Nebraska ›Omaha

Life Care Center of Omaha

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

6032 Ville De Sante Drive, Omaha, NE 68104 (opens Google Maps) · Douglas County · (402) 571-6770· 128 certified beds · avg 79 residents/day · certified since Nov 29, 1993 · 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 →

Part of chain: LIFE CARE CENTERS OF AMERICA (194 facilities, chain avg rating 3.4★)

1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Sep 15, 2025
2
Serious findings on record
most recent Nov 19, 2025
$31,079
Fines, last 3 years
4.19
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: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5 · 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, isolated · Apr 3, 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: Apr 29, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Nov 19, 2025 · F-0686 · triggered by a complaint

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: Jan 19, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 44 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

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

    The facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely. · from a complaint F-0627

  2. 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. · from a complaint F-0686

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

    The facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes. · from a complaint F-0693

View all 44 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
Mar 10, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely. · from a complaint · F-0627
Nov 19, 2025▲ G · Actual 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. · from a complaint · F-0686
Nov 19, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes. · from a complaint · F-0693
Sep 15, 2025F · 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. · from a complaint · F-0732
Sep 15, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Sep 15, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely. · from a complaint · F-0627
Sep 15, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). · F-0628
Sep 15, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · from a complaint · F-0641
Sep 15, 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. · F-0657
Sep 15, 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
Sep 15, 2025D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0689
Sep 15, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Sep 15, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. · from a complaint · F-0759
Jun 11, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). · from a complaint · F-0628
Jun 11, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0726
Jun 11, 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. · from a complaint · F-0880
Mar 17, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes. · from a complaint · F-0693
Mar 17, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. · from a complaint · F-0759
Mar 17, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0761
Oct 29, 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. · from a complaint · F-0553
Oct 29, 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. · from a complaint · F-0689
Oct 29, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. · from a complaint · F-0759
Jul 23, 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
Jul 23, 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
Jul 23, 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. · F-0656
Jul 23, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jul 23, 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
Jul 23, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes. · F-0693
Apr 3, 2024▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolatedThe 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
Apr 3, 2024D · 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
Apr 3, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. · from a complaint · F-0947
Apr 3, 2024C · Potential for 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. · from a complaint · F-0732
Jan 9, 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
Jan 9, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · from a complaint · F-0690
Jan 9, 2024D · 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
Aug 22, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0880
Aug 22, 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. · from a complaint · F-0580
Aug 22, 2023D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0686
Jun 29, 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
Jun 29, 2023E · 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
Jun 29, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 29, 2023D · 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
Jun 29, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (6 → 10).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 9
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 16
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2025
All citations: 18
Serious citations (G–L): 1
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
202390F
2024161J ▲
2025181G ▲
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 $31,079.

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
Apr 3, 2024Fine$31,079

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: 4.19
Nebraska average: 4.33
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.32
Nebraska average: 0.72
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.62
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)4.194.333.95bottom 47% in Nebraska; top 32% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.320.720.69bottom 5% in Nebraska; bottom 12% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.623.793.50bottom 45% in Nebraska; top 37% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.130.470.48bottom 2% in Nebraska; bottom 3% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)50.948.745.8bottom 44% in Nebraska; bottom 35% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)77.844.142.9bottom 16% in Nebraska; bottom 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 4.20, RN 0.32, weekend 3.63.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.20 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.

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: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Life Care Center of Omaha. 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 →

For profit - Partnership

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Fund I Investments Limited PartnershipOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest96%08/23/1995
Consolidated Resources Health Care Fund I LPOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/01/1990
Consolidated Resources Health Care Fund I LPOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE08/31/2000
CRHC LLCOrganizationGeneral Partnership InterestNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2017
Cross, CindyIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE04/21/1994
Developers Investment Company INCOrganizationLimited Partnership InterestNOT APPLICABLE08/23/1995
Eklund, AmberIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE08/16/2024
Eklund, AmberIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE08/16/2024
Fletcher, ToddIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE11/02/2020
Fund I Investments Limited PartnershipOrganizationLimited Partnership InterestNOT APPLICABLE08/23/1995
Fund I Investments Limited PartnershipOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE08/31/2000
HCF INCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE08/23/1995
HCF INCOrganizationGeneral Partnership InterestNOT APPLICABLE08/23/1995
HCF INCOrganizationLimited Partnership InterestNOT APPLICABLE08/23/1995
Henry, TerryIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE08/16/1999
Lay, LisaIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE02/09/2018
Life Care Centers of America, INC.OrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/01/1990
Life Care Centers of America, INC.OrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/21/2025
Preston, AubreyIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/06/2025
Preston, ForrestIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE08/31/2000

Showing 20 of 30 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 10 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 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.

Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 193 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.

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 is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
  • "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
  • "Before a resident is discharged or transferred, how do you make sure the new place can actually meet their needs?"
  • "How do you decide when a feeding tube is truly needed, and how do staff care for residents who have one?"
  • "Where do you post your daily staffing numbers, and can I see today's?"
  • "What percentage of your residents are on antipsychotic or sedating medications, and how do you work to reduce that?"
  • "What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
  • "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"

Also worth asking anywhere

  • "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Nebraska midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
  • "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
  • "CMS reports 51% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 30 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
  • "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

Nearby facilities (12 closest of 36 within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Quality Living, INC.0.7 miOmaha, NE★★★☆☆3/5
Keystone Ridge Post Acute Nursing and Rehabilitati1.5 miOmaha, NE★★☆☆☆1/5
Maple Crest Health Center2.1 miOmaha, NE★★★☆☆2/5
Emerald Nursing & Rehab Legacy Pointe LLC2.6 miOmaha, NE★☆☆☆☆1/5SFF
Florence Home2.8 miOmaha, NE★★★★☆3/5
Ambassador Health of Omaha3.7 miOmaha, NE★★★★★4/5
The Cypress at Midtown4.7 miOmaha, NE★★★☆☆3/5
Douglas County Health Center5.0 miOmaha, NE★★★☆☆2/5
Old Mill Rehabilitation5.0 miOmaha, NE★★★☆☆3/5
Emerald Nursing & Rehabilitation Mercy5.3 miOmaha, NE★☆☆☆☆1/5SFF
Emerald Nursing & Rehab Omaha6.0 miOmaha, NE★☆☆☆☆1/5SFF
St. Joseph Villa Nursing Center6.6 miOmaha, NE★☆☆☆☆1/5

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 285137.

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