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 May 13, 2025
1
Serious findings on record
most recent May 16, 2024
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.94
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)
The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.
Why it matters: Untreated pain causes needless suffering and can lead to depression, poor sleep, and declining health.
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: Jun 7, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 14 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. F-0947
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not make sure residents actually saw their doctor face-to-face at all required visits. Doctors must examine nursing home residents in person on a regular schedule. F-0712
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility admitted a resident without a doctor's order, or did not make sure each resident stayed under a doctor's ongoing care. F-0710
View all 14 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 13, 2025
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. · F-0947
May 13, 2025
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not make sure residents actually saw their doctor face-to-face at all required visits. Doctors must examine nursing home residents in person on a regular schedule. · F-0712
May 13, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility admitted a resident without a doctor's order, or did not make sure each resident stayed under a doctor's ongoing care. · F-0710
May 13, 2025
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
May 13, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The 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. · F-0759
May 16, 2024
▲ G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697
May 16, 2024
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records. · F-0851
May 16, 2024
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. · F-0947
May 16, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The 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
May 16, 2024
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
May 16, 2024
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
May 16, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The 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. · F-0759
Aug 15, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
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
Mar 16, 2023
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. · F-0801
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (7 → 5).
Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations:
2
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2024
All citations:
7
Serious citations (G–L):
1
2025
All citations:
5
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
2023
2
0
F
2024
7
1
G ▲
2025
5
0
F
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.
0 fines totaling $0, 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.
Date
Type
Amount / length
May 16, 2024
Payment Denial
15 days from Jun 12, 2024
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 facilityNebraska averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility:
3.94
Nebraska average:
4.33
U.S. average:
3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility:
0.66
Nebraska average:
0.72
U.S. average:
0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility:
3.53
Nebraska average:
3.79
U.S. average:
3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Measure
This facility
Nebraska avg
U.S. avg
Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
3.94
4.33
3.95
bottom 38% in Nebraska; top 42% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours
0.66
0.72
0.69
bottom 47% in Nebraska; top 40% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing
3.53
3.79
3.50
bottom 39% in Nebraska; top 40% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)
0.37
0.47
0.48
bottom 42% in Nebraska; bottom 47% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)
59.5
48.7
45.8
bottom 29% in Nebraska; bottom 17% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)
—
44.1
42.9
—
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 3.11, RN 0.52, weekend 2.79.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.11 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 1/5.
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 Wauneta Care and Therapy 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.