Nebraska ›Omaha

Douglas County Health Center

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

4102 Woolworth Avenue, Omaha, NE 68105 (opens Google Maps) · Douglas County · (402) 444-7041· 254 certified beds · avg 228 residents/day · certified since Mar 24, 1967 · 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 →

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected May 13, 2025
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Oct 30, 2025
$0
Fines, last 3 years
5.89
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: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5 · 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)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Oct 30, 2025 · F-0760 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.

Why it matters: A serious medication error can cause real harm, hospitalization, or worse.

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: Dec 12, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 33 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. G · Actual harm, isolated

    The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · from a complaint F-0760

  2. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · from a complaint F-0697

  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 33 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
Oct 30, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · from a complaint · F-0760
Oct 30, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · from a complaint · F-0697
May 13, 2025F · 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
May 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility gave residents unnecessary mind-altering (psychotropic) medications, or used drugs in a way that restrained residents by dulling their ability to think, move, or function. · F-0605
May 13, 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
May 13, 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
May 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not fully assess residents on time — a complete assessment of health, abilities, and needs is required when a resident is first admitted and at least once every 12 months after that. · F-0636
May 13, 2025D · 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
May 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684
May 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · F-0686
May 13, 2025D · 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
May 13, 2025D · 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
May 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697
May 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
May 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure residents actually saw their doctor face-to-face at all required visits. Doctors must examine nursing home residents in person on a regular schedule. · from a complaint · F-0712
May 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jul 18, 2024D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0580
May 16, 2024D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0656
Apr 26, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Apr 26, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not let a resident help develop and carry out their own plan of care — the written roadmap of the services and support they'll receive, built around their personal goals and preferences. · F-0553
Apr 26, 2024D · 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
Apr 26, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0585
Apr 26, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Apr 26, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Apr 26, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Apr 26, 2024C · Potential for minimal harm, widespreadThe 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
Mar 5, 2024D · 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
May 16, 2023F · 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
May 16, 2023D · 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
May 16, 2023D · 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
May 16, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not let a resident return after a hospital stay or approved leave that lasted longer than the facility's bed-hold policy allowed. Residents generally have the right to come back to the next available bed. · F-0626
May 16, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide or arrange dental services for its residents. Nursing homes are responsible for making sure residents can get dental care. · F-0791
May 16, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (8 → 14).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 16
Serious citations (G–L): 1

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

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202360F
2024110E
2025161G ▲

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 →

0 fines totaling $0, 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
Oct 30, 2025Payment Denial8 days from Dec 4, 2025

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 facilityNebraska averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 5.89
Nebraska average: 4.33
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 1.24
Nebraska average: 0.72
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 5.41
Nebraska average: 3.79
U.S. average: 3.50

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

MeasureThis facilityNebraska avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)5.894.333.95top 6% in Nebraska; top 5% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours1.240.720.69top 7% in Nebraska; top 8% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing5.413.793.50top 5% in Nebraska; top 4% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.690.470.48top 15% in Nebraska; top 17% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)14.948.745.8top 1% in Nebraska; top 1% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)12.844.142.9top 8% in Nebraska; top 7% 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 4.78, RN 1.01, weekend 4.39.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.78 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 5/5.

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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Douglas County Health Center. 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 →

Government - City/county

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Borgeson, Mary AnnIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/1995
Boyle-Manganaro, MaureenIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2021
Cavanaugh, JamesIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2015
Friend, MikeIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2021
Garcia, RogerIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2021
Morgan, PJIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2010
Nelson, ErinIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2019
Nelson, ErinIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2019
Nelson, ErinIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2019
Rogers, ChrisIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2005

All 10 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.

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 systems do you use to prevent medication errors, and what happens when one occurs?"
  • "How do you assess and manage residents' pain, especially for those who have trouble communicating?"
  • "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
  • "What percentage of your residents are on antipsychotic or sedating medications, and how do you work to reduce that?"
  • "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
  • "If someone reports suspected abuse or neglect here, what happens in the first 24 hours?"
  • "How soon after admission is a full assessment completed, and how are the findings shared with the family?"
  • "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"

Also worth asking anywhere

  • "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
  • "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
  • "CMS reports 15% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

Nearby facilities (12 closest of 35 within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
The Cypress at Midtown0.4 miOmaha, NE★★★☆☆3/5
Emerald Nursing & Rehab Omaha1.8 miOmaha, NE★☆☆☆☆1/5SFF
St. Joseph Villa Nursing Center2.4 miOmaha, NE★☆☆☆☆1/5
Omaha Nursing and Rehabilitation Center2.5 miOmaha, NE★☆☆☆☆1/5
Ambassador Health of Omaha2.6 miOmaha, NE★★★★★4/5
Emerald Nursing & Rehabilitation Mercy2.9 miOmaha, NE★☆☆☆☆1/5SFF
Maple Crest Health Center3.4 miOmaha, NE★★★☆☆2/5
Keystone Ridge Post Acute Nursing and Rehabilitati4.7 miOmaha, NE★★☆☆☆1/5
Life Care Center of Omaha5.0 miOmaha, NE★☆☆☆☆1/5
Quality Living, INC.5.4 miOmaha, NE★★★☆☆3/5
Emerald Nursing & Rehab Legacy Pointe LLC5.6 miOmaha, NE★☆☆☆☆1/5SFF
Florence Home6.0 miOmaha, NE★★★★☆3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Douglas, NE — 24 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.

Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.

All facilities in Omaha →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 285019.

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