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: LIFE CARE CENTERS OF AMERICA (194 facilities, chain avg rating 3.4★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Feb 6, 2024
4
Serious findings on record
most recent Nov 14, 2024
$6,788
Fines, last 3 years
3.83
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 most recent standard health inspection was more than 2 years ago — conditions may have changed.
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 · Nov 14, 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 (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.
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.
Why it matters: Being treated without dignity harms a resident's self-worth, mental health, and overall quality of life.
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: Nov 15, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
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.
Why it matters: Bedsores are painful, can become deeply infected, and in serious cases can be life-threatening.
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: Nov 15, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
Why it matters: Malnutrition and dehydration can quickly weaken a resident and lead to serious complications.
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: Nov 15, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 21 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
G · Actual harm, 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 complaintF-0689
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. F-0684
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. F-0658
View all 21 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
Nov 14, 2024
▲ G · Actual harm, 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
Feb 6, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684
Feb 6, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · F-0658
Feb 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
Oct 5, 2023
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · from a complaint · F-0804
Oct 17, 2022
▲ G · Actual 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. · F-0550
Oct 17, 2022
▲ G · Actual 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
Oct 17, 2022
▲ G · Actual 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
Oct 17, 2022
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · F-0677
Oct 17, 2022
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The 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
Oct 17, 2022
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
Oct 17, 2022
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · F-0679
Oct 17, 2022
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
Oct 17, 2022
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The 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
Oct 17, 2022
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. · F-0757
Oct 17, 2022
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
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
Oct 17, 2022
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide residents with enough to drink, or with drinks matching their needs and preferences, to keep them properly hydrated. · F-0807
Jun 29, 2021
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
Jun 29, 2021
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
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 29, 2021
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not properly notify residents about the balance of money it holds for them, or failed to return those funds when a resident was discharged, evicted, or died. · F-0569
Jun 29, 2021
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
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (12 → 3).
Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations:
4
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2022
All citations:
12
Serious citations (G–L):
3
2023
All citations:
1
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2024
All citations:
4
Serious citations (G–L):
1
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Year
Citations
Serious (G–L)
Worst severity that year
2021
4
0
E
2022
12
3
G ▲
2023
1
0
E
2024
4
1
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.
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
Nov 14, 2024
Fine
$6,788
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 facilityColorado averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility:
3.83
Colorado average:
3.89
U.S. average:
3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility:
0.88
Colorado average:
0.86
U.S. average:
0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility:
3.39
Colorado average:
3.44
U.S. average:
3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Measure
This facility
Colorado avg
U.S. avg
Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
3.83
3.89
3.95
top 43% in Colorado; top 47% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours
0.88
0.86
0.69
top 38% in Colorado; top 22% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing
3.39
3.44
3.50
top 44% in Colorado; top 48% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)
0.74
0.61
0.48
top 28% in Colorado; top 14% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)
27.9
47.1
45.8
top 7% in Colorado; top 11% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)
26.1
44.6
42.9
top 18% in Colorado; top 23% 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 3.71, RN 0.86, weekend 3.29.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.71 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.
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 Hallmark Nursing 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.
All 5 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Life Care Centers of America — 194 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 Denver, CO — 23 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 065233.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).
The Care File
Visit checklist — Hallmark Nursing Center
3701 W Radcliff Ave, Denver, CO 80236 · (303) 794-6484
Health inspection rating 4/5 · CMS overall 5/5· Fines (3y): $6,788
Most serious findings on record:
▲ Nov 14, 2024 (F-0689, Actual harm, isolated): The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
▲ Oct 17, 2022 (F-0550, Actual 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.
▲ Oct 17, 2022 (F-0686, Actual 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.
Questions for the administrator:
☐ "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?"
☐ "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
☐ "How do you monitor residents' weight and eating, and what happens when someone starts losing weight?"
☐ "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
☐ "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
☐ "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
☐ "Could I join residents for a meal to see the food quality and temperature for myself?"
☐ "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 28% 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?"
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 065233 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)