Above 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 Rock Haven during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Improper Cleaning of Food Thermometer Probe During Meal Service: A cook was observed taking temperatures of food in the steam table before lunch service while wiping the food thermometer probe with a napkin before inserting it into different foods. The cook stated she cleans the probe after temping all food and only between foods if an allergen is involved, while the FSM said the probe should be cleaned properly between each food using a cleaning wipe and allowed to dry before reuse.
Failure to monitor antibiotic use and apply Loeb criteria led to antibiotics being given to four residents without documented symptom support. A resident with UTI findings, another resident with no UTI symptoms documented, a resident with worsening cough, and another resident with urine odor and nausea were all identified by the ADON/IP as not meeting Loeb criteria, yet the Provider was not contacted to discontinue the antibiotics or provide rationale to continue them. The DON stated that antibiotic use should be supported by signs and symptoms and reviewed with the Provider when it is not.
Background Check Policy Not Followed: The facility did not follow its written background check policy for one Maintenance Tech, whose required 4-year background check was overdue. The NHA acknowledged that background checks must be completed every 4 years and said the records should be accessible in the nursing home, but reported the information was kept by HR in a different building.
A resident with CHF, heart disease, lymphedema, and edema had a nearly 25-pound unintended weight gain in one month, but staff did not promptly re-weigh him, complete a nursing assessment, notify the PCP, or update the care plan. Surveyor observation found the resident with dependent, swollen legs and tight shoes, while staff interviews confirmed the weight change should have triggered immediate follow-up and that no new interventions were in place.
Failure to identify and care plan trauma history: A resident with PTSD, military combat exposure, and documented nightmares did not have a trauma-informed care assessment completed on admission. The resident’s care plan and posted care summary did not include trauma triggers or interventions, even though staff and psychiatric notes reflected a history of combat-related trauma and the DON and SW acknowledged the need for a trauma-focused care plan.
The facility did not ensure that an area was free from accident hazards and failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent accidents. Surveyors observed environmental hazards and insufficient staff monitoring, resulting in a deficiency related to resident safety.
Two residents experienced significant medication errors when one was given another's medications, resulting in hospitalization, and another did not receive prescribed nebulizer treatments as ordered. Staff failed to follow medication administration protocols, did not immediately notify the physician, and did not ensure continual assessment or proper supervision during medication administration.
A resident with moderate cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses had a new Power of Attorney (POA) document created by a social worker after the primary agent (spouse) passed away, despite the original POA listing alternate agents. The social worker did not document discussions with the resident or her daughters prior to preparing the new POA, and the facility's legal department later clarified that a new POA was unnecessary, as the alternates in the original document should have assumed the role.
The facility failed to protect two residents from potential abuse by staff. A cognitively intact resident expressed fear of a CNA due to rough handling, yet the CNA continued to work on the same unit. Another resident with Alzheimer's was reportedly subjected to verbal and physical abuse by a different CNA during meal service. The facility's inadequate response and investigation into these incidents highlight deficiencies in safeguarding residents.
A CNA failed to immediately report an allegation of physical abuse by an LPN against a resident with dementia, delaying the report until the day shift supervisor was available. The facility's policy requires immediate reporting of such allegations. The resident, who was moderately cognitively impaired, denied any abuse when interviewed. The LPN, an agency nurse, was not allowed to return due to professionalism concerns, and the facility deemed the abuse allegation unsubstantiated.
The facility failed to investigate abuse allegations for two residents. One resident, scared of a CNA, did not receive a proper investigation into her claims. Another resident, with Alzheimer's, experienced verbal and physical aggression from a CNA, but the facility initially dismissed the incident as a misunderstanding. The administrator later recognized the need for further investigation.
A facility failed to provide a resident and their representative with a written transfer notice when the resident was sent to a hospital. The facility's policy requires written notification in a language understood by the resident, detailing the transfer reasons and location, and information about the appeal process. Interviews confirmed that while the family was notified by phone, no written notice was given, potentially leading to misunderstandings.
A facility failed to document a resident's participation in their care plan development or revision. Despite being cognitively intact, the resident's records did not show evidence of participation in a scheduled care conference. Interviews revealed a lack of documentation and absence of a formal care plan policy.
The facility failed to provide proper care for residents with indwelling catheters, leading to potential UTI risks. Observations showed catheter bags and tubing touching the floor or positioned above bladder level for three residents. The IDON and CNA acknowledged these practices were against facility policy, increasing infection risk. The IP was unaware of these issues during the survey.
The facility did not conduct an annual performance review for a CNA, as required. The CNA's personnel file only contained a performance review dated over a year ago. The HRD confirmed the absence of current performance reviews and policies, while the Interim DON noted a change in county requirements to bi-annual reviews.
A facility failed to ensure a resident's medication regimen was free from unnecessary medications by administering PRN lorazepam without proper documentation of indication for use or non-pharmacological interventions. The resident, severely cognitively impaired with Alzheimer's, received lorazepam multiple times without a stop date or documented rationale for extending the PRN order beyond 14 days.
A resident was readmitted to the facility with a diagnosis of urinary retention and had an indwelling urinary catheter inserted during a hospital stay. However, the facility's electronic medical record lacked a physician order for the catheter, despite orders to measure urinary output. Observations confirmed the presence of the catheter, and interviews with the IDON and Medical Director revealed a lack of awareness of the missing order and absence of a policy on physician orders.
A facility failed to offer a pneumococcal vaccination to a resident over the age of 65, who had previously received the PCV13 vaccine before admission. According to CDC guidelines, the resident should have been offered the PCV20 vaccine one year later, but this did not occur. The facility's policy aligns with CDC recommendations, yet the oversight was confirmed by the Infection Preventionist.
Improper Cleaning of Food Thermometer Probe During Meal Service
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not prepare and distribute food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. During observation, a cook was seen taking temperatures of food in the steam table before lunch service while cleaning the food thermometer probe with a napkin prior to inserting it into the various foods. The facility policy on Food Temping states that residents will be provided meals that are safe and that a clean thermometer is to be used. When interviewed, the cook stated she cleans the thermometer probe after she is done temping all the food and in between foods only if the food could be an allergen such as seafood. The Food Service Manager stated she would expect cooks to clean the thermometer probe properly between each food by using a cleaning wipe and allowing it to dry for 10 seconds before inserting it into the next food item.
Failure to Monitor Antibiotic Use and Apply Loeb Criteria
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not establish an antibiotic stewardship program that included antibiotic use protocols and a system to monitor antibiotic use for 4 of 4 supplemental residents reviewed. The facility’s Antibiotic Stewardship Policy and Procedure dated 10/20/25 stated that antibiotic stewardship would include an assessment process, use of evidence-based criteria, efforts to identify the microbe responsible for disease, selecting the appropriate antibiotic with documentation of the rationale for use, appropriate dosing, route, and duration of therapy, and discontinuation when antibiotics were no longer needed. Four residents were treated with antibiotics without meeting Loeb Criteria. R79 was on the UTI line list with cloudy urine with sediment and mucus and foul odor, but the ADON/IP stated this did not meet Loeb criteria and the Provider was not contacted to discontinue the antibiotic or provide rationale to continue it. R43 was listed for UTI with no symptoms documented, and the ADON/IP stated it did not meet Loeb criteria and the Provider was not contacted. R17 was listed for respiratory infection with worsening cough, and the ADON/IP stated it did not meet Loeb criteria; the Provider was not contacted at the time, and the antibiotics were later said to have been ordered for inflammation. R27 was listed for UTI with urine odor and nausea, and the ADON/IP stated it did not meet Loeb criteria and the Provider was not contacted. The DON stated that residents treated with antibiotics should have signs and symptoms to support use and that if they do not, staff should discuss the situation with the Provider for rationale to continue the antibiotic.
Background Check Policy Not Followed
Penalty
Summary
Develop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft was cited because the facility did not ensure written policies and procedures were followed for background checks. For 1 of 8 staff reviewed, MT C, a Maintenance Tech hired on 12/14/20, did not have a background check completed every 4 years as required by the facility’s policy and Wisconsin law. The record showed MT C’s last completed background check was on 1/28/26, even though it should have been completed by 12/14/24. During interview, the NHA acknowledged that background checks are supposed to be completed every 4 years and stated that background check information should be accessible in the nursing home because the facility is responsible for it. The NHA also reported difficulty obtaining access to background checks because HR keeps the records in a different building downtown.
Failure to Recognize and Act on Severe Weight Gain
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide treatment and care according to orders, resident preferences, and goals for a resident with congestive heart failure, coronary artery disease, hypertensive heart disease with heart failure, lymphedema, and unspecified heart failure. The resident’s care plan identified unintended weight gain and included weekly weights, while the physician order specified monthly weights. The resident’s weights were documented as 268 lbs., 268.3 lbs., 266.2 lbs., 265.6 lbs., and then 290 lbs., reflecting an almost 25-pound gain in one month and a 9.1% severe unintended weight gain. Despite this significant change, the resident was not re-weighed promptly for accuracy, no nursing assessment was completed, the physician was not notified, and the care plan was not updated with new interventions. The report states that the resident’s weight gain was not recognized as a significant change in condition. The resident had a history of edema and was prescribed furosemide 40 mg daily for edema. Surveyor observation found the resident sitting with legs dependent and appearing edematous, wearing Velcro tennis shoes without socks and with the straps not fully closed. Interviews with staff showed that the facility expected significant weight changes to trigger re-weighs and physician notification, but this did not occur for the resident until the surveyor began asking questions and requesting documentation. The RD had emailed nursing staff twice requesting a re-weigh, but nursing did not complete it. Facility leadership acknowledged that the resident should have been re-weighed sooner, and the DON stated there were no special physician orders for weights, so monthly weights were being used. The report also states that no new nursing interventions were added to monitor the resident’s weight or edema.
Failure to Identify and Care Plan Trauma History
Penalty
Summary
The facility did not ensure that a resident with a history of trauma received trauma-informed and culturally competent care in accordance with professional standards of practice. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including Parkinson’s disease, secondary parkinsonism, dementia without behavioral disturbance, generalized anxiety disorder, and chronic post-traumatic stress disorder. The resident’s record also reflected military service in Vietnam and exposure to Agent Orange, and psychiatric notes documented nightmares related to combat and military service. Although the facility policy required trauma-informed care information to be reviewed on admission and any identified approaches to be entered into the care plan, the resident did not have a Trauma Informed Care Assessment completed upon admission. A Life Events Checklist tool was identified by the facility as the trauma assessment tool, but the resident’s trauma history was not identified at admission. The resident’s comprehensive care plan included only limited information about military service and a general approach for social work to talk with the resident and keep him informed, but it did not include trauma-related triggers or interventions to prevent re-traumatization. The Plan of Care Summary posted on the resident’s bathroom door also did not include trauma history, triggers, or interventions. Record review and staff interviews showed that psychiatric notes had documented the resident’s nightmares and military-related trauma, and a later social work note completed the trauma assessment using the Life Events Checklist, which identified combat exposure, fire or explosion, life-threatening illness or injury, severe human suffering, sudden unexpected death of someone close to the resident, and other stressful events. Staff interviews showed that CNA and RN staff expected trauma history and interventions to be reflected in the care plan or CNA Kardex, but they were not aware of specific trauma-related interventions for the resident. The Social Worker and DON acknowledged that the resident should have had a full trauma assessment related to his military service and that positive findings should be added to the care plan, yet the resident’s PTSD and combat-related trauma were not identified and incorporated into the care plan at the time reviewed.
Failure to Maintain Safe Environment and Supervision
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that an area was free from accident hazards and did not provide adequate supervision to prevent accidents. Surveyors observed that the environment contained hazards that could lead to resident accidents, and staff did not implement sufficient measures to monitor or protect residents from these risks. This deficiency was identified based on direct observations and findings during the survey, which indicated lapses in maintaining a safe environment and in providing necessary supervision to prevent accidents.
Failure to Prevent Significant Medication Errors and Ensure Proper Medication Administration
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to prevent significant medication errors for two residents, resulting in one resident being administered another resident's medications and requiring hospital transfer due to an accidental overdose. One resident with a history of stroke, diabetes, bipolar disorder, chronic kidney disease, and seizures was given medications intended for another resident, including blood pressure and psychiatric medications. The error occurred when a unit manager, after being notified by a CNA of pills found in the resident's food, separated the pills and administered them without verifying their origin. It was later discovered that these medications belonged to another resident who sat beside the affected resident in the dining room. The error was not immediately communicated to the physician, and the resident was not continually assessed as required by facility policy. The resident subsequently experienced a significant change in condition, including hypotension and disorientation, leading to a code blue and emergency transfer to the hospital. The facility's policies required that the person who prepares the medication dose must be the one to administer it, and that in the event of a medication error, immediate steps must be taken, including contacting Poison Control, notifying the primary care provider, and initiating post-error monitoring. In this incident, these steps were not followed. The physician was not promptly notified, Poison Control was not contacted while the resident was still in the facility, and the family was not informed until after the resident was sent to the emergency department. Interviews with staff revealed confusion about communication protocols and a lack of immediate action following the discovery of the error. A second medication error involved another resident who did not receive their prescribed nebulizer treatments as ordered. Instead, an LPN used another resident's medication to administer a nebulizer treatment and left the medication at the bedside, contrary to policy. The LPN did not verify the availability of the correct medication, failed to ensure the resident received the full dose, and missed a scheduled dose. The errors were discovered after the resident reported not receiving treatments, and subsequent interviews confirmed that medications were not administered as ordered and were not properly supervised.
Failure to Follow Professional Standards in Handling Power of Attorney Documentation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to follow professional standards regarding the handling of a Power of Attorney (POA) for one resident who was moderately cognitively impaired and had diagnoses including a left pubis fracture, cancer, and Alzheimer's disease. Upon admission, the resident's spouse was listed as the primary health care agent, with two daughters as alternates. After the spouse passed away, the facility's social worker facilitated the creation of a new POA document, removing the deceased spouse and keeping the daughters in the same order as alternates. This action was taken without documented evidence of discussions with the resident or her daughters prior to preparing and signing the new POA document. The social worker acknowledged that she did not document conversations with the resident or her daughters before the new POA was prepared and signed. Only one progress note reflected a conversation with one of the daughters, which occurred after the new POA was created. The social worker stated that she had previously drawn up new POA documents in similar situations and did not see an issue with this practice. However, she admitted that there should have been documentation reflecting the resident's wishes before proceeding with the new POA. The facility's administrator later consulted the legal department, which clarified that staff should not assist in creating a new POA if the original is still valid and that the alternate agent listed in the original document should assume the role if the primary agent is unable or unwilling to act. The lack of documentation and the unnecessary creation of a new POA document did not meet professional standards of quality for handling advance directives and resident rights.
Failure to Protect Residents from Potential Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect two residents from potential abuse by staff members. Resident R16, who was cognitively intact, expressed fear of CNA2 due to rough handling and lack of assistance. Despite R16's repeated complaints and requests for CNA2 not to provide her care, the facility continued to schedule CNA2 on the same unit as R16, causing ongoing distress for the resident. Interviews and documentation revealed that the facility did not adequately monitor or investigate the allegations against CNA2, and there was no evidence of additional monitoring or auditing of CNA2's performance after the initial complaint. Resident R43, who was severely cognitively impaired due to Alzheimer's disease, was reportedly subjected to verbal and physical abuse by CNA3. During a meal service, CNA3 was observed being verbally aggressive and physically preventing R43 from standing by placing her knee against the resident's chair. The incident was reported by an Activities Therapy Assistant, who felt uncomfortable with CNA3's behavior. The facility's initial investigation dismissed the incident as a misunderstanding, but later acknowledged the allegations were not hearsay, although no further investigation was conducted. The facility's actions and inactions in both cases demonstrate a failure to protect residents from potential abuse and neglect. The lack of appropriate response to R16's complaints and the inadequate investigation into R43's incident highlight deficiencies in the facility's handling of abuse allegations. These failures contributed to an environment where residents were not adequately safeguarded from potential harm.
Failure to Timely Report Alleged Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) reported allegations of physical abuse by a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) against a resident immediately to the Administrator. The resident involved was admitted with a diagnosis of dementia and had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The incident occurred when the CNA observed the LPN forcibly administering medication to the resident, who then spit it out. However, the CNA delayed reporting this observation to the night shift supervisor and instead reported it to the day shift nurse supervisor later. This delay in reporting increased the risk of further potential abuse to other vulnerable residents. The facility's policy mandates that all allegations of abuse be reported immediately, but no later than two hours after the allegation is made. Despite this, the CNA did not report the incident in a timely manner, citing a belief that the night shift supervisor and the LPN were friends. The facility conducted an investigation, which included interviews with staff and the resident, who denied any abuse. The LPN involved was an agency nurse and was requested not to return to the facility due to other professionalism concerns. The facility concluded that the allegation of abuse was unsubstantiated.
Failure to Investigate Abuse Allegations
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to thoroughly investigate allegations of abuse for two residents, leading to a deficiency in their abuse prevention and response protocols. For one resident, identified as R16, the facility did not conduct a specific investigation into the resident's claims of being scared of a CNA who allegedly did not assist her properly and left her walker out of reach. The facility's administrator dismissed the issue as a customer service problem rather than a potential abuse case, and the investigation lacked targeted questions to determine if abuse had occurred. In the case of another resident, identified as R43, who was severely cognitively impaired due to Alzheimer's disease, the facility did not adequately investigate an incident where a CNA was reported to have been verbally aggressive and physically restrictive during a meal service. Despite a witness statement from an Activities Therapy Assistant indicating discomfort with the CNA's actions, the facility initially considered the incident a misunderstanding and hearsay. The administrator later acknowledged the statements as eyewitness accounts but did not conduct further investigation into the abuse allegation.
Failure to Provide Written Transfer Notice
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide timely written notification to a resident and their representative regarding a transfer to a hospital, as required by their policy. The policy mandates that residents and their representatives receive a written notice in a language they understand, detailing the reasons for the transfer and the location, as well as information about the appeal process. However, during a review of the facility's records, it was found that the resident, identified as R6, was transferred to a hospital on two occasions without receiving the necessary written notice. Interviews with facility staff, including an LPN and the Administrator, confirmed that while the family was notified by phone, no written transfer notice was provided to the resident or their representative. The facility's policy also requires notification to the Office of the State Long Term Care Ombudsman and, if applicable, to the state's department of protection and advocacy for individuals with mental or developmental disabilities. The lack of written notification created a potential for misunderstanding the reasons and process for the transfer, as well as the appeal rights.
Failure to Document Resident Participation in Care Plan
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident's clinical records contained evidence of participation in the development or revision of their care plan. The resident, identified as R34, was admitted to the facility and had a documented cognitive status indicating they were cognitively intact with no behaviors. Despite this, the records did not show that the resident or their representative participated in a care conference scheduled for June 21, 2024. The only documented participation was from a previous care plan meeting on March 19, 2024. Interviews conducted with the resident, the social worker, and the interim director of nursing revealed discrepancies in the facility's documentation practices. The resident stated they were not invited to participate in the care conference, while the social worker indicated that invitations are typically documented in the electronic medical record. However, upon review, the social worker confirmed that the last entry showing participation was from March 19, 2024. Additionally, the facility lacked a formal care plan policy, as confirmed by the administrator.
Improper Catheter Care and Infection Control Practices
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide appropriate care for residents with indwelling catheters, leading to potential risks of urinary tract infections (UTIs) for three residents. Observations revealed that catheter bags were improperly managed, with bags and tubing often touching the floor or positioned above the bladder level. For Resident R90, the catheter bag was repeatedly observed lying directly on the carpeted floor, folded, and with tubing resting on the floor, which was acknowledged by the Interim Director of Nursing (IDON) as inappropriate. The catheter bag was not covered with a dignity bag, and the IDON could not confirm if such a cover was required. Resident R243's catheter bag was also observed hanging uncovered and positioned above the bladder level, with tubing touching the floor. The Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) confirmed that the facility's policy required catheter bags to be covered when residents were out of their rooms and not to be placed above the bladder level or in contact with the floor. The IDON acknowledged the improper placement of the catheter bag, which increased the risk of backflow and potential infection. Resident R89 was observed with her catheter bag and tubing touching the floor in both her room and the dining area. The Registered Nurse (RN) confirmed that this was not best practice, as it could lead to contamination and infection. The Infection Preventionist (IP) stated that she conducted random walkthroughs to ensure compliance with infection control practices but was unaware of the specific observations made during the survey. The facility was unable to provide policies regarding infection control practices for urinary catheters during the survey period.
Failure to Conduct Annual Performance Review for CNA
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide an annual performance review for one of the two Certified Nurse Assistants (CNA) reviewed, specifically CNA2. The personnel file of CNA2 contained a document titled Performance Review, which was date-stamped 01/10/23, but there were no current performance reviews in CNA2's employee record. During an interview, the Human Resource Director (HRD) confirmed that the last performance review for CNA2 was completed on 01/10/23 and acknowledged the absence of current policies for annual performance reviews of the nursing home staff. Additionally, the Interim Director of Nursing (DON) stated that the county currently requires bi-annual employee performance reviews, whereas previously, the facility was expected to conduct them annually.
Failure to Document Justification for PRN Psychotropic Medication Use
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident's medication regimen was free from unnecessary medications, specifically regarding the administration of PRN lorazepam, a psychotropic anxiolytic medication. The resident, who was severely cognitively impaired with a BIMS score of 1 out of 15 and diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease, had an order for lorazepam to be administered twice a day as needed for agitation associated with dementia. However, the order did not include a stop date, and the facility did not provide documented clinical rationale for continuing the PRN medication beyond 14 days, as required by their policy. The facility's records showed that the resident received PRN lorazepam on multiple occasions without documented indication for use or evidence of attempted non-pharmacological interventions. The Interim Director of Nursing acknowledged that the nursing documentation was inadequate to justify the administration of the PRN lorazepam and assumed that the physician's note indicating that discontinuing the medication was contraindicated was sufficient to continue its use. This lack of proper documentation and adherence to policy led to the deficiency identified by the surveyors.
Incomplete Medical Records for Resident with Urinary Catheter
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that medical records were complete and accurate for a resident, identified as R89, who was readmitted following a hospitalization with a diagnosis of urinary retention. The hospital records indicated that R89 had a failed voiding trial and an indwelling urinary catheter was inserted during the hospital stay. However, upon review of R89's electronic medical record (EMR) at the facility, there was no physician order for the urinary catheter, although there was an order to measure urinary output three times daily. The care plan for R89 acknowledged the need for a urinary catheter, with goals and interventions related to monitoring urinary output and notifying the physician of any changes. Observations confirmed that R89 had an indwelling urinary catheter on multiple occasions. During interviews, the Interim Director of Nursing (IDON) and the Medical Director confirmed that hospital transfer orders should be reconciled and verified with the resident's physician upon admission and readmission. Both were unaware of the missing order for the urinary catheter. Additionally, the facility did not have a policy related to physician orders, as confirmed by the IDON.
Failure to Offer Pneumococcal Vaccination
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to offer a pneumococcal vaccination to one of the five residents reviewed for flu and pneumonia vaccinations, specifically Resident 71. According to the CDC guidelines, adults aged 65 years or older who have previously received the PCV13 vaccine should be offered the PCV20 vaccine one year later. Resident 71, who was over the age of 65 at the time of admission, had received the PCV13 vaccine prior to her admission to the facility. However, the facility did not offer her the PCV20 vaccine as recommended by the CDC guidelines. The facility's policy on pneumococcal vaccines, dated January 26, 2024, states that they will follow CDC recommendations for administering pneumococcal vaccines. Despite this policy, the Infection Preventionist confirmed during an interview that Resident 71 should have been offered the PCV20 vaccine one year after receiving the PCV13 vaccine, which did not occur. This oversight indicates a failure to adhere to the established vaccination protocol for residents, as outlined by the CDC and the facility's own policy.
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 195 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 7 immediate-jeopardy cases — 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 Janesville
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| St Elizabeth Nursing Home | 1.6 mi | ★★★★★ | 19 | 0 |
| Mercy Manor Transition Center | 1.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Oak Park Place Of Janesville | 2.6 mi | ★★★★★ | 1 | 0 |
| Cedar Crest Health Center | 4.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 4 | 0 |
| Edgerton Care Center, Inc | 9.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 14 | 1 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Rock Haven.
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.