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: THE ENSIGN GROUP (342 facilities, chain avg rating 3.2★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jul 17, 2025
2
Serious findings on record
most recent Jun 19, 2025
$11,960
Fines, last 3 years
3.27
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 · May 1, 2025 · F-0604 · triggered by a complaint
The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment.
Why it matters: Unneeded restraints can cause injuries, muscle loss, and deep emotional distress.
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 2, 2025 (Past Non-Compliance)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jun 19, 2025 · 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.
Corrected: Jul 4, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 18 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The 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
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. F-0558
View all 18 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
Jul 17, 2025
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
Jul 17, 2025
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The 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
Jul 17, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. · F-0558
Jul 17, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The 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
Jul 17, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Jul 17, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal 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
Jun 19, 2025
▲ 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
Jun 19, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
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 · F-0607
May 1, 2025
▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated
The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · from a complaint · F-0604
May 1, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
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 · F-0607
May 15, 2024
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
May 15, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The 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
May 15, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The 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. · F-0690
May 15, 2024
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
May 15, 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
May 10, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The 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. · F-0610
May 10, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
May 10, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The 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
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (5 → 6).
Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations:
3
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2024
All citations:
5
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2025
All citations:
10
Serious citations (G–L):
2
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Year
Citations
Serious (G–L)
Worst severity that year
2023
3
0
D
2024
5
0
E
2025
10
2
J ▲
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
Jun 19, 2025
Fine
$11,960
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 facilityWisconsin averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility:
3.27
Wisconsin average:
4.29
U.S. average:
3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility:
0.44
Wisconsin average:
1.01
U.S. average:
0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility:
2.90
Wisconsin average:
3.84
U.S. average:
3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Measure
This facility
Wisconsin avg
U.S. avg
Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
3.27
4.29
3.95
bottom 14% in Wisconsin; bottom 25% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours
0.44
1.01
0.69
bottom 3% in Wisconsin; bottom 29% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing
2.90
3.84
3.50
bottom 14% in Wisconsin; bottom 26% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)
0.33
0.68
0.48
bottom 8% in Wisconsin; bottom 39% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)
52.7
46.9
45.8
bottom 31% in Wisconsin; bottom 30% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)
42.9
39.7
42.9
bottom 43% in Wisconsin; bottom 49% 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 3.40, RN 0.46, weekend 3.01.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.40 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.
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for The Pines Post Acute and Memory Care. 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.
Individual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNF
NOT APPLICABLE
10/15/2025
PRN Health Services, INC.
Organization
Operational/Managerial Control
NOT APPLICABLE
06/01/2014
Standard Bearer Healthcare Op, LP
Organization
ADP of the SNF
NOT APPLICABLE
06/01/2014
The Ensign Group INC
Organization
ADP of the SNF
NOT APPLICABLE
06/01/2014
All 19 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 The Ensign Group — 342 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 Waupaca, WI — 8 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 525497.
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 — The Pines Post Acute and Memory Care
1625 E Main St, Clintonville, WI 54929 · (715) 823-3135
Health inspection rating 3/5 · CMS overall 4/5· Fines (3y): $11,960
Most serious findings on record:
▲ May 1, 2025 (F-0604, Immediate jeopardy, isolated): The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment.
▲ Jun 19, 2025 (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.
Questions for the administrator:
☐ "What is your policy on physical restraints, and what alternatives do you try first?"
☐ "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
☐ "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
☐ "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
☐ "Can you give me examples of how you adjust daily routines and room setups to fit each resident's preferences?"
☐ "What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
☐ "How do you monitor residents' weight and eating, and what happens when someone starts losing weight?"
☐ "What specific steps do you take to prevent abuse and neglect, and how are staff trained on them?"
☐ "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Wisconsin 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 53% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
☐ "The ownership record on file lists 19 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 525497 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)