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 →
Part of chain: ESSENTIA HEALTH (6 facilities, chain avg rating 4.3★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected May 28, 2026
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Apr 26, 2024
$14,433
Fines, last 3 years
6.02
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
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 · Apr 26, 2024 · 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: May 13, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 13 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
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. F-0585
D · Potential for more than minimal 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
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. F-0883
View all 13 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.
Date
Severity
What the facility was cited for
May 28, 2026
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
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. · F-0585
May 28, 2026
D · Potential for more than minimal 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
May 28, 2026
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883
May 28, 2026
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not educate residents and staff about COVID-19 vaccination, offer the vaccine to those eligible after that education, or properly document everyone's vaccination status. · F-0887
Jul 30, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The 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. · F-0637
Jul 30, 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
Jul 30, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. · F-0676
Jul 30, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The 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
Jul 30, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755
Jul 30, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
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
Jun 6, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The 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
Jun 6, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
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
Apr 26, 2024
▲ 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
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (6 → 4).
Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2024
All citations:
3
Serious citations (G–L):
1
2025
All citations:
6
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2026
All citations:
4
Serious citations (G–L):
0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Year
Citations
Serious (G–L)
Worst severity that year
2024
3
1
J ▲
2025
6
0
D
2026
4
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.
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
Apr 26, 2024
Fine
$14,433
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityMinnesota averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility:
6.02
Minnesota average:
4.83
U.S. average:
3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility:
1.75
Minnesota average:
1.22
U.S. average:
0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility:
5.00
Minnesota average:
4.27
U.S. average:
3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Measure
This facility
Minnesota avg
U.S. avg
Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
6.02
4.83
3.95
top 11% in Minnesota; top 4% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours
1.75
1.22
0.69
top 10% in Minnesota; top 3% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing
5.00
4.27
3.50
top 15% in Minnesota; top 6% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)
0.89
0.69
0.48
top 21% in Minnesota; top 8% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)
41.7
42.2
45.8
bottom 46% in Minnesota; top 41% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)
20.0
38.6
42.9
top 17% in Minnesota; top 13% 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 5.35, RN 1.55, weekend 4.45.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (5.35 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.
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for First Care Living 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.
Showing 20 of 23 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 3 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Essentia Health — 6 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.
CMS records place this facility in Polk, MN — 4 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
Health inspection rating 3/5 · CMS overall 4/5· Fines (3y): $14,433
Most serious findings on record:
▲ Apr 26, 2024 (F-0689, 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.
Questions for the administrator:
☐ "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
☐ "Walk me through what happens when a resident or family files a grievance — who responds and how fast?"
☐ "What specific dementia training do your staff receive, and how do you handle difficult moments without medication?"
☐ "What percentage of your residents and staff are vaccinated against flu and pneumonia, and how do you offer the vaccines?"
☐ "How do you handle COVID-19 vaccination for residents and staff, and what happens during an outbreak?"
☐ "If my family member's health suddenly changes, how quickly do you reassess them and update their care?"
☐ "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
☐ "How do you help residents maintain their daily living skills, and how do you measure whether it's working?"
☐ "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 42% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
☐ "The ownership record on file lists 23 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
☐ "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
While you're there, notice:
☐ Smell and cleanliness in hallways, not just the lobby
☐ How staff speak to residents; call lights answered promptly
☐ Residents up, dressed, and engaged (visit mealtimes and a weekend if you can)
Data: CMS Provider Data Catalog, version 2026-08-01 · CCN 245512 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)