Below average — CMS composite of the measures below.
The next survey window likely opens around December 2026
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of July 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Avantara Redfield during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Incomplete baseline care plans for newly admitted residents: The facility failed to complete and review baseline care plans within the required timeframe for some residents, and several plans lacked basic, individualized information such as assistance needs for bathing, eating, transfers, mobility, and use of DME or other devices. An LPN and the DON stated baseline care plans should be completed and reviewed within 48 hours and should reflect each resident’s needs, while the facility policy required the plan to begin on day 1 and include minimum healthcare information needed to direct care.
Staff failed to follow standards for a resident's pressure-relief cushion, compression garments, and urine specimen collection. A resident with a stage III pressure ulcer used a Roho cushion with a pillow and absorbent pads on top and without a protective cover, while staff also found the cushion underinflated. For another resident with lymphedema, staff applied Circaids to the legs and feet despite an order for foot Circaids, did not use the measuring device, and used Tubi grips without an order. RN E also collected a urine specimen by pouring urine from a previously used urinal into a specimen cup for a resident being treated for a UTI.
Dish Machine Temperatures Not Monitored or Documented: Staff failed to consistently record the wash and rinse temperatures for a commercial dish machine used to sanitize dishes and meal equipment. The log had multiple missing entries and several documented rinse temperatures below the required 180-degree minimum, and both dietary leadership and the administrator acknowledged that the required documentation was not consistently completed.
Staff failed to follow hand hygiene and PPE requirements during care for residents on EDP and EBP. A CNA delivering meal trays to residents with COVID-19 entered and exited rooms without proper hand hygiene, did not use eye protection, removed PPE in the hallway, and discarded used PPE in uncovered garbage cans. An LPN and a CMA also provided wound care and personal care for a resident on EBP without performing hand hygiene before donning gloves, after removing gloves, and at other required points during care.
Resident and resident council grievances about meal quality, food temperature, presentation, and diet compliance were repeatedly documented, but residents said their concerns were heard without any real follow-up or resolution. Meeting minutes showed ongoing complaints about poor evening meals and unresolved food issues, while grievance records listed staff inservice and re-education as responses without showing that the resident council or individual residents were informed of the outcomes or that the resolutions were effective.
MDS PASRR coding was inaccurate for two residents. One resident with major depressive disorder, OCD, anxiety disorder, and paranoid schizophrenia had a level II PASRR on file, but multiple comprehensive MDS assessments coded A1500 as No. Another resident with delusional disorders had a PASRR Outcome Explanation stating the facility should mark A1500 Yes, yet her comprehensive MDS also coded No. The SSC confirmed both assessments should have been coded Yes, and the administrator expected accurate MDS coding.
Staff did not consistently monitor and document food temperatures for all meals as required by facility policy, with significant gaps in temperature records over multiple days. Both dietary management and administration acknowledged the ongoing issue with incomplete documentation.
A resident with a known strawberry allergy and severe cognitive impairment was served cake containing strawberries after a cook failed to use meal tray tickets that listed allergies. The resident experienced an allergic reaction requiring emergency treatment. Staff interviews and records confirmed that allergy protocols existed but were not followed during this incident.
The facility failed to maintain sanitary conditions in the kitchen and dining areas, with observations of improper food labeling, storage, and handling. Staff were seen using gloves inappropriately and neglecting hand hygiene while assisting residents. The kitchen had significant cleanliness issues, including grease buildup and expired sanitizer test strips. These deficiencies indicate a failure to adhere to the facility's policies on food safety and sanitation.
The facility failed to maintain a clean and homelike environment, with observations revealing wet floors, peeling caulking, and non-functional equipment in residents' rooms. The dining room and other areas showed signs of neglect, such as gouged walls, rusted heaters, and delaminated doors. The maintenance director acknowledged the issues but did not log repairs from direct reports, indicating a gap in the reporting and repair process.
Essential kitchen equipment in the dietary department was not maintained in safe working condition, with non-functional stove burners and ovens, a leaking flattop grill, and a leaking food preparation sink. The air conditioning unit's condensation was improperly draining into the only handwashing sink. The maintenance director was unaware of these issues, and the maintenance work orders lacked dates, indicating a delay in addressing the problems.
A resident receiving oxygen therapy through a nasal cannula was found to have no foam filter on the oxygen concentrator, and there were no current physician's orders for the therapy. The facility's policy for weekly changes of oxygen tubing and cleaning of the concentrator's foam filter was not followed, and staff were unaware of these deficiencies. The resident's EMR lacked documentation of the necessary orders and maintenance records.
A resident with moderate cognitive impairment and a history of stroke was left unsupervised outside a facility after being assisted out by an RN who failed to inform other staff. The resident's wheelchair became stuck on railroad tracks, and he was found by the county sheriff two hours later. The incident revealed a lapse in communication and supervision, leading to a deficiency in resident safety.
A resident at risk for elopement left the facility undetected for over two hours due to a deactivated door alarm and lack of a Wanderguard. The facility's care plan identified the resident as an elopement risk, but interventions were not adequately monitored. The Wanderguard system was only operational on the central door, and the door used by the resident did not have this system. The facility's policy required daily verification of Wanderguards and door alarms, which was not followed.
A resident with a vascular wound on the left foot did not receive consistent wound care treatments as ordered by the physician, and documentation was incomplete. The resident reported missed dressings by night shift nurses, and the Treatment Administration Record showed missing entries for specific dates. Interviews revealed inconsistencies in staff communication and documentation, with no evidence of physician notification when treatments were not completed.
Incomplete baseline care plans for newly admitted residents
Penalty
Summary
The provider failed to develop person-centered baseline care plans that included the minimum healthcare information necessary to provide care for four newly admitted residents, and failed to ensure the baseline care plan was reviewed with the resident or resident representative within 48 hours of admission for three of those residents. The report states that resident 32 was admitted to the facility and his representative and an LPN signed the baseline care plan nine days later; the care plan did not identify the level of assistance needed for bathing or what diet he should receive at meals. Resident 18 signed his baseline care plan six days after admission, and the plan did not identify the level of assistance needed for bathing, bed mobility, transfers, dressing, personal hygiene, eating, toileting, or whether he needed hearing aids, glasses, dentures, a wheelchair, a cane, or a walker. Resident 8’s admission nursing assessment indicated he was dependent on staff for bathing, dressing, toileting, and eating, but his baseline care plan did not state that he was dependent for eating, did not identify the level of assistance needed for bathing, and did not specify which assistive devices he used or the level of assistance needed for transferring and mobility. Resident 33 did not have an individualized baseline care plan completed or reviewed with him or his representative within 48 hours of admission. The administrator acknowledged that resident 33 did not have a baseline care plan completed or reviewed with him or his representative. During interviews, a CNA stated she used the resident’s Kardex to determine how to care for newly admitted residents, and that the Kardex information was based on the resident’s care plan. An LPN stated baseline care plans were to be completed within the first 24 hours of admission and reviewed with the resident or representative within 48 hours, and that each resident’s baseline care plan should reflect that resident’s assistance needs. The DON stated baseline care plans were to be completed and reviewed within 48 hours and expected them to be individualized to include basic needs such as how a resident can transfer. The facility policy stated baseline care plans were to be started on the first day of admission and completed no later than 48 hours after admission, and were to include minimum healthcare information such as initial goals, physician orders, dietary orders, therapy services, and social services.
Failure to Follow Standards for Pressure Relief, Compression Garments, and Urine Collection
Penalty
Summary
Staff failed to follow professional standards for use and maintenance of a Roho cushion for a resident with a stage III pressure ulcer to the buttocks and upper thighs. The resident was observed sitting on a Roho cushion in her wheelchair and recliner with a pillow and absorbent pads placed on top of the cushion, and the cushion did not have a protective cover. The resident stated she used a pillow on the cushion because she did not like sitting on plastic. Staff later confirmed the cushion was flat and needed more air, and that the pillow and pads made the cushion less effective. The administrator stated the facility did not have a policy related to Roho cushions and staff did not receive training on their use or maintenance. Staff also failed to ensure specialized compression garments were used according to the physician's order and manufacturer instructions for a resident with lymphedema and other diagnoses including diabetes, heart failure, peripheral vascular disease, and a diabetic foot ulcer. The resident had a physician's order for foot Circaids, but the MAR stated Circaids to feet every shift for diabetic foot ulcer and there was no physician's order for Tubi grips. During observation, staff removed the Tubi grips and applied Circaids to both the resident's legs and feet. The heel portion was wrapped under the arch instead of the heel, the leg and foot pieces did not meet or overlap as required, and no measuring tool was used to determine the pressure being applied. Staff and the DON acknowledged the order did not specify the pressure or other directions needed for proper use, and staff were not aware of the measuring device used with the Circaids. Staff also failed to collect a urine specimen according to the facility's professional standards reference for a resident who was being treated with an antibiotic for a UTI. The resident stated he had not provided a urine sample by urinating into a specimen cup and was concerned the sample had been taken from a dirty urinal on his bedside table. RN E confirmed she poured urine from the resident's existing urinal into a specimen cup and did not replace the urinal with a clean one before collection. The facility had no policy for UA collection, and the DON stated the resident's genitals were to be cleaned and the sample collected in a specimen cup after the resident urinated into a toilet, urinal, or bedpan. The urinals in resident rooms were replaced by hospitality aids without an established schedule, and they were not dated when replaced.
Dish Machine Temperatures Not Monitored or Documented
Penalty
Summary
The provider failed to monitor and document the temperatures for one commercial dishwashing machine used to sanitize dishes and equipment for resident meal service. During observation in the main kitchen, the January 2026 dishwashing machine temperature log was missing documented temperatures for multiple breakfast, lunch, and dinner meal services, and the manufacturer’s sign on the machine stated the rinse temperature minimum was 180 degrees Fahrenheit for the high-temperature rinse cycle. Dietary aide R stated temperatures should have been recorded after each meal and confirmed the dish machine used a high-temperature rinse that should be at least 180 degrees. Review of the logs showed multiple documented rinse temperatures below 180 degrees in January 2026, and review of prior logs from October through December 2025 showed additional missing entries and temperatures below the required minimum. The maintenance director stated she knew the temperature had to be at least 180 degrees, had not received notice from kitchen staff that the machine was not meeting rinse temperature, and expected the dietary manager to notify her if the dish machine was not reaching 180 degrees. The dietary manager and administrator both acknowledged that staff were expected to document dish machine temperatures after all meals and that the documentation did not consistently show the rinse cycle meeting the 180-degree minimum.
Failure to Follow Hand Hygiene and PPE Requirements During Resident Care
Penalty
Summary
Staff failed to follow infection prevention and control practices during resident care and while transporting meal trays to residents on enhanced droplet precautions. During observation, a CNA delivered lunch trays to four residents with COVID-19 who were on enhanced droplet precautions and repeatedly entered and exited rooms without performing hand hygiene before donning gloves and gowns or after removing them. The CNA also did not use eye protection before entering rooms, removed PPE in the hallway, and discarded used PPE into uncovered garbage cans outside resident rooms. The CNA was observed placing a used surgical mask in her pants pocket, reusing it after removing other PPE, and attempting to use alcohol-based hand sanitizer from dispensers that were empty or did not dispense sanitizer. The same CNA was observed moving from room to room while handling meal trays for residents on enhanced droplet precautions and using PPE inconsistently with the facility’s policy. She placed on a gown, gloves, N95 mask, and at times a face shield before entering rooms, but did not perform hand hygiene before these actions. After leaving each room, she removed PPE in the hallway and discarded it in uncovered garbage cans, then reused the surgical mask from her pocket and sanitized her hands only at certain points. Residents 10, 14, 20, and 22 were identified as being on enhanced droplet precautions because they had COVID-19. Staff also failed to follow hand hygiene requirements during wound care and personal care for resident 5, who was on enhanced barrier precautions. A CMA and an LPN each put on gowns and gloves without performing hand hygiene before providing care. During the dressing change and personal care, the LPN and CMA repeatedly removed gloves, discarded them, and put on clean gloves without washing or sanitizing their hands. The LPN washed the resident’s foot wound, applied a dressing and compression wrap, measured wounds on the buttocks and thighs, and the CMA assisted with repositioning, trash handling, incontinence care, and blood sugar testing, all while hand hygiene was omitted at multiple required points. The LPN and CMA later acknowledged the hand hygiene expectations and the PPE requirements for residents on enhanced droplet precautions.
Resident Food Grievances Not Communicated or Resolved
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that resident and resident council grievances about meal quality were addressed and that the staff’s efforts to resolve those concerns were communicated back to the residents and approved as effective. Multiple residents reported that meals were not hot enough, were burnt, were not cooked properly, were missing items, or did not match ordered diets or preferences. These concerns were raised both individually and through the resident council over several months, and residents stated that their complaints were heard and documented but that no solutions or follow-up were provided. Resident council meeting minutes showed repeated complaints about watery mashed potatoes, spicy bean soup, poor desserts, and evening meals that were not good, with the issue repeatedly marked as not resolved to residents’ satisfaction. Grievance records from July 2025 through January 2026 documented concerns from residents and the resident council about dietary meal service, food quality, meal timing, presentation, and failure to follow diet orders. The recorded resolutions included staff inservice, re-education of the dietary manager, and re-education and training of a cook, but the documentation did not show that the resident council representative was informed of the department response or that residents were told the outcomes of the grievances. Interviews confirmed that residents were frustrated because they did not see improvement in the meals served, especially during evenings and weekends. The activities director stated she collected resident council concerns and expected the dietary manager to complete the response section and share the information back with residents at the next meeting, but she did not receive the forms back. The social services coordinator stated she tracked grievances but did not communicate the resolutions to the resident council or individual residents, and the administrator was unaware that residents had not received information about the actions being taken to address their food-related grievances.
MDS PASRR Coding Was Inaccurate for Two Residents
Penalty
Summary
The provider failed to ensure accurate MDS coding for PASRR status for two sampled residents. One resident had diagnoses including major depressive disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, anxiety disorder, and paranoid schizophrenia, and her record contained a 5/9/23 level II PASRR stating the approval had no time limit and did not need to be resubmitted unless there was a significant change. Despite this, her comprehensive MDS assessments dated 12/20/23, 12/4/24, and 3/31/25 coded item A1500 as No to whether she was currently considered by the state level II PASRR process to have serious mental illness and/or intellectual disability or a related condition. Her care plan also included a PASRR/MH level II notice of determination stating she had been screened by the contracted PASRR agency and found to be in need of long-term care placement/services and had a diagnosis of severe persistent mental illness. A second resident had a diagnosis of delusional disorders, and her 10/15/25 PASRR Outcome Explanation stated the facility should mark Yes for MDS question A1500. However, her 10/27/25 comprehensive MDS coded A1500 as No, and her care plan did not indicate she was considered to have a PASRR Level II. During interview, the social service coordinator confirmed she completed A1500 for all residents' comprehensive MDS assessments and agreed that both residents' assessments should have been coded Yes. The administrator stated she expected the MDS assessments to be coded accurately, and the CMS RAI Manual section reviewed stated to code A1500 Yes if PASRR Level II determined the resident has serious mental illness and/or ID/DD or a related condition.
Failure to Consistently Document Food Temperatures for All Meals
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that food temperatures were consistently monitored and documented according to its own policy for all meals prepared and served in the kitchen. Observations revealed that the cook was taking food temperatures five to fifteen minutes before serving, and staff were expected to document these temperatures on a designated chart. However, interviews with the dietary manager and administrator confirmed that there were ongoing issues with staff not documenting food temperatures as required. The dietary manager noted that a new system had been implemented to improve compliance, but significant gaps in documentation persisted. Record review showed that in March, there were no food temperatures documented for 23 out of 31 days, with only partial documentation on several other days. In April, there were also days with missing or incomplete documentation. The facility's policy required food temperatures to be recorded at the beginning and end of the trayline for each meal, and corrective action to be taken if temperatures were not within acceptable ranges. Both the dietary manager and administrator acknowledged the failure to meet these documentation requirements.
Failure to Prevent Allergen Exposure Due to Non-Compliance with Meal Ticket Protocol
Penalty
Summary
A resident with a documented strawberry allergy and severe cognitive impairment was served cake containing strawberries for dessert. The cook responsible for meal service did not use the meal tray tickets, which are intended to identify resident allergies, when preparing and serving the meal. As a result, the resident consumed the allergen, leading to an allergic reaction that required assessment, administration of Benadryl, and subsequent transfer to the emergency department for further evaluation and treatment. Interviews and record reviews confirmed that the facility had systems in place, such as posted allergy lists in the kitchen and allergy information on meal tray tickets, to prevent such incidents. However, these procedures were not followed by the cook on the day of the event. Staff interviews indicated awareness of the process for identifying and accommodating food allergies, but the failure to adhere to established protocols directly resulted in the resident being exposed to an allergen.
Sanitation and Food Handling Deficiencies in Kitchen and Dining Areas
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a safe and sanitary environment in the kitchen and dining areas, leading to multiple deficiencies. Observations revealed that the kitchen was not kept in a sanitary condition, with substances such as limescale and black residue found on and around the dishwasher, and grease accumulation under the stove. The commercial refrigerator contained unlabeled and undated food items, and expired sanitizer test strips were used. Additionally, the kitchen staff, including the dietary manager and cooks, were observed eating in the kitchen and leaving food preparation areas unattended, with utensils and food items left uncovered. In the dining room, staff members, including CNAs and a restorative aide, were observed using gloves inappropriately and failing to perform proper hand hygiene while assisting residents with meals. They wore the same gloves while touching various surfaces and assisting multiple residents, which is against the facility's handwashing and glove use policy. The ice machine in the dining room also had a buildup of unidentified substances, and dietary staff handled drinking cups improperly, potentially compromising sanitation. The facility's policies on food storage, handwashing, and cleaning were not adhered to, as evidenced by the improper thawing of meat, unlabeled and expired food items, and incomplete cleaning schedules. Interviews with the dietary manager and staff revealed a lack of awareness and adherence to these policies, contributing to the unsanitary conditions observed. The facility's failure to ensure proper food handling, storage, and sanitation practices resulted in a significant deficiency in maintaining a safe environment for residents.
Failure to Maintain a Clean and Homelike Environment
Penalty
Summary
The provider failed to maintain a clean and homelike environment for several residents and areas within the facility. Observations revealed multiple deficiencies, including a wet floor and peeling caulking in a shared bathroom, a faucet with a thick build-up and missing parts in another resident's room, and a non-functional hand sanitizer dispenser outside a room. Additionally, rooms had scratched and scuffed surfaces, flaking paint, exposed drywall, and exposed heating elements, all of which contributed to an unclean and unsafe environment. In the dining room, there were visible signs of neglect, such as a gouged wall, dirty and rusted heaters, exposed drywall, and delaminated doors. The maintenance director acknowledged the issues but did not log repairs made from direct reports, relying instead on an online work order system. However, the work orders log did not reflect any open or unaddressed issues, indicating a gap in the reporting and repair process. The facility's policies emphasized maintaining a safe and homelike environment, but the observations and interviews highlighted a failure to adhere to these standards.
Deficient Kitchen Equipment Maintenance
Penalty
Summary
The provider failed to ensure that essential kitchen equipment in the dietary department was in safe working condition. Observations revealed that five out of eight stove-top burners on the commercial gas stove did not ignite, and both ovens in the commercial gas stove were non-operational. Additionally, the flattop grill was leaking oil onto the floor, and the two-compartment food preparation sink was leaking and not used for food preparation. The air conditioning unit's condensation tubing was improperly draining into the handwashing sink, which was the only handwashing facility available in the kitchen. Interviews with the dietary manager and cook confirmed the non-functioning equipment and improper use of the three-compartment sink for thawing chicken due to the leaking food preparation sink. The maintenance director was unaware of these issues, and the maintenance work orders log showed no dates for the reported leaks, indicating a lack of timely response. The facility's maintenance policy requires staff to report malfunctioning equipment, and the maintenance department is expected to address issues promptly, but this was not adhered to in this case.
Deficiency in Respiratory Care for a Resident
Penalty
Summary
The provider failed to ensure proper respiratory care for a resident by not replacing the foam filter on the oxygen concentrator machine and not having current physician's orders for oxygen therapy. During an observation, it was noted that the resident was receiving oxygen through a nasal cannula at a rate of 3 liters per minute, but there was no foam filter on the back of the oxygen concentrator. The resident's electronic medical record (EMR) lacked documentation of a current physician's order for supplemental oxygen, despite previous assessments indicating oxygen therapy. Additionally, there was no record of when the oxygen tubing was last changed or when the foam filter was last cleaned and replaced. Interviews with facility staff, including a registered nurse and the director of nursing, revealed a lack of awareness regarding the missing foam filter and the absence of physician's orders for oxygen use. The facility's policy required weekly changes of oxygen tubing and cleaning of the concentrator's foam filter, with documentation in the medical record, which was not followed. The staff suggested that the orders might have been lost during the resident's recent trips to the emergency department. The facility's oxygen administration policy emphasized the need for a physician's order and proper documentation, which was not adhered to in this case.
Resident Left Unsupervised and Found on Railroad Tracks
Penalty
Summary
The provider failed to ensure the safety of a resident with moderate cognitive impairment, as indicated by a BIMS score of 9, who was allowed to leave the facility unsupervised. The resident, who had a history of cerebral infarction, arthritis, hemiplegia on the right side, and aphasia, was assisted out of the building by an RN in the early morning hours. The RN did not inform other staff members that the resident was outside and subsequently forgot about him due to being occupied with other tasks. As a result, the resident's wheelchair became stuck on nearby railroad tracks, and he was discovered by the county sheriff approximately two hours later. The resident was found three blocks away from the facility, and the sheriff contacted the provider to report the incident. The resident was retrieved by the facility's administrator and returned to the facility without any noted injuries. The incident highlighted a lapse in communication and supervision, as the resident was outside alone for an extended period. The provider's failure to prevent the resident from leaving the facility unsupervised constituted a deficiency in protecting the resident from potential harm.
Resident Elopement Due to Inadequate Door Alarm and Wanderguard Monitoring
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure the safety of a resident identified at risk for elopement, resulting in the resident leaving the facility without staff knowledge and being outside for approximately 2 hours and 4 minutes. This incident occurred when a door alarm was deactivated by an RN and not reactivated, allowing the resident to exit the facility undetected. The resident had a history of elopement risk, as indicated by previous physician orders for a Wanderguard, which was not in place at the time of the incident. The facility's care plan identified the resident as an elopement risk, but interventions were not adequately monitored or revised following the elopement. Interviews and observations revealed that the resident was not wearing a Wanderguard, and there was a lack of documentation regarding its placement. The facility's Wanderguard system was only operational on the central door, and the door through which the resident exited did not have this system. The DON and administrator were unaware of the resident's ability to remove the Wanderguard, and the previous Wanderguard was discontinued based on a low-risk assessment. The facility's policy required daily verification and testing of Wanderguards and door alarms, which was not adhered to, contributing to the deficiency.
Failure to Document and Complete Wound Care Treatments
Penalty
Summary
The provider failed to ensure that wound care treatments were completed and documented according to physician orders for a resident with a vascular wound on the left foot. Observations and interviews revealed that the resident had a scheduled appointment with a vascular surgeon for a possible amputation. The resident reported that a nurse on the night shift had not completed his dressings on several occasions. A review of the resident's Treatment Administration Record (TAR) showed missing documentation for wound care treatments on specific dates, indicating that treatments were either not completed or not documented. Interviews with the Director of Nursing (DON) and other staff members highlighted inconsistencies in the documentation and communication of wound care treatments. The DON confirmed that there was no documentation to support that the physician had been notified when wound dressing changes were not completed. Additionally, there were discrepancies in staff reports regarding the resident's refusal of care, with some staff indicating that the resident did not refuse care, while others noted refusals. The facility's job descriptions for RNs and LPNs emphasized the importance of documenting care provided, yet this was not consistently followed, leading to the deficiency.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 1 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near Redfield
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eastern Star Home Of South Dakota, Inc | 0.4 mi | ★★★★★ | 1 | 0 |
| Faulkton Senior Living | 32.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 3 | 0 |
| Good Samaritan Society Miller | 33.5 mi | ★★★★★ | 11 | 0 |
| Avantara Clark City | 38 mi | ★★★★★ | 7 | 0 |
| Avantara Huron | 38.6 mi | ★★★★★ | 14 | 1 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Avantara Redfield.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release July 2026) and official state health department websites.