Hearth Record

St. Patrick Hospital

An acute care hospital in Missoula, Montana 59802

500 W Broadway, Missoula, Montana 59802. (406) 543-7271.

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 20, 2026.

The last 24 months 2 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Feb 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 May 6, 2026: a complaint inspection.

2 deficiencies cited in the last three years, 2 of them under EMTALA, the law requiring an emergency department to examine and stabilise anyone who comes to it.

Source:

CMS, QCOR Hospital 2567 statements of deficiencies. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

When those deficiencies happened

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

2 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 Hospital 2567 statements of deficiencies. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

Feb 26, 2026: complaint inspection2 deficiencies

  • Compliance With 489.24

    The inspectors’ words, 415 words

    “COMPLIANCE WITH 489.24 CFR(s): 489.20(l) [The provider agrees,] in the case of a hospital as defined in §489.24(b), to comply with §489.24. This Standard is not met as evidenced by: 46400 Based on interview, policy review, and record review, the facility failed to comply with the conditions of participation outlined in 489.24 (refer to appendix V). The facility failed to accept the transfer of a patient determined to have an emergency medical condition within the hospital’s specialized capabilities to provide treatment for 1 (#21) of 21 patients sampled. Findings include: Patient #21 presented to Hospital A for evaluation of self-inflicted abdominal wound with foreign bodies. Imaging of the abdomen and pelvis showed two foreign bodies embedded. Hospital B was contacted for transfer of patient #21 to a higher level of care for his Emergency Medical Condition (EMC). Hospital B had the capabilities to provide care for patient #21 but declined the transfer. Review of the facility policy, Emergency and Unassigned Patient Call Policy, dated 7/2023, showed: “... 1. If a specialty physician receives a request for a transfer and is unwilling or unable to accept the transfer, the specialty physician must refer the request to the Emergency Department physician. The Emergency Department physician in consultation with Administration has the responsibility to accept the patient as an ED to ED transfer, which then places the responsiblity on the Hospital’s receiving specialist (s) to see and treat the patient as appropriate. 2. The Hospital (including the Emergency Department physician and staff physicians) shall note refuse to accept requests for transfers if the patient is in need of the specialized capabilities or facilities available at the Hospital. The only exception to this prohibition is if the Hospital lacks the capacity to safely treat the patient.” Review of a facility document, “Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor act (EMTALA),” approved 10/2024, showed: “ ...When an EMTALA obligation is triggered, the individual will be registered as a patient and [Facility Name] will provide a Medical Screening Exam (MSE) to determine whether or not an individual is experiencing an Emergency Medical Condition (EMC) ...[Facility Name] will provide an appropriate MSE within its full capabilities ...Definitions ... within the capability of the facility and staff - capabilities of a facility means that there is physical space, equipment supplies, and services that the hospital provides. Capabilities of the staff of a facility mean the level of care that personnel of the hospital can provide within the training and scope of their professional licenses ...””

    Rule A2400. Standard-level. From a complaint.

  • Recipient Hospital Responsibilities

    The inspectors’ words, 843 words

    “RECIPIENT HOSPITAL RESPONSIBILITIES CFR(s): 489.24(f) A participating hospital that has specialized capabilities or facilities (including, but not limited to, facilities such as burn units, shock-trauma units, neonatal intensive care units, or (with respect to rural areas) regional referral centers, which, for purposes of this subpart, means hospitals meeting the requirements of referral centers found at §412.96 of this chapter) may not refuse to accept from a referring hospital within the boundaries of the United States an appropriate transfer of an individual who requires such specialized capabilities or facilities if the receiving hospital has the capacity to treat the individual. This requirement applies to any participating hospital with specialized capabilities, regardless of whether the hospital has a dedicated emergency department. This Standard is not met as evidenced by: 46400 Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to accept a transfer of a patient determined to have an emergency medical condition within the hospital’s specialized capabilities to provide treatment for 1 (#21) of 21 patients sampled. Findings include: Review of patient #21’s Emergency Department (ED) visit in Hospital A showed he presented for evaluation of a self-inflicted abdominal wound with foreign bodies. Patient #21 had used a pen to reopen a prior surgical scar on his abdomen and inserted two sporks into the wound. Twenty four hours after inserting the sporks into his wound, due to the increase of pain, patient #21 sought medical attention. Examination of the wound by NF2 showed it to be three millimeters deep with no visibility of foreign bodies and no discharge. Medical Screening Examination (MSE) included labs, wound cultures, and Computerized Tomography (CT) scan of the abdomen/ pelvis with contrast. The CT scan results showed two foreign bodies. Patient #21 was administered a dose of antibiotics, and the provider began contacting other hospitals for a higher level of care. Hospital B declined the patient transfer and stated patient #21 was no longer a surgical candidate due to his previous surgeries. Hospital C accepted the patient #21 for further evaluation and he was transferred to Hospital C. During an interview on 2/12/26 at 11:45 a.m., NF2 stated patient #21 was not unstable while at hospital A, but it was obviously something the hospital did not have the capabilities to treat because they did not have the capability to perform surgery. NF2 stated the facility receives patients from the prison, and it was common for those patients to be denied at several local hospitals. NF2 stated the facility “just take this in stride” and continue looking for a facility that will provide further care. During an interview on 2/12/26 at 11:00 a.m., staff member D stated he had performed multiple surgeries on patient #21 and the last time he had operated, staff member D had documented the patient had a frozen abdomen. Staff member D stated, “In my note I was very clear, we are at the point where the risk is high of causing damage you can’t fix.” Staff member D stated, “The responsibility is to do no harm. A lot of foreign bodies will work themselves out and by constantly going in you can do more harm or damage you can’t fix. You might be able to get away with an operation but eventually there’s going to be a bad outcome. A foreign body can work its way out. Just put a dressing on it. In my clinical judgement the best thing was to send him back to his facility with wound care if he was not symptomatic.” Staff member D referenced academic and medical papers about not encouraging the secondary gain theory of constant admission for patients who repeatedly inserted foreign bodies. During an interview on 2/12/26 at 11:30 a.m., NF3 (Hospital C provider) stated it was his first time interacting with patient #21. The ED called NF3 and let him know there was a patient who had placed sporks into a wound. NF3 stated, “... Overall, the surgery was straightforward.” Review of patient #21’s medical records from Hospital C showed the patient arrived via ambulance with police on 1/3/26 at 1:40 a.m. On 1/3/26 a surgical procedure was performed to remove the two foreign bodies. Patient #21 was discharged back to prison facility on 1/6/26. Review of the facility policy, Emergency and Unassigned Patient Call Policy, dated 7/2023, showed: “... 1. If a specialty physician receives a request for a transfer and is unwilling or unable to accept the transfer, the specialty physician must refer the request to the Emergency Department physician. The Emergency Department physician in consultation with Administration has the responsibility to accept the patient as an ED to ED transfer, which then places the responsiblity on the Hospital’s receiving specialist (s) to see and treat the patient as appropriate. 2. The Hospital (including the Emergency Department physician and staff physicians) shall note refuse to accept requests for transfers if the patient is in need of the specialized capabilities or facilities available at the Hospital. The only exception to this prohibition is if the Hospital lacks the capacity to safely treat the patient.””

    Rule A2411. Standard-level. From a complaint.

All 6 inspections in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
May 6, 2026Complaint inspectionNo deficiencies cited
Feb 26, 2026Complaint inspection2 deficiencies cited
Dec 2, 2025Complaint inspectionNo deficiencies cited
Mar 11, 2025Complaint inspectionNo deficiencies cited
Nov 14, 2024Complaint inspectionNo deficiencies cited
Jul 17, 2024Complaint inspectionNo deficiencies cited

How do patients fare?

  • CMS’s overall for it is 5 of 5.
  • Of the measures behind its , CMS counts against the national value: mortality, 0 better and 0 worse of 8; safety of care, 2 better and 0 worse of 7; readmission, 2 better and 1 worse of 11.
  • Patients rate it 4 of 5 in CMS’s patient survey (422 surveys completed, Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025): 77% rated it 9 or 10 out of 10, and 80% would definitely recommend it.
  • Infections, compared by CMS with the national benchmark (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025): central line bloodstream infections (CLABSI), no different than national benchmark; catheter urinary tract infections (CAUTI), no different than national benchmark; surgical site infections after colon surgery, no different than national benchmark; MRSA bloodstream infections, no different than national benchmark; C. diff infections, better than the national benchmark.
  • CMS’s patient safety composite for serious complications, PSI 90, Jul 1, 2022 to Jun 30, 2024: better than the national value.
  • Deaths within 30 days, as CMS gives them (Jul 1, 2022 to Jun 30, 2025): heart attack 11.2%, heart failure 11.8%, pneumonia 14.2%, COPD 7.3%, stroke 10%, heart bypass surgery 1.6%. CMS gives no comparison with the national rate for them in this release.
  • Readmissions within 30 days, as CMS gives them (Jul 1, 2023 to Jun 30, 2025): heart attack 13.5%, heart failure 20.5%, pneumonia 16%, COPD 20.6%, heart bypass surgery 13.6%, hip or knee replacement 6%. CMS gives no comparison with the national rate for them in this release.
  • After outpatient care, compared by CMS: unplanned hospital visits after a colonoscopy, no different than the national rate; hospital admissions after outpatient chemotherapy, no different than the national rate; emergency visits after outpatient chemotherapy, worse than the national rate; unplanned hospital visits after outpatient surgery, no different than expected.
  • Emergency department patients spent a median of 163 minutes there before leaving (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025), and 2% left before being seen.
  • 86% of patients with severe sepsis or septic shock got the care CMS measures, SEP-1 (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025).
  • Medicare’s spending per patient here is 0.92 times the national median (Jan 1, 2024 to Dec 31, 2024).
Source:

CMS, Hospital General Information, Patient survey (HCAHPS) - Hospital, Healthcare Associated Infections - Hospital, Timely and Effective Care - Hospital and Medicare Spending Per Beneficiary - Hospital. Released Aug 13, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, Complications and Deaths - Hospital and Unplanned Hospital Visits - Hospital. Released Sep 30, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Ratings and measures, as published
MeasureRating
Overall ratingCMS’s overall hospital quality star rating, 1 to 55 of 5
Patient survey ratingCMS star rating from its survey of the hospital’s patients (HCAHPS), 1 to 54 of 5

Is it certified, and in good standing?

  • Medicare-certified acute care hospital since Jul 1, 1966.
  • Ownership: voluntary non-profit - church.
  • It is accredited by The Joint Commission, whose surveys stand in for the state’s routine inspections.
  • No deficiency on record in the last three years.
  • Voluntary non-profit - Church.
Source:

CMS, Provider of Services File - Hospital & Non-Hospital Facilities. Released Oct 14, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, Hospital General Information. Released Aug 13, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, QCOR Hospital 2567 statements of deficiencies. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

Has it been penalized?

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for hospitals.
  • Not among the hospitals whose Medicare payments CMS cut under the Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program for fiscal year 2026.
  • 2 deficiencies cited in the last three years came from inspections that included a complaint investigation.
Source:

CMS, Hospital-Acquired Condition (HAC) Reduction Program. Released Aug 13, 2026. Updated yearly.

CMS, Provider of Services File - Hospital & Non-Hospital Facilities. Released Oct 14, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, QCOR Hospital 2567 statements of deficiencies. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

What do patients say about their care?

  • CMS doesn’t publish staffing levels for hospitals.
  • In CMS’s patient survey, patients rate how well its nurses communicated 5 of 5.
  • 69% of its health care workers got a flu shot (Oct 1, 2024 to Mar 31, 2025).
Source:

CMS, Patient survey (HCAHPS) - Hospital and Timely and Effective Care - Hospital. Released Aug 13, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Who owns it?

  • Providence Health & Services Mt owns 100% directly since Jan 1, 2010.
  • Providence Health & Services - Washington and Providence Health & Services run it.
  • 21 owners or officers are people: Diane L Hejna (corporate director); Richard S Blair (corporate director); Marvin O’quinn (corporate director); Linda Buck (corporate director, 0%); Mary E Lyons (corporate director); Kirk Francis Bodlovic (managing employee (on the payroll), 0%); Phyllis M Hughes (corporate director); Rogelio Riojas (corporate director, 0%); Joel Gilbertson (managing employee (on the payroll)); James Martin (corporate officer); Charles Wallace Sorenson (corporate officer); Donald Wayne Anderson (corporate officer); Gregory David Hoffman (corporate officer); Isiaah D Crawford (corporate director); Donna Markham (corporate director); Michael W Murphy (corporate director); Mary Beth Kingston (corporate director); Eric D Sprunk (corporate director); Anna R Newsom (corporate officer); Darryl Elmouchi (corporate officer, 0%); Karin Dufault (corporate director, 0%).
  • CMS’s Provider of Services file records 1 change of ownership.
  • No private-equity firm among the owners CMS lists.
  • No real-estate investment trust among the owners CMS lists.
Source:

CMS, Hospital All Owners and Hospital Enrollments. Released Sep 29, 2026. Updated monthly.

CMS, Provider of Services File - Hospital & Non-Hospital Facilities. Released Oct 14, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Organisations CMS lists
OrganisationRoleShareSince
Providence Health & Services MtOwns 5% or more directly100%Jan 1, 2010
Providence Health & Services - WashingtonRuns it (operational or managerial control)Jan 1, 1966
Providence Health & ServicesRuns it (operational or managerial control)Aug 13, 2008
Providence St. Joseph HealthOther role (CMS gives no detail)Jul 1, 2016

How does it compare nearby?

  • Of the 2 hospitals CMS lists in Missoula County, 2 have an overall star rating from CMS: 1 rated 5 of 5, 1 rated 3 of 5.
  • CMS rates this one 5 of 5.
Source:

CMS, Hospital General Information. Released Aug 13, 2026. Updated quarterly.

1 compared
PlaceOverall star rating
Community Medical Center3

What the record doesn’t say

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for hospitals, so none are shown. The one payment cut CMS publishes for each hospital, under its Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program, is shown where it applies.
  • Only complaints that led to a citation appear; complaints that didn’t aren’t published.
  • Most hospitals are accredited by a private organisation (The Joint Commission, DNV and others) whose routine inspections stand in for the state’s; those reports aren’t public, and QCOR holds only the state’s surveys: no inspection on record here doesn’t mean none took place.
  • QCOR says its hospital inspection data are complete only through September 17, 2026, while it moves to a new system.
  • CMS doesn’t publish staffing levels for hospitals.
  • In its September 2026 release CMS gives no comparison with the national rate for death and readmission rates, though it gives the rates.

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 hospital

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

Replies

None. Replies aren’t open yet. When they open, the hospital 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 hospital”, 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.