Hearth Record

Saint Lukes Hospice of Leavenworth, LLC

A hospice in Leavenworth, Kansas 66048

1001 6th Ave., Suite 125, Leavenworth, Kansas 66048. (913) 758-9034.

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 7 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Jan 2024. 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?

7 deficiencies cited in the last three years

The middle of the 38 hospices serving ZIP code 66048 had 4.5.

The last inspection on record was on Mar 11, 2024: 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

7 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Jan 2024. Most serious: Standard-level. The last 3 years, to Nov 5, 2026.

7 deficiencies by month over the last 3 years. Each cell is one month.
JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2023 Dec
2024 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2025 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2026 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNov

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.

Jan 11, 2024: recertification inspection by the state7 deficiencies
  • Develop EP Plan, Review and Update Annually (42 CFR 418.113(a))

    The inspectors’ words, 127 words

    “Based on review of the Emergency Preparedness Program (EPP) and interview the Hospice failed to review and update the emergency preparedness plan (EPP) at least every 2 years. Failure to review and update the EPP at least every 2 years places patients at risk for harm or injury during an emergency situation. Findings Include: Review of the EPP failed to show the plan was reviewed and updated every 2 years, the last documented revision was October 2021. During an interview on 01/10/24 between at 9:00 AM and 2:30 PM, the Safety Administrator stated that the last documented revision of the EPP was November 2021, even though the EPP showed October 2021, and that the EPP was currently in the review and revision process at their facility now.”

    Rule E0004. Standard-level.

  • EP Program Patient Population (42 CFR 418.113(a)(3))

    The inspectors’ words, 139 words

    “Based on review of the Emergency Preparedness Program (EPP) and interview the Hospice failed to develop and maintain an emergency preparedness plan (EPP) that addressed patient population, the services the facility has the ability to provide in an emergency; and continuity of operations including the delegation of authority and succession plan. This deficient practice has the potential to place patients at risk for harm or injury during an emergency situation. Findings Include: Review of the EPP failed to show an emergency preparedness plan (EPP) that addressed patient population, the services the facility has the ability to provide in an emergency; and continuity of operations including the delegation of authority and succession plan. During an interview on 01/10/24 between at 9:00 AM and 2:30 PM, the Safety Administrator confirmed the Patient Population was not addressed within the Emergency Preparedness Program.”

    Rule E0007. Standard-level.

  • Local, State, Tribal Collaboration Process (42 CFR 418.113(a)(4))

    The inspectors’ words, 157 words

    “Based on review of the Emergency Preparedness Program (EPP) and interview the Hospice failed to develop and maintain an emergency preparedness plan (EPP) that includes a process for cooperation and collaboration with local, tribal, regional, State, and Federal emergency preparedness officials’ efforts to maintain an integrated response during a disaster or emergency situation. This deficient practice has the potential to place patients at risk for harm or injury during an emergency situation. Findings Include: Review of the EPP failed to show a process for cooperation and collaboration with local, tribal, regional, State, and Federal emergency preparedness officials’ efforts to maintain an integrated response during a disaster or emergency situation. During an interview on 01/10/24 between at 9:00 AM and 2:30 PM, the Safety Administrator confirmed that there was no process for cooperation and collaboration with local, tribal, regional, State and Federal emergency preparedness officials to maintain an integrated response during a disaster for the Emergency Preparedness Program.”

    Rule E0009. Standard-level.

  • Hospice Follow up for Staff (42 CFR 418.113(b)(1))

    The inspectors’ words, 224 words

    “Based on review of the Emergency Preparedness Program (EPP) and interview the Hospice failed to develop a procedure to follow up with on duty staff and patients to determine services that are needed, in the event that there is an interruption in services during or due to an emergency. The hospice must inform State and local officials of any on-duty staff or patients that they are unable to contact. Failure to develop a procedure to follow up with on duty staff and patients has the potential to place staff an patients at risk for harm in an emergency situation. Findings Include: Review of the EPP failed to show an emergency preparedness plan (EPP) that procedure to follow up with on duty staff and patients to determine services that are needed, in the event that there is an interruption in services during or due to an emergency. During an interview on 01/10/24 between at 9:00 AM and 2:30 PM, the Safety Administrator confirmed that there were no procedures to follow up with on duty staff and patients to determine services, but that there were no timeframes of when follow-ups will occur. There were also no distinct differences in response between triaging levels of patients in the event that there is an interruption in services during or due to an emergency for the Emergency Preparedness Program.”

    Rule E0016. Standard-level.

  • Homebound HHA/Hospice Inform EP Officials (42 CFR 418.113(b)(2))

    The inspectors’ words, 169 words

    “Based on review of the Emergency Preparedness Program (EPP) and interview the Hospice failed to develop a procedure to inform State and local emergency preparedness officials about homebound hospice patients in need of evacuation from their residences at any time due to an emergency situation based on the patient’s medical and psychiatric condition and home environment. Failure to develop a procedure to inform State and local emergency preparedness officials about homebound hospice patients places them at risk for harm during an emergency. Findings Include: Review of the EPP failed to show a communication plan which addressed the procedures to inform State and local emergency preparedness officials about homebound hospice patients in need of evacuation from their residences at any time due to an emergency situation. During an interview on 01/10/24 between at 9:00 AM and 2:30 PM, the Safety Administrator confirmed there was no communication plan which addressed the procedures to inform State and local emergency preparedness officials about homebound hospice patients in need of evacuation from their residences.”

    Rule E0019. Standard-level.

  • Policies/Procedures for Medical Documentation (42 CFR 418.113(b)(3))

    The inspectors’ words, 141 words

    “Based on review of the Emergency Preparedness Program (EPP) and interview the Hospice failed to develop and implement policies and procedures for a system of medical documentation that preserves patient information, protects confidentiality of patient information, and secures and maintains availability of records. The failure to develop and implement policies and procedures for a system of medical documentation places patients at risk for the loss of continuity of care and violation of their privacy rights. Findings Include: Review of the EPP failed to include policies and procedure for a system of medical documentation during an emergency. During an interview on 01/10/24 between at 9:00 AM and 2:30 PM, the Safety Administrator confirmed there were no EPP policies and procedures for a system of medical documentation that preserves patient information, protects confidentiality of patient information, and secures and maintains availability of records.”

    Rule E0023. Standard-level.

  • Supervision of hospice aides (42 CFR 418.76(h)(1)(i))

    The inspectors’ words, 401 words

    “Based on interview and record review, it was determined the hospice agency failed to ensure the completion of supervisory visits for 4 (Patient 2,11,15, & 16) of 8 patients receiving hospice aide services. This failure has the potential for patients to not receive the appropriate services and delay the patient’s progress toward meeting established goals. Findings Include: Patient 2 Review of Patient 2’s Plan of Care (POC) for the certification period dated 11/24/23 to 01/22/24, showed there was an order for hospice aide services for assistance with personal care one time per week for nine weeks. Review of Skilled Nurse note dated 12/06/23 indicated the RN made a supervisory visit. The next required aide supervisory visit would then be due on or before 12/20/23 however, the next documented aide supervisory visit was on 12/22/23, which was two days late. Patient 11 Review of Patient 11’s Plan of Care (POC) for the certification period dated 11/10/23 to 02/07/24, showed there was an order for hospice aide services for assistance with personal care two times per week for 11 weeks. Review of Skilled Nurse note dated 12/26/23 indicated the RN made a supervisory visit. The next required aide supervisory visit would then be due on or before 01/09/24 however, as of survey date of 01/11/24 there was no supervisory visit documented as being made. Patient 15 Review of Patient 15’s Plan of Care (POC) for the certification period dated 10/07/23 to 12/06/23, showed there was an order for hospice aide services for assistance with personal care one time per week for 9 weeks. Review of Skilled Nurse note dated 11/14/23 indicated the RN made a supervisory visit. The next required aide supervisory visit would then be due on or before 11/28/23 however, there was no documentation of the supervisory visit being made. Patient 16 Review of Patient 16’s Plan of Care (POC) for the certification period dated 10/18/23-01/15/24, showed there was an order for hospice aide services for assistance with personal care one time per week for 9 weeks. Review of Skilled Nurse not dated 10/25/23 indicated the RN made a supervisory visit. The next required aide supervisory visit would then be due on or before 11/08/23 however, the next documented supervisory visit was made on 11/10/23 which was 2 days late. During an interview on 01/10/24 at 3:55 PM, the Administrator confirmed the above findings of missed or late aide supervisory visits.”

    Rule L0629. Standard-level.

All 2 inspections in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
Mar 11, 2024Recertification inspection by the stateNo deficiencies cited
Jan 11, 2024Recertification inspection by the state7 deficiencies cited

Is it certified?

  • Medicare-certified hospice since Jan 14, 1992.
  • Ownership: other.
  • 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): 13.7 nurse care minutes per routine home care day, 14.4% of skilled nursing minutes at weekends and a visit near death for 92.4% of patients who died.
  • Where its patients were cared for (Jan 1, 2024 to Dec 31, 2024): 95% at home, 1% in assisted living, 3% in a nursing facility, 1% in a skilled nursing facility.
Source:

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

Staffing measures
MeasureThis provider
Nurse care minutes per routine home care day13.7 min
Skilled nursing minutes at weekends14.4%
Visits near death92.4% of patients who died

Who owns it?

  • Saint Luke’s Health System Home Care and Hospice owns 100% directly since Jan 1, 2007.
  • Saint Lukes Health System Inc. runs it.
  • 19 owners or officers are people: Lisa H Havenhill (corporate officer, 100%); Lisa H Havenhill (managing employee (on the payroll)); Peter S Holt (corporate officer); Peter S Holt (corporate director); Amy M Nachtigal (corporate officer); Amy M Nachtigal (runs it (operational or managerial control)); Angela Locke (corporate director); Denise Mogg (corporate officer); Denise Mogg (corporate director); Jennifer Dawn Keil (managing employee (on the payroll)); Julie Quirin (corporate officer); Jamie Allen (corporate director); Gina E Lawson (corporate director); Julie A Solomon (corporate director); Lisa Chase (corporate director); Christopher E Beal (corporate director); Anita Brennan (corporate director); Anita Brennan (runs it (operational or managerial control)); Jamila M Weaver (corporate director).
  • 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.

Organisations CMS lists
OrganisationRoleShareSince
Saint Lukes Health System Inc.Owns 5% or more through other companies100%Jan 1, 2007
Saint Lukes Health System Inc.Runs it (operational or managerial control)100%Jan 1, 2007
Bjc Health SystemOwns 5% or more through other companies100%Jan 1, 2024
Saint Luke’s Health System Home Care and HospiceOwns 5% or more directly100%Jan 1, 2007

What do families say?

  • Family caregivers rate it 4 of 5 in CMS’s survey (Oct 1, 2023 to Sep 30, 2025): 84% rated it 9 or 10 out of 10, and 85% would definitely recommend it.
  • CMS’s Hospice Care Index: 10 of 10 (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024).
  • 99.53% of patients were assessed on all seven of CMS’s measures at the start of care (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025); 56% 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 54 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 threshold10 of 10

How does it compare nearby?

  • Of the 38 hospices CMS’s data show serving patients in ZIP code 66048, where this hospice’s office is, the middle number of deficiencies cited in the last three years was 4.5; this one had 7.
Source:

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

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

The 38 hospices CMS lists serving ZIP code 66048
PlaceDeficiencies, 3 years
Saint Lukes Hospice of Leavenworth, LLC This hospice7
Hospice the University of Kansas Health System23
Amberwell Hospice33
Elara Caring10
Catholic Comm HospiceNot given
Gentiva5
St Croix Hospice4
Kansas Palliative & Hospice Care7
Vitas Innovative Hospice Care4
Ascend Hospice3
Three Oaks Hospice2
Amedisys Hospice4

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 Nov 5, 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.