Hearth Record

Marshfield Medical Ctr Rice Lake Hospice

A hospice in Rice Lake, Wisconsin 54868

1215 W Knapp St, Rice Lake, Wisconsin 54868. (715) 236-6256.

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 27 deficiencies in 2 months of the last 36. Last cited Apr 2025. Most serious: Condition-level. Every month

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

What these words mean4
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.
Condition-level deficiency
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.

What did inspectors find?

27 deficiencies cited in the last three years

The middle of the 7 hospices serving ZIP code 54868 had 7.

The last inspection on record was on Apr 24, 2025: a follow-up inspection by The Joint Commission.

2 deficiencies at condition level, the more serious of CMS’s two levels

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

27 deficiencies in 2 months of the last 36. Last cited Apr 2025. Most serious: Condition-level. The last 3 years, to Oct 27, 2026.

27 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.

Apr 24, 2025: follow-up inspection by The Joint Commission3 deficiencies
  • Initial & comprehensive assessment of patient (42 CFR 418.54)

    “Observed in Record Review. On 1 of 2 active hospice records reviewed, the organization failed to ensure the staff conduct and document a patient-specific comprehensive assessment that identifies the patient’s need for hospice care and services. On HSRRNHV #1, it was noted that patient started oxygen and no oxygen assessment and teaching was completed prior to starting services. On review of the organizations policy, their assessment policy did not contain information on oxygen assessment requirements. This observation was reviewed with the Administrator and clinical supervisor.”

    Rule L0520. Standard-level.

  • Review of the plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(d))

    The inspectors’ words, 95 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 2 of 2 active hospice patient records reviewed. the organization did not updated the plan of care based on information from update to the patients comprehensive assessment. On HSRRNHV #1, it was noted on the most recent recert assessment that patient had change in nutrition and this was not reflected in the current Plan of Care. On HSRRNHV #2, it was noted that the patient has had a teaching goal for CHF for over a year with no update to that plan. These observations were reviewed with the Clinical Supervisor.”

    Rule L0553. Standard-level.

  • Use and mintenance of equipment and supplies (42 CFR 418.106(f)(2))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 2 Hospice patient records reviewed, education was not provided based on the needs of the patient. On HSRRNHV #1, it was noted that the patient had need for oxygen, however, before starting oxygen education on the care and treatment of the equipment was not provided. There was a note that the caregiver stated she knew how to administer oxygen but there is no documentation on the storage, handling and access of oxygen. This finding was reviewed with the clinical supervisor.”

    Rule L0702. Standard-level.

Mar 14, 2025: reaccreditation inspection by The Joint Commission24 deficiencies
  • Content of comprehensive assessment (42 CFR 418.54(c))

    The inspectors’ words, 155 words

    “Observed in Tracer Activities. the organization failed to provide a written definition of data and information to be collected during the comprehensive assessment that included the patient’s physical, psychosocial, emotional, and spiritual needs related to the terminal illness that must be addressed in order to promote the patient’s well-being, comfort, and dignity throughout the dying process - The nature of the condition causing the patient’s admission to the hospice program, including the presence or absence of objective data and subjective complaints - Complications and risk factors that affect care planning - Functional status, including the patient’s ability to understand and participate in their care - Imminence of death. On review of the organizations policy for initial assessment filed to include the required elements only specifying time frames that the assessment was to be accomplished yet not defining the elements of the assessment. This observation was review with the Director of Home Care/Hospice and Clinical Supervisor.”

    Rule L0524. Condition-level.

  • Governing body and administrator (42 CFR 418.100(b))

    “Observed in Leadership Session. Upon review of all tracer activities, it was noted that there was a pattern of staff failing to follow established organization policy and the governing body/leadership did not ensure that the Conditions of Participation for 418.100, 418.54, and 418.56, were met per policy as determined through observations, documentation, and staff interviews.”

    Rule L0651. Condition-level.

  • Exercise of rights/respect for proprty/person (42 CFR 418.52(b)(1)(i))

    The inspectors’ words, 111 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 1 patient records reviewed, for live discharge for extended prognosis, the organization failed to respect the patient’s right to participate in decisions about their care, treatment, and services. On review of HosRRDC#2 there was no documentation that the Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage was signed by the patient/caregiver/POA two days prior to discharge as required. There was documentation that the POA was informed vis phone of the planned discharge and that NOMNC was mailed yet there was no documentation that the POA was informed of their right to appeal the decision nor was the document returned signed. This observation was reviewed with the Clinical Supervisor.”

    Rule L0505. Standard-level.

  • Content of comprehensive assessment (42 CFR 418.54(c)(5))

    The inspectors’ words, 193 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 14 patient records reviewed, the organization failed to ensure and document a patient specific comprehensive assessment and reassessment that identified the patient’s need for hospice and services. On review of HosRRNHV#14 the patient had a diagnosis of Alcoholic Cirrhosis with ascites yet there was no documentation of the severity of the ascites such as appearance, size, palpation, and presence of fluid wave. This observation was reviewed with the Clinical Supervisor. Observed in Patient Home. In 1 of 4 home visits conducted, the organization failed to ensure the staff conduct and document a patient-specific comprehensive assessment and reassessment that identifies the patient’s need for hospice care and services. On home observation for HosRRHV#2 the RN was observed to perform an incomplete patient assessment. There was no observation of assessment of lung sounds, heart sounds, respirations, or bowel sounds. The RN observed the skin on the feet and elbows yet failed to observe any other portions of the skin such as the sacrum or perineum. There were no vital signs taken as part of the assessment. This observation was reviewed with the Manager/Administrator of Home Health and Hospice.”

    Rule L0529. Standard-level.

  • Patient outcome measures (42 CFR 418.54(e)(2))

    The inspectors’ words, 121 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 14 patient records reviewed, the organization failed to maintain complete and accurate patient records. On review of HosRRHV#2 in review of the documentation of each IDG meeting to review and update the comprehensive assessment, it was noted that the physician’s documentation was specific to a patient with a diagnosis of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with metastasis to the lung along with related history and physical yet all documentation from the rest of the IDG team and the Certificate of Terminal Illness was noted the patient with a terminal diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. The discrepancy was throughout all IDG documentation from admission in January to the current IDG meeting. This observation was reviewed with the Clinical Supervisor.”

    Rule L0535. Standard-level.

  • Plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(b ))

    The inspectors’ words, 133 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 14 of 14 patient records reviewed, the organization failed to ensure the plan of care reflect patient and family goals that were specific, measurable, and time-bound. Throughout all records reviewed there was noted a lack of goals that were specific, measurable and /or time-bound. In HosRRHV#1 examples of goals that were not individualized, measurable, and time-bound were Patient will receive massage therapy for comfort by the end of the certification and Spiritual trust has been restored with no achieve by date. Similar goals that were not measurable were noted throughout all records reviewed. Throughout the records reviewed all goals established were noted not to be individualized and were set an achieve by date of the end of the certification period. These observations were reviewed with the Clinical Supervisor.”

    Rule L0543. Standard-level.

  • Plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(b))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 2 patient records reviewed, for live discharge, the organization failed to ensure the patient/caregiver receive education and training by the hospice as appropriate to their responsibilities for care and services as identified in the plan of care. On review of HosRRDC#2 for extended prognosis there was no documentation of discharge instructions for the caregiver that was to care the patient post discharge. This observation was reviewed with the Clinical Supervisor.”

    Rule L0544. Standard-level.

  • Content of plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(c)(1))

    The inspectors’ words, 345 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 14 of 14 patient records reviewed, the organization failed to ensure the plan of care include all services needed for the palliation and management of the terminal illness and related conditions. On review of HosRRHV#1 the documentation noted the patient with difficulty swallowing, poor appetite with the use of ensure as supplement, and high fall risk yet there were no care plans for nutrition or fall safety. There were orders to taper medications related to over sedation yet the issue was not reflected in the plan of care. In HosRRHV#2 the patient had a terminal diagnosis of Alzheimer’s yet the only clinical care plan was for skin integrity. There was documentation of weight loss, poor appetite and PRN visit for cough yet no care plans related to the issues established to guide the care. In HosRRHV#3 the patient was on bleeding precautions, there was documentation of a yeast infection, complaints of dizziness and an episode of COVID yet the issues were not reflected in the plan of care. Throughout records reviewed there was a pattern noted of issues documented in the record yet not reflected in the plan of care. Further examples of issues documented yet not reflected were: In HosRRHV#4 tube feedings, and dysphagia/aspiration precautions. In HosRRNHV#5 the use of oxygen and respiratory/shortness of breath. In HosRRNHV#6 issues with pain, nausea were not reflected. Fall safety had a goal but no interventions. In HosRRNHV#7 the patient was diabetic with orders for blood glucose monitoring yet no endocrine plan, and documented confusion related to an encephalopathy diagnoses yet no care plan to address established. In HosRRNHV#8 the terminal diagnosis was Parkinson’s that required medication adjustment with tapering doses yet no care plan to guide. In HosRRNHV#9 the patient had issues with CHF and COPD with oxygen use yet to cardiopulmonary care plan established. Additional examples of issues that were noted in the documentation yet were not reflected in the plan of care were noted in HosRRNHV#9, HosRRNHV#10, HosRRNHV#11, HosRRNHV#12, HosRRNHV#13 and HosRRNHV#14. These observations were reviewed with the Clinical Supervisor.”

    Rule L0546. Standard-level.

  • Content of plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(c)(4))

    The inspectors’ words, 218 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 3 of 14 patient records reviewed, the organization failed to ensure the plan of care included all services needed for the palliation and management of the terminal illness and related conditions. On home observation and record review for HosRRHV#4 the patient had a G- Tube and the RN provided G Tube site care yet there were no orders for the care noted on the plan of care. In HosRRHV#3 there were orders noted on the plan of care for oxycodone as needed for pain, and oxycodone with acetaminophen as needed for pain yet there were no specific instructions to guide the patient/caregiver as to when to use which medication. Further, there were as needed orders for acetaminophen oral for pain/fever and per suppository for pain/fever along with the oxycodone with acetaminophen order but no specific instructions on when to choose which medication, nor any parameters for max dose of acetaminophen per day. In HosRRNHV#5 the order for oxygen read 1-6 liters per nasal cannula yet there were no specific instructions to guide the user as to which liter flow to choose. In HosRRNHV#14 there was an order for Oxygen 1-4 liters without any instruction as to what liter flow to choose. These observations were reviewed with the RN and Manager/Administrator for Home Health/Hospice.”

    Rule L0549. Standard-level.

  • Review of the plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(d))

    The inspectors’ words, 103 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 14 of 14 patient records reviewed, the organization failed to ensure the plan of care revisions were based on information from update to the patients comprehensive assessment and address the patient’s progress toward goals and outcomes. Throughout all clinical records reviewed there was a lack of updates to the plan of care as the care plans were noted to remain unchanged IDG to IDG without revisions based on changes in patient status and updates to the comprehensive assessment. There was no evidence noted in the record of progress toward goals. These observations were reviewed with the Clinical Supervisor.”

    Rule L0553. Standard-level.

  • Coordination of services (42 CFR 418.56(e)(2))

    The inspectors’ words, 95 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 2 of 14 patient records reviewed, the organization failed to ensure the care and services were provided in accordance with the plan of care. On review of HosRRHV#2 the social worker was order a frequency of every other week yet there was no visit documented on the 2nd week of February leaving a 3 week gap in social worker contact. In HosRRNHV#12 the Chaplain frequency was ordered 12 visits in 86 days yet in the allotted period only 10 visits were documented. These observations were reviewed with the Clinical Supervisor.”

    Rule L0555. Standard-level.

  • Coordination of services (42 CFR 418.56(e)(4))

    The inspectors’ words, 144 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 2 of 14 patient records reviewed, the organization failed to ensure all disciplines that provide care, treatment or services collaborate in the care of the patient and coordinate their efforts to support the goals outlined in the plan of care. On review of HosRRHV#2 there was documentation of a PRN skilled nursing visit made to assess the patient for a cough, yet there was no documentation that the physician was informed of the change in the patient status. In HosRRHV#3 during home observation the hospice aide was unable to perform the patient bath because the patient complaint of dizziness. The aide noted that patient frequently complained of dizziness and refused services yet there was no documentation noted in the clinical record that the dizziness had been reported to RN case manager. These observations were reviewed with the Clinical Supervisor.”

    Rule L0557. Standard-level.

  • Program data (42 CFR 418.58(b)(2)(i))

    “Observed in Tracer Activities. The organization failed to utilize collected data to monitor the effectiveness and safety of services and the quality of care. During tracer activities for Data Management for Home Care and Hospice, the surveyor observed the HCO failed to utilize the complaints received over the previous 3 years to determine the effectiveness or safety was achieved. This was discussed and reviewed with the Home Care and Hospice Director”

    Rule L0564. Standard-level.

  • Program data (42 CFR 418.58(b)(2)(ii))

    The inspectors’ words, 103 words

    “Observed in Tracer Activities. The organization failed to compile and analyze data. During tracer activities for Data Management for Home Care and Hospice, the surveyor observed the HCO collected data on complaints however did not document that the data was analyzed to identify trends or variances. Upon conversation with the Home Care and Hospice Director he stated that he was investigation all complaints but there was no data to say how many complaints had been received in the last 3 years or if there were any trends related to those complaints. This was discussed and reviewed with the Home Care and Hospice Director.”

    Rule L0564. Standard-level.

  • Control (42 CFR 418.60(b))

    The inspectors’ words, 212 words

    “Observed in Tracer Activities. The organization failed to implement activities for the prevention and control of infections and communicable disease. During tracer activities for Hospice, the surveyor observed the organization had only been collecting data on Catheter Associated Urinary Tract Infections and no other infections. Upon conversation with the Home Care and Hospice Director he stated that he wasn’t sure why they were collecting that. And he was unable to produce documentation of the data that was collected or any other infection data. This was discussed and reviewed with the Home Care and Hospice Director. Observed in Tracer Activities. The organization failed to document an infection prevention control program that was organizational wide and was an integral part of the organization’s quality assessment and performance improvement program. During tracer activities for Data Management, the surveyor observed the organization failed to document an infection control plan for the current year and the previous two years. Upon discussion with the Home Care and Hospice Director, the organization had been collecting data on catheter related urinary tract infections but did not have prioritization of infections, or analysis of what infections affected their patients. There was no documentation of an overall infection control plan. This was discussed and reviewed with the Home Care and Hospice Director.”

    Rule L0580. Standard-level.

  • In-service training (42 CFR 418.76(d))

    The inspectors’ words, 125 words

    “Observed in HR File Review. During a review of two home health aid education records, for the required 12 total hours per year required specifically for home-health aids. the hospice e pharmacy surveyor noted that one of the home health aids had a training sheet on file, but no hours assigned to the education provided. The second home health aid had been employed for 11 months and still had no training record. However, they still had one more month to meet this requirement. Also, in talking with one of the clinical nurse managers, the employee was not aware that this 12-hour education was required for all home health aides. This omission was validated with the director and clinical manager at the time of the survey.”

    Rule L0620. Standard-level.

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

    The inspectors’ words, 111 words

    “Observed in Record Review. In 3 of 12 patient records reviewed, the organization failed to ensure the quality of care and services provided by the hospice aide to ensure that services ordered meet the patient need were assessed by the RN no less frequently than every 14 days. On review of HosRRHV#1 there was a 15 day gap in aide supervisory visits in February. In HosRRHV#2 there was a 27 day gap from January to February in the RN aide supervisory visit. In HosRRNHV#5 the last aide supervisory visit documented was mid February leaving a 16 day gap to present day of survey. These observations were reviewed with the Clinical Supervisor.”

    Rule L0629. Standard-level.

  • Recruiting and retaining (42 CFR 418.78(c))

    “Observed in Tracer Activities. During a review of the organization’s volunteer recruitment and retention activities, the hospice pharmacist surveyor noted that retention activities were completed and documented; however although the volunteer coordinator indicated that recruitment activities were being completed, no documentation of this effort was available at the time of the survey, This omission was validated with the volunteer coordinator.”

    Rule L0645. Standard-level.

  • Cost saving (42 CFR 418.78(d)(3))

    “Observed in Tracer Activities. The hospice pharmacist surveyor noted that the organization had not documented the estimated cost savings for 2024 that the hospice would have incurred if paid employes had occupied the positions identified as volunteer positions for the same number of hours as the volunteers provided. The hospice must maintain these cost records on the use of volunteers for patient care and administrative services. The validation of this information was reviewed with the volunteer coordinator and director at the time of the survey”

    Rule L0646. Standard-level.

  • Content (42 CFR 418.104(a)(3))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 14 patient records reviewed, the organization failed to ensure the patient record contain all information to reflect the patient’s care, treatment, and services. On review of HosRRNHV#5 the patient had orders for wound treatments that were to be performed on each nursing visit yet in visits in the end of January, and early February there was no documentation of the dressing change performed nor the patient’s reaction to the treatment. This observation was reviewed with the Clinical Supervisor.”

    Rule L0674. Standard-level.

  • Content (42 CFR 418.104(a)(7))

    The inspectors’ words, 162 words

    “Observed in Patient Home. In 2 of 2 home visits conducted, where medication reconciliation was conducted, the organization failed to ensure the patient record contain all information to reflect the patient’s care, treatment, and services. For example: on home observation of medication reconciliation for HosRRHV#1 the patient’s plan of care had orders for cholecalciferol (Vit D3) 25 mcg/1000units 1 daily yet the medication was not included in the facility medication records. On HosRRHV#4 during the observation for medication reconciliation the patient medication profile as part of the plan of care noted hydrocodone 5mg/acetaminophen 325 mg as needed for pain yet the patient’s wife stated the patient was not taking the medication and had not taken for a couple of months (prior to hospice admission). For the loperamide 2 mg order noted take 1 tab every 4 hours as needed, yet the patient wife noted he was taking 1/2 tab daily. These observations were reviewed with the RN and Manager/Administrator HH and Hospice.”

    Rule L0678. Standard-level.

  • Discharge or transfer of care (42 CFR 418.104(e)(1)(i))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 2 patient records reviewed, for live discharge, the organization failed to provide the receiving facility with a copy of the hospice discharge summary. On review of HosRRDC#1 the patient revoked hospice services when enter the ED of the hospital yet there was no documentation of a discharge summary created or sent to the Medicare/Medicaid certified facility. This observation was reviewed with the Clinical Supervisor.”

    Rule L0682. Standard-level.

  • Discharge or transfer of care (42 CFR 418.104(e)(2)(i))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 2 patient records reviewed, for live discharge, the organization failed to provided the patient’s attending physician with a copy of the hospice discharge summary and if requested the patient’s clinical record. On review of HosRRDC#1 there was no documentation that a discharge summary was created therefore not provided to the patient’s attending physician. This observation was reviewed with the Clinical Supervisor.”

    Rule L0683. Standard-level.

  • Discharge or transfer of care (42 CFR 418.104(e)(3)(i))

    “Observed in Record Review. In 1 of 2 patient records reviewed, for live discharge, the organization failed to ensure that when the patient was discharged or transferred the discharge summary included all of the required elements. On review of HosRRDC#1 the patient revoked the hospice benefit to go the hospital yet there is no documentation in the record that a discharge summary was created. This observation was reviewed with the Clinical Supervisor.”

    Rule L0684. Standard-level.

All 2 inspections in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
Apr 24, 2025Follow-up inspection by The Joint Commission3 deficiencies cited
Mar 14, 2025Reaccreditation inspection by The Joint Commission24 deficiencies cited

Is it certified?

  • Medicare-certified hospice since Mar 21, 1997.
  • Ownership: non-profit.
  • Cited at in the last three years: it didn’t meet a whole condition of Medicare’s rules.
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): 7.8 nurse care minutes per routine home care day, 6.4% of skilled nursing minutes at weekends and a visit near death for 98.7% of patients who died.
  • Where its patients were cared for (Jan 1, 2024 to Dec 31, 2024): 56% at home, 24% in assisted living, 20% 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 day7.8 min
Skilled nursing minutes at weekends6.4%
Visits near death98.7% of patients who died

Who owns it?

  • Mchs Hospitals Inc. owns 100% directly since May 15, 2020.
  • 19 owners or officers are people: Brian D Hoerneman (corporate officer); Brian D Hoerneman (corporate director); Tony Lee Morrison (managing employee (on the payroll)); John F Baltus (corporate officer); John F Baltus (corporate director); Jolyn Joy Munson (managing employee (on the payroll)); Dennis H Smith (corporate director); Jeffrey Douglas Poppen (corporate officer); Jeffrey Douglas Poppen (managing employee (on the payroll)); Edward G Fernandez (corporate officer); Edward G Fernandez (corporate director); Samantha L Klebe (corporate director); Samantha L Klebe (managing employee (on the payroll), 0%); Linda Laverne Procci (corporate director, 0%); Everett W Newcomb (corporate director); John Nelson (managing employee (on the payroll)); David Schifeling (managing employee (on the payroll)); Douglas Mathison (corporate director); Nicholas Wayne Olson (managing employee (on the payroll)).
  • 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
Mchs Hospitals Inc.Owns 5% or more directly100%May 15, 2020
SanfordOwns 5% or more through other companies100%Jan 1, 2025
Marshfield Clinic Health System Inc.Owns 5% or more through other companies100%May 15, 2020

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 92% would definitely recommend it.
  • CMS’s Hospice Care Index: 9 of 10 (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024).
  • 96.47% of patients were assessed on all seven of CMS’s measures at the start of care (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025); 82.1% 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 threshold9 of 10

How does it compare nearby?

  • Of the 7 hospices CMS’s data show serving patients in ZIP code 54868, where this hospice’s office is, the middle number of deficiencies cited in the last three years was 7; this one had 27.
Source:

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

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

The 7 hospices CMS lists serving ZIP code 54868
PlaceDeficiencies, 3 years
Marshfield Medical Ctr Rice Lake Hospice This hospice27
St Croix Hospice Hudson4
Interim Healthcare Hospice of Western Wisconsin8
St Croix Hospice Eau Claire10
Moments Hospice of Eau Claire6
Heartland Hospice Eau Claire7
Lily Home and Hospice3

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.