Essentia Health Homestead
115 10th Avenue Northeast, Deer River, MN 56636 · Itasca County · 32 certified beds · avg 21 residents/day · certified since Feb 1, 1987
Part of chain: ESSENTIA HEALTH (6 facilities, chain avg rating 4.3★)
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · 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)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, repeated · Dec 17, 2025 · F-0726 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident.
Why it matters: Undertrained caregivers are more likely to miss warning signs and make care mistakes.
Severity (K): A life-threatening or extremely dangerous situation affected several residents. Among the most serious findings an inspection can produce.
Corrected: Jan 16, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · May 18, 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 (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: Apr 23, 2026 (Past Non-Compliance)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Mar 31, 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 (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 22, 2026 (Past Non-Compliance)
All citations in the current public record (15)
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| May 18, 2026 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | 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 |
| Apr 22, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Mar 31, 2026 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | 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 |
| Dec 17, 2025 | ▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, repeated | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · from a complaint |
| Dec 17, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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 |
| Dec 17, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Jul 30, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. · from a complaint |
| Jul 30, 2025 | C · Minimal risk, facility-wide | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · from a complaint |
| Mar 12, 2025 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not give residents reasonable access to and privacy in using ways to communicate, such as phones, mail, and email. Residents have the right to stay in touch with the outside world privately. |
| Mar 12, 2025 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records. |
| Mar 12, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Mar 12, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Mar 12, 2025 | C · Minimal risk, facility-wide | The facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day. |
| May 16, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| May 16, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (5 → 1).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 2 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 10 | 1 | K ▲ |
| 2026 | 3 | 2 | G ▲ |
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)
2 fines totaling $67,727.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 31, 2026 | Fine | $27,378 |
| Dec 17, 2025 | Fine | $40,349 |
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
| Measure | This facility | Minnesota avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 5.68 | 4.83 | 3.95 | top 14% in Minnesota; top 6% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 1.95 | 1.22 | 0.69 | top 6% in Minnesota; top 2% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 5.07 | 4.27 | 3.50 | top 13% in Minnesota; top 6% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 1.13 | 0.69 | 0.48 | top 10% in Minnesota; top 4% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 50.0 | 42.2 | 45.8 | bottom 28% in Minnesota; bottom 38% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 40.0 | 38.6 | 42.9 | bottom 45% in Minnesota; top 46% 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 4.97, RN 1.71, weekend 4.44. Staffing rating: 5/5.
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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: —/5
Who owns this facility
Non profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Essentia Health | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 03/01/2025 |
| Aronson Norr, Nancy | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Bachand, Adam | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Bergstrom, Amy | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Boren, Kevin | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/04/2022 |
| Boren, Kevin | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/04/2022 |
| Duininck, Troy | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Essentia Health | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/12/2025 |
| Jamar, Thomas | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Loban, George | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Lund, Jared | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Lund, Jared | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Meyer, Deborah | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/22/2019 |
| Meyer, Deborah | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/22/2019 |
| Sertich, Anthony | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2021 |
| Skorupa, Krista | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/06/2024 |
| Smith, Bruce | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2026 |
| St Marys Duluth Clinic Health System | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2012 |
| St Marys Duluth Clinic Health System | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/12/2025 |
| Terch, Justin | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/22/2025 |
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "How do you verify that your nurses and aides have the skills to care for residents with needs like my family member's?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "Walk me through what happens when a resident or family files a grievance — who responds and how fast?"
- "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
- "What specific steps do you take to prevent abuse and neglect, and how are staff trained on them?"
- "How can my family member make private phone or video calls, and can we see where?"
- "How do your actual daily staffing levels compare to what's reported on Medicare's Care Compare website?"
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"
Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grand Village | 12.7 mi | Grand Rapids, MN | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| The Emeralds at Grand Rapids LLC | 15.6 mi | Grand Rapids, MN | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 |
Compare this facility with the 2 closest →
All facilities in Deer River →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 245428.