New Mexico ›Santa Clara

Fort Bayard Medical Center

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

41 Fort Bayard Road, Santa Clara, NM 88026 (opens Google Maps) · Grant County · (575) 537-8604· 200 certified beds · avg 127 residents/day · certified since Jun 20, 2009 · 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 →

3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Aug 9, 2024
2
Serious findings on record
most recent Jun 11, 2024
$83,501
Fines, last 3 years
6.90
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: ★★★☆☆3/5 · 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.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, pattern · Jun 11, 2024 · F-0684 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.

Why it matters: Care that strays from doctor's orders or ignores the resident's wishes can lead to declining health and avoidable harm.

Severity (K): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was a pattern: more than a limited occurrence, without being widespread. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Jul 26, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, pattern · Jun 11, 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 (H): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was a pattern: more than a limited occurrence, without being widespread. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Jul 26, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 48 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

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

    The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · from a complaint F-0550

  2. 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. · from a complaint F-0609

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

    The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · from a complaint F-0552

View all 48 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
Apr 8, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · from a complaint · F-0550
Jul 10, 2025E · 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
Jul 10, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · from a complaint · F-0552
Jul 10, 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. · from a complaint · F-0605
Jul 10, 2025D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0842
Jan 24, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · from a complaint · F-0604
Jan 24, 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
Aug 9, 2024F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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. · F-0732
Aug 9, 2024F · 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
Aug 9, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · F-0550
Aug 9, 2024E · 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
Aug 9, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · F-0604
Aug 9, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility used bed rails without first trying safer alternatives, or without assessing the resident's safety risk, discussing the risks and benefits with the resident or family, getting consent, and installing the rails correctly. · F-0700
Aug 9, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems. · F-0756
Aug 9, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Aug 9, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. · F-0582
Aug 9, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · F-0655
Aug 9, 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
Aug 9, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692
Jun 11, 2024▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, patternThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684
Jun 11, 2024▲ H · Actual harm, patternThe 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
Jun 11, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternWhen a resident had a planned discharge, the facility did not make sure the necessary information was communicated to the resident and to the doctors or facility taking over their care. · from a complaint · F-0661
Jun 11, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not make sure the resident's doctor reviewed their care and wrote, signed, and dated progress notes and orders at each required visit. · from a complaint · F-0711
Jun 11, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not properly plan a resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs after leaving. · from a complaint · F-0660
Jun 1, 2023F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician. · F-0803
Jun 1, 2023F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not designate a qualified infection preventionist — a trained person responsible for running the infection prevention and control program. · F-0882
Jun 1, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal. · F-0623
Jun 1, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave. · F-0625
Jun 1, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · F-0655
Jun 1, 2023E · 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
Jun 1, 2023E · 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
Jun 1, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Jun 1, 2023E · 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
Jun 1, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842
Jun 1, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not train its staff on dementia care and on recognizing and reporting abuse, neglect, and exploitation. · F-0943
Jun 1, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · F-0550
Jun 1, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not prepare and serve food in a form that meets each resident's individual needs — for example, chopped, pureed, or softened food for residents with chewing or swallowing problems. · F-0805
Mar 3, 2022F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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. · F-0576
Mar 3, 2022F · 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
Mar 3, 2022F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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
Mar 3, 2022E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · F-0550
Mar 3, 2022E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave. · F-0625
Mar 3, 2022E · 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
Mar 3, 2022E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Mar 3, 2022E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Mar 3, 2022E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842
Mar 3, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide necessary behavioral health care and services — support for residents' mental and emotional wellbeing, including conditions like depression and anxiety. · F-0740
Mar 3, 2022D · 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

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (13 → 12).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2022
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 13
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 17
Serious citations (G–L): 2
2025
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0

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

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2022110F
2023130F
2024172K ▲
202560E
202610D

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 →

1 fine totaling $83,501, 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
Jun 11, 2024Fine$83,501
Jun 11, 2024Payment Denial13 days from Jul 13, 2024

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 facilityNew Mexico averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 6.90
New Mexico average: 3.94
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 1.33
New Mexico average: 0.70
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 5.57
New Mexico average: 3.46
U.S. average: 3.50

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

MeasureThis facilityNew Mexico avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)6.903.943.95top 2% in New Mexico; top 2% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours1.330.700.69top 3% in New Mexico; top 7% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing5.573.463.50top 5% in New Mexico; top 3% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.800.460.48top 9% in New Mexico; top 11% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)33.153.345.8top 8% in New Mexico; top 20% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)9.753.642.9top 1% in New Mexico; top 4% 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 6.27, RN 1.21, weekend 5.06.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (6.27 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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 1/5 · 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 Fort Bayard Medical 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 - State

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Bays, SherriIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2018
Bays, SherriIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2018
Bays, SherriIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2018
Hamilton, JasonIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2018
Hamilton, JasonIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2018
Hamilton, JasonIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2018

All 6 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.

  • "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
  • "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
  • "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
  • "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
  • "How do you explain health changes and treatment options to residents and their families?"
  • "What percentage of your residents are on antipsychotic or sedating medications, and how do you work to reduce that?"
  • "How do you keep residents' medical records accurate, complete, and secure?"
  • "What is your policy on physical restraints, and what alternatives do you try first?"

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 33% 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 (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Silver City Care Center6.6 miSilver City, NM★★☆☆☆2/5

Compare this facility with the 1 closest →

All facilities in Santa Clara →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 325120.

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