10 Kruger Rd, Plains, MT 59859 (opens Google Maps) · Sanders County · (406) 826-4800· 28 certified beds · avg 27 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1985 · 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 →
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5 · 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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Feb 13, 2025 · F-0744
The facility did not provide the right treatment and services for residents with dementia or signs of dementia. Dementia care requires specific approaches, training, and patience.
Why it matters: Poor dementia care can lead to distress, unsafe wandering, or unnecessary sedating medication.
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: Mar 14, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 19 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The 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. F-0610
The facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need. F-0644
The facility did not provide the right treatment and services for residents with dementia or signs of dementia. Dementia care requires specific approaches, training, and patience. F-0744
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.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 9, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0610 |
| Apr 9, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need. · F-0644 |
| Feb 13, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not provide the right treatment and services for residents with dementia or signs of dementia. Dementia care requires specific approaches, training, and patience. · F-0744 |
| Feb 13, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The 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 13, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0600 |
| Feb 13, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · F-0609 |
| Feb 13, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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. · F-0610 |
| Feb 13, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Feb 13, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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. · F-0761 |
| Feb 13, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 13, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 13, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0690 |
| Feb 13, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692 |
| Feb 13, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide care that took into account residents' past trauma or their cultural backgrounds. Care is supposed to be sensitive to what residents have lived through and where they come from. · F-0699 |
| Feb 13, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide the social services residents need — such as counseling, help with adjustment, or connecting to outside resources — to achieve the best possible quality of life. · F-0745 |
| Feb 13, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Feb 13, 2025 | C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not give residents important notices in a format and language they can understand — for example, translated documents or accessible formats for those with vision or hearing loss. · F-0574 |
| Feb 13, 2025 | C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread | The 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. · F-0577 |
| Feb 29, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective. · F-0881 |
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (16 → 2).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 1 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 16 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2026 | 2 | 0 | D |
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.
How to file a complaint about care →
1 fine totaling $62,871.
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.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Feb 13, 2025 | Fine | $62,871 |
What these staffing numbers mean →
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | Montana avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 5.20 | 4.82 | 3.95 | top 33% in Montana; top 10% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 1.22 | 1.17 | 0.69 | top 40% in Montana; top 9% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.44 | 4.26 | 3.50 | top 36% in Montana; top 13% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.90 | 0.71 | 0.48 | top 24% in Montana; top 8% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 48.3 | 54.8 | 45.8 | top 34% in Montana; bottom 41% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 62.5 | 48.3 | 42.9 | bottom 26% in Montana; bottom 19% in the U.S. |
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 3.81, RN 0.90, weekend 3.25.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.81 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.
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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: —/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Clark Fork Valley Nursing Home. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
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.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
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 →
Non profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Plains Hospital Corporation | Organization | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/17/1971 |
| Baxter, Michael | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2017 |
| Eberhardt, Lisa | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/13/2016 |
| Eberhardt, Lisa | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/13/2016 |
| Eberhardt, Lisa | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/13/2016 |
| Eggensperger, Bina | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2006 |
| Feist Brown, Trista | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2023 |
| Gentry, Jeanine | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/15/2023 |
| Gentry, Jeanine | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/15/2023 |
| Hanson, Gregory | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2008 |
| Hanson, Gregory | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2008 |
| Hanson, Gregory | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2008 |
| Hanson, Gregory | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2008 |
| Holland, Virginia | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2017 |
| Ingle, Richard | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Lawyer, Nicholas | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Lindsay, Arlene | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2025 |
| Lindsay, Arlene | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2016 |
| McCarthy, Erin | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2012 |
| Meaden, Brian | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2023 |
Showing 20 of 29 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 9 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hot Springs Health & Rehabilitation Center | 13.8 mi | Hot Springs, MT | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 275107.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details