Montana ›Columbus

Beartooth Rehabilitation and Nursing LLC

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

350 W Pike Ave, Columbus, MT 59019 (opens Google Maps) · Stillwater County · (406) 290-5070· — certified beds · avg 42 residents/day · certified since Dec 18, 2024 · Medicare and Medicaid certified

Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →

Abuse citation flag (CMS)SFF Candidate

What the abuse flag means → · What Special Focus status means →

Part of chain: THE CHARLY BELLO FAMILY, THE MAZE FAMILY, THE SWAIN FAMILY, & WALTER MYERS (19 facilities, chain avg rating 1.7★)

The abuse flag means inspectors cited this facility for abuse that caused harm to a resident within the past year, or potential for harm in each of the last two years. Source: CMS.

1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Feb 10, 2026
4
Serious findings on record
most recent Feb 10, 2026
$50,592
Fines, last 3 years
3.75
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

New to these records? How to read an inspection report →

Health inspection rating: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5 · how star ratings work →

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 quality measures from resident assessments and claims.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Feb 10, 2026 · 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 (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Apr 27, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Sep 4, 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 (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Oct 3, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Sep 4, 2025 · F-0600 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors.

Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.

Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Oct 3, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Sep 4, 2025 · F-0658 · triggered by a complaint

The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.

Why it matters: Care that falls below professional standards can directly harm a resident's health and recovery.

Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Oct 3, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 43 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated

    The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint F-0689

  2. F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread

    The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. F-0801

  3. F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread

    The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. F-0812

View all 43 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Feb 10, 2026▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Feb 10, 2026F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. · F-0801
Feb 10, 2026F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812
Feb 10, 2026F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents. · F-0835
Feb 10, 2026F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not have a proper governing body legally responsible for its policies and operations, or that body failed to appoint a properly licensed administrator to manage the facility. · F-0837
Feb 10, 2026F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not conduct and document a facility-wide assessment of what staff, supplies, and resources it needs to care for its residents properly — during everyday operations, nights, weekends, and emergencies. · F-0838
Feb 10, 2026F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them. · F-0865
Feb 10, 2026F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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. · F-0880
Feb 10, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584
Feb 10, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint · F-0600
Feb 10, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint · F-0609
Feb 10, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · F-0657
Feb 10, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not properly inform residents or their representatives about arbitration agreements — contracts that give up the right to sue in court — including their right to refuse to sign. · F-0847
Feb 10, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0580
Feb 10, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0610
Feb 10, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0656
Feb 10, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · F-0679
Feb 10, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline. · F-0688
Feb 10, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide appropriate treatment and services to residents with a mental health condition, difficulty adjusting emotionally, or a history of trauma or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). · F-0742
Feb 10, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842
Sep 4, 2025▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Sep 4, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint · F-0600
Sep 4, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · from a complaint · F-0658
Sep 4, 2025F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them. · from a complaint · F-0865
Sep 4, 2025F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility's quality committee — the internal group responsible for finding and fixing care problems — did not have the required members or did not meet at least every three months. · from a complaint · F-0868
Sep 4, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). · from a complaint · F-0628
Sep 4, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint · F-0609
Sep 4, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0610
Sep 4, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not reassess a resident after a significant change in their condition, such as a sudden decline in health. A full new assessment is required when a resident's condition changes in a major way. · from a complaint · F-0637
Sep 4, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require. · from a complaint · F-0640
Sep 4, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0641
Sep 4, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · from a complaint · F-0657
Jul 31, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not honor residents' right to voice complaints without discrimination or retaliation, or did not have a working complaint process that resolves issues promptly. · from a complaint · F-0585
Jul 31, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make its inspection results easy for residents to see, or made it hard for residents to contact advocacy agencies like the ombudsman. · from a complaint · F-0577
Jul 31, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584
Dec 5, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0656
Dec 5, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0880
Dec 5, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584
Dec 5, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · F-0657
Dec 5, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · F-0658
Dec 5, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · F-0677
Dec 5, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. · F-0695
Dec 5, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits. · F-0758

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (8 → 18).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2024
All citations: 8
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 15
Serious citations (G–L): 3
2026
All citations: 20
Serious citations (G–L): 1

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202480E
2025153J ▲
2026201J ▲

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)

How to file a complaint about care →

2 fines totaling $50,592, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.

Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.

DateTypeAmount / length
Feb 10, 2026Fine$32,988
Feb 10, 2026Payment Denial41 days from Mar 17, 2026
Sep 4, 2025Fine$17,604

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

What these staffing numbers mean →

Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityMontana averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.75
Montana average: 4.82
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 1.07
Montana average: 1.17
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.42
Montana average: 4.26
U.S. average: 3.50

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

MeasureThis facilityMontana avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)3.754.823.95bottom 24% in Montana; bottom 49% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours1.071.170.69top 48% in Montana; top 13% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.424.263.50bottom 35% in Montana; top 46% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.630.710.48bottom 48% in Montana; top 21% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)—54.845.8—
RN turnover (%)—48.342.9—

Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — 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 2.95, RN 0.84, weekend 2.68.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (2.95 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.

Quality measures: assessments & claims

Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.

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

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Beartooth Rehabilitation and Nursing LLC. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.

Calculate a stay from a quote you receive

Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.

Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.

Before you compare prices

  • Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
  • Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
  • Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.

Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price

Who owns this facility

How to read ownership records →

Ownership records as published by CMS on 2026-08-01. CMS records when an owner joined but not when they left. Listed here and no longer involved? Tell us →

For profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Larsen, KoleIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest10%07/15/2024
White Ash LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest10%02/15/2024
Lake, BrandyIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE07/15/2024
Macewen, JeffreyIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE07/15/2024
Olmstead, StaceyIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2026
Olmstead, StaceyIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2026

All 6 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.

Other facilities in the same chain

CMS lists this facility under the chain The Charly Bello Family, the Maze Family, the Swain Family, & Walter Myers — 19 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.

Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 18 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.

Questions to ask on your visit

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

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

  • "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
  • "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
  • "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
  • "Do you have a qualified dietician on staff, and how involved are they in each resident's nutrition plan?"
  • "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
  • "What were the findings behind this administration citation, and what has leadership changed since?"
  • "Who owns and governs this facility, and how long has the current administrator been here?"
  • "How do you decide you have enough staff and resources for your resident population, including nights and weekends?"

Also worth asking anywhere

  • "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Montana midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
  • "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
  • "CMS lists this facility under its Special Focus program — what is being done differently, and by when?"
  • "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Laurel Health & Rehabilitation Center23.8 miLaurel, MT★☆☆☆☆1/5
St John's Lutheran Home32.8 miBillings, MT★★★★☆3/5
Aspen Meadows Health and Rehabilitation Center33.9 miBillings, MT★★☆☆☆3/5
Skyline Heights Nursing and Rehabilitation34.4 miBillings, MT★☆☆☆☆1/5SFF
Yellowstone River Nursing and Rehabilitation34.5 miBillings, MT★☆☆☆☆1/5
Billings Rehabilitation and Nursing LLC37.9 miBillings, MT★★☆☆☆2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Columbus →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 275159.

This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).

Your research

Viewed & saved homes

Kept in this browser tab for this session. Choose to remember them only on a device you trust. Opening a record or comparison sends its usual page request.

Selected for comparison

Recently viewed

Prices entered in a cost worksheet stay on that page and are not saved. Privacy details