Hearth Record

Journeys Hospice

A hospice in Nampa, Idaho 83686

223 East Amity, Nampa, Idaho 83686. (208) 353-4285.

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 23, 2026.

The last 24 months 3 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Jun 2026. Most serious: Standard-level. Every month

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

What these words mean2
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?

3 deficiencies cited in the last three years

The middle of the 23 hospices serving ZIP code 83686 had 5.

The last inspection on record was on Jun 17, 2026: a recertification inspection by the state.

Source:

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

3 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Jun 2026. Most serious: Standard-level. The last 3 years, to Oct 27, 2026.

3 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 hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Jun 17, 2026: recertification inspection by the state3 deficiencies
  • Plan Based on All Hazards Risk Assessment (42 CFR 418.113(a)(1)-(2))

    The inspectors’ words, 150 words

    “Based on policy review, EP plan review, and staff interview, it was determined the agency failed to ensure the EP plan, including the all hazards risk assessment, was updated on an annual basis. Failure to update the plan on an annual basis had the potential for necessary updates to the EP plan to be missed. Findings include: An agency policy titled, “Emergency Operations Plan” was reviewed. The policy stated, “Hazard Vulnerability Analysis (HVA) will be conducted and evaluated annually in October.” This policy was not followed. An example includes:The facility’s EP plan was reviewed. The last time the all hazards risk assessment was reviewed was August 2023.The HR director was interviewed on 6/16/26 beginning at 12:42 PM. He confirmed the all hazards risk assessment had not been updated since August 2023.The agency failed to ensure the EP plan, including the all hazards risk assessment, was updated on an annual basis.”

    Rule E0006. Standard-level.

  • Coordination of services (42 CFR 418.56(e)(1))

    The inspectors’ words, 275 words

    “Based on medical record review and staff interview, it was determined the agency failed to maintain responsibility for coordinating care for 1 of 11 current patients (Patient #7) whose medical records were reviewed. Failure to ensure coordination of care created the potential for unmet patient social work needs. Findings include: Patient #7 was an 88 year old male admitted to the agency with a primary diagnosis of atherosclerotic heart disease. He received SN services. Social work services were ordered but he initially refused them. His record for the certification period 3/04/2026 to 6/01/2026 was reviewed.An SN visit note dated 3/22/26 was reviewed. It stated, “I did speak one on one with the daughter and asked about bring out a social worker for a visit/eval. Daughter is ok with this.”An SN visit note dated 3/18/26 was reviewed. It stated, “I did speak one on one with the daughter and asked about bring out a social worker for a visit/eval. Daughter is ok with this.”An SN visit note dated 6/03/26 was reviewed. It stated, “Daughter [name] states she needs to talk to someone about possibly getting guardianship over her dad. Referred to HSW [hospice social worker].”The medical record was reviewed for social work visits or notes and did not include any at the time of record review.The Social Worker was interviewed on 6/16/26 beginning at 11:04 AM and Patient #7’s record was reviewed with her. She stated she had reached out to the daughter about social work visits but had not been able to contact her. She confirmed there were no notes regarding the attempted contact.The agency failed to maintain responsibility for coordinating care for Patient #7.”

    Rule L0554. Standard-level.

  • Performance improvement projects (42 CFR 418.58(d)(2))

    The inspectors’ words, 476 words

    “Based on QAPI plan review and staff interview, it was determined the agency failed to ensure performance improvement projects (PIPs) included the reason for conducting the project and measurable progress toward the PIP’s goals. The agency failed to ensure the PIP had clear direction and showed progress. Findings include: QAPI meeting minutes from 2025 to 2026 were reviewed and included the following: The QAPI meeting minutes from 10/15/25 stated, “QAPI team has decided to perform a PIP for our Volunteer Program. By the next QAPI meeting we will form a PIP team and create a plan to grow our Volunteer program, this PIP will also include retention.”The QAPI meeting minutes from 2/04/26 stated, “QAPI team has decided to form a PIP for our Volunteer Program. By the next QAPI meeting we will form a PIP team and create a plan to grow our Volunteer Program.”The QAPI meeting minutes from 4/15/26 stated, “Presented the Volunteer Cost savings, QAPI team decided to do a PIP for our Volunteer Program. [Name], [Name] and [Name] will be the PIP team. They will meet on 4/29/26 11 am to create a plan and present the PIP at the next QAPI meeting.”Minutes were requested from the PIP team meeting that was said to occur on 4/29/26 in the QAPI meeting minutes, but were unable to be located.A document titled, “Performance Improvement Plan (PIP): Hospice Volunteer Program” was provided. The document did not have a date. It stated “The purpose of this Performance Improvement Plan is to stabilize and strengthen the hospice volunteer program by increasing active volunteer utilization, and ensuring reliable support for patient care needs.” It included the following: “Goal…increase the number of active hospice volunteers from 2 to 8 within 90 days, ensuring volunteers are consistently engaged and contributing to patient support.”“Launch targeted recruitment through community outreach, local organizations, and partnerships”“Track recruitment activity weekly to ensure steady progress toward goal.”“Track active volunteer status weekly … monitor volunteer hours and participation consistency … conduct biweekly reviews to assess progress toward 8 active volunteers within 90 days”A document titled “Volunteer Recruitment and Retention Tracking for 2026” was provided. It stated the following: “Activity … PIP volunteer program recruitment strategies” dated 4/29/26. It did not include what recruitment strategies included“Ad at American Legion Society” dated 5/08/26. It did not include what the advertisement included.It was unclear if the PIP had been started yet. There was no documentation of tracking of volunteers or volunteer hours. There was no documentation of progress toward the goal of 8 volunteers. At the time of survey the agency did not have any active volunteers.The DON was interviewed on 6/16/26 beginning at 12:42 PM and the QAPI plan was reviewed in her presence. She confirmed the QAPI plan was missing information on the progress toward the goal.The agency failed to ensure the PIP had clear direction and showed progress.”

    Rule L0573. Standard-level.

The one inspection in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
Jun 17, 2026Recertification inspection by the state3 deficiencies cited

Is it certified?

  • Medicare-certified hospice since Feb 6, 2007.
  • Ownership: for-profit.
  • No deficiency or on record in the last three years.
Source:

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.
Source:

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): 11 nurse care minutes per routine home care day, 6.7% of skilled nursing minutes at weekends and a visit near death for 95.8% of patients who died.
  • Where its patients were cared for (Jan 1, 2024 to Dec 31, 2024): 51% at home, 49% in assisted living.
Source:

CMS, Hospice Provider Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Staffing measures
MeasureThis provider
Nurse care minutes per routine home care day11.0 min
Skilled nursing minutes at weekends6.7%
Visits near death95.8% of patients who died

Who owns it?

  • 4 owners or officers are people: Jessica Velasquez (owns 5% or more directly, 100%); Jessica Velasquez (corporate officer, 100%); Dean Hummer (managing employee (on the payroll), 49%); Steven J Koga (managing employee (under contract), 5%).
  • No private-equity firm among the owners CMS lists.
  • No real-estate investment trust among the owners CMS lists.
Source:

CMS, Hospice All Owners and Hospice Enrollments. Released Sep 29, 2026. Updated quarterly.

What do families say?

  • CMS gives no family caregiver survey rating: “The number of cases is too small to report Star Ratings.”
  • In CMS’s survey of family caregivers (Oct 1, 2023 to Sep 30, 2025): 87% rated it 9 or 10 out of 10, and 92% would definitely recommend it.
  • CMS’s Hospice Care Index: 9 of 10 (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024).
  • 95.83% of patients were assessed on all seven of CMS’s measures at the start of care (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025); 76% had visits from a nurse or social worker on at least 2 of their last 3 days (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024).
Source:

CMS, CAHPS Hospice Survey and Hospice Provider Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Ratings and measures, as published
MeasureRating
Family caregiver survey ratingCMS star rating from its survey of patients’ family caregivers, 1 to 5Not rated
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 threshold9 of 10

How does it compare nearby?

  • Of the 23 hospices CMS’s data show serving patients in ZIP code 83686, where this hospice’s office is, the middle number of deficiencies cited in the last three years was 5; this one had 3.
Source:

CMS, Hospice ZIP Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

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

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 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.

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.