Where its patients were cared for (Jan 1, 2024 to Dec 31, 2024): 60% at home, 37% in assisted living, 1% in a nursing facility, 2% in a skilled nursing facility, 1% elsewhere.
CMS, Hospice Provider Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.
| Measure | This provider |
|---|---|
| Nurse care minutes per routine home care day | 12.3 min |
| Skilled nursing minutes at weekends | 11.1% |
| Visits near death | 94.5% of patients who died |
Who owns it?
- Kambros, LLC owns 100% directly since Jul 1, 2021.
- 10 owners or officers are people: Marcus Macip (corporate officer); Kimberly Seymour (corporate officer, 0%); Kimberly Seymour (managing employee (on the payroll), 0%); Joni Babineaux (corporate officer, 0%); Paul C Gering (managing employee (under contract), 0%); Amanda Chapman (managing employee (on the payroll)); Wendy Daigle (corporate director, 0%); Lily A Conant-Burkett (managing employee (on the payroll), 0%); Joshua Lee Proffitt (corporate officer); Amy Cormier (corporate director, 0%).
- No private-equity firm among the owners CMS lists.
- No real-estate investment trust among the owners CMS lists.
CMS, Hospice All Owners and Hospice Enrollments. Released Sep 29, 2026. Updated quarterly.
| Organisation | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unitedhealth Group Incorporated | Owns 5% or more through other companies | 100% | Feb 22, 2023 |
| Kambros, LLC | Owns 5% or more directly | 100% | Jul 1, 2021 |
| LHC Group Inc. | Owns 5% or more through other companies | 100% | Jul 1, 2021 |
| Idaho Health Care Group, LLC | Owns 5% or more through other companies | 100% | Jul 1, 2021 |
What do families say?
- Family caregivers rate it 4 of 5 in CMS’s survey (Oct 1, 2023 to Sep 30, 2025): 82% rated it 9 or 10 out of 10, and 89% would definitely recommend it.
- CMS’s Hospice Care Index: 10 of 10 (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024).
- 99.49% of patients were assessed on all seven of CMS’s measures at the start of care (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025); 75.3% had visits from a nurse or social worker on at least 2 of their last 3 days (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024).
CMS, CAHPS Hospice Survey and Hospice Provider Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.
| Measure | Rating |
|---|---|
| Family caregiver survey ratingCMS star rating from its survey of patients’ family caregivers, 1 to 5 | 4 of 5 |
| Hospice Care IndexCMS’s Hospice Care Index, 0 to 10 (higher is better): a point for each of ten measures from Medicare claims on which the hospice meets CMS’s threshold | 10 of 10 |
How does it compare nearby?
- Of the 14 hospices CMS’s data show serving patients in ZIP code 83619, where this hospice’s office is, the middle number of deficiencies cited in the last three years was 5; this one had 5.
CMS, Hospice ZIP Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.
CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.
| Place | Deficiencies, 3 years |
|---|---|
| Enhabit Hospice of Idaho | 4 |
| Heart N Home Hospice & Palliative Care This hospice | 5 |
| Canyon Home Care & Hospice | 7 |
| Ancora Hospice & Palliative Services, LLC | 4 |
| St Luke’s Home Care / Hospice | 4 |
| Horizon Hospice West | 4 |
| Horizon Hospice | Not given |
| Heart ‘n Home Hospice | 5 |
| First Choice Home Health & Hospice | 14 |
| Achs Hospice & Palliative Care | 5 |
| Doctors Hospice of Idaho | 4 |
| Lighthouse Hospice LLC | 22 |
What the record doesn’t say
- CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for hospices, so none are shown.
- Only complaints that led to a citation appear; complaints that didn’t aren’t published.
- CMS ended its Special Focus Program for hospices with serious problems on Feb 14, 2025, so no hospice is marked as one.
- Hospice quality measures have a gap from October 2025: CMS replaced its patient assessment then, and public results from the new one (HOPE) are expected around November 2027.
Sources
-
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Hospice General Information (yc9t-dgbk).
Released Aug 26, 2026 and checked Oct 27, 2026. Updated quarterly. Public domain (U.S. Government work).
-
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Hospice Provider Data (252m-zfp9).
Released Aug 26, 2026 and checked Oct 27, 2026. Updated quarterly. Public domain (U.S. Government work).
-
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, CAHPS Hospice Survey (gxki-hrr8).
Released Aug 26, 2026 and checked Oct 27, 2026. Updated quarterly. Public domain (U.S. Government work).
-
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, QCOR hospice inspection reports (Hospice Survey Reports - Oct 2021 through Sep 2026.xlsx).
Released Oct 23, 2026 and checked Oct 27, 2026. Updated quarterly. Public domain (U.S. Government work).
-
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Hospice All Owners (e983965e-1603-4cb8-82b5-c40090e380d1).
Released Sep 29, 2026 and checked Oct 27, 2026. Updated quarterly. Public domain (U.S. Government work).
-
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Hospice Enrollments (25704213-e833-4b8b-9dbc-58dd17149209).
Released Sep 29, 2026 and checked Oct 27, 2026. Updated quarterly. Public domain (U.S. Government work).
-
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Hospice ZIP Data (95rg-2usp).
Released Aug 26, 2026 and checked Oct 27, 2026. Updated quarterly. Public domain (U.S. Government work).
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.
This copy of the record was made on Oct 27, 2026.
From the hospice
The public record above comes first. Anything the hospice adds will appear here, below it, and say who wrote it.
Replies
None. Replies aren’t open yet. When they open, the hospice 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 hospice”, and paying will never change a finding, a rating or the order of results.