WisconsinAugusta

Augusta Health and Rehabilitation

901 Bridge Creek Lane, Augusta, WI 54722 · Eau Claire County · 50 certified beds · avg 36 residents/day · certified since Jun 1, 1994

3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
1
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
0.00
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5

The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and self-reported quality measures.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Feb 6, 2025 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.

Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.

Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Mar 6, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (24)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Apr 8, 2026F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide.
Apr 8, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock.
Apr 8, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Apr 8, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide special eating equipment and utensils — like adaptive cups or easy-grip silverware — for residents who need them, along with appropriate help at meals.
Feb 6, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Feb 6, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
Feb 6, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away.
Feb 6, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · from a complaint
Feb 6, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections.
Feb 6, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
Feb 6, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Feb 6, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock.
Feb 6, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide or arrange dental services for its residents. Nursing homes are responsible for making sure residents can get dental care.
Feb 6, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide.
Jun 25, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · from a complaint
Dec 20, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Dec 20, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide.
Dec 20, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation.
Dec 20, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do.
Dec 20, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines.
Dec 20, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Dec 20, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Dec 20, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
Dec 20, 2023B · Minimal risk, repeatedThe facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (10 → 4).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202390F
202410D
2025101G ▲
202640F

Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.

Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)

No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

MeasureThis facilityWisconsin avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)0.004.293.95
Registered Nurse hours0.001.010.69
Weekend total nurse staffing0.003.843.50
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.000.680.48
Total nursing staff turnover (%)34.846.945.8top 17% in Wisconsin; top 24% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)30.039.742.9top 36% in Wisconsin; top 29% in the U.S.

Hours are per resident per day, case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 0.00, RN 0.00, weekend 0.00. Staffing rating: 1/5.

Self-reported quality measures

Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.

Quality measures rating: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 2/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Augusta Area Home, INCOrganizationDirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE08/01/1968
Augusta Area Home, INCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE08/01/1968
Augusta Area Home, INCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE08/01/1968
Bradley, JahnIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE04/15/2013
Bradley, JahnIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE04/15/2013
Bradley, JahnIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/15/2013
Krueger, KimIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE05/05/2011
Krueger, KimIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE05/05/2011
Vande Zande, VictoriaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2024
Vande Zande, VictoriaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/18/2025

Questions to ask on your visit

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Dove Healthcare - Osseo7.6 miOsseo, WI★★★★☆4/5
Dove Healthcare - South Eau Claire17.6 miEau Claire, WI★★★★★5/5
Oakwood Health Services17.9 miAltoona, WI★★★☆☆3/5
Grace Lutheran Communities - River Pines18.0 miAltoona, WI★★★★☆4/5
Pigeon Falls HCC18.7 miPigeon Falls, WI★★★★★4/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Augusta →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 525535.