Not rated by CMS — ratings are suppressed for new or low-volume facilities.
Past the typical resurvey interval — a standard survey could occur at any time
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of June 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Maple Springs Of Palmer during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with multiple neurological and mental health diagnoses reported concerns about staff using profanities and inappropriate names. The allegation was disclosed during an IDT meeting attended by the Administrator, DON, and Resident Advocate, but no formal investigation was conducted and the incident was not reported to the State Survey Agency within the required timeframe, contrary to facility policy.
A resident with multiple neurological and mental health diagnoses reported being verbally abused by a nurse, including the use of profanities and derogatory language. The facility did not conduct a formal investigation, failed to report the incident to the State Survey Agency, and allowed the alleged staff member to continue working in the resident's unit, contrary to facility policy.
The facility did not perform required monthly inspections or maintain documentation for seven facility-owned Hoyer lifts and personal mechanical lifts used by two residents. One resident experienced a lift tipping incident during a transfer, and neither resident had physician orders or care plan documentation for the use of personal lifts. The Maintenance Director and Administrator confirmed that inspections and maintenance logs were not completed as required.
The facility did not report injuries of unknown origin and allegations of abuse or neglect to the Resident Advocate and State Survey Agency within the required timeframes for three residents. In each case, there were significant delays in reporting incidents involving forceful handling, unexplained bruising, and neglect related to incontinence care, despite facility policy requiring immediate notification.
Two residents with severe cognitive impairment were involved in separate incidents where allegations of abuse and injuries of unknown origin were not thoroughly investigated. In both cases, the facility did not assess non-interviewable residents for signs of abuse, nor did it interview all staff who had provided care to the affected residents, resulting in incomplete investigations as required by facility policy.
A resident with dementia, fractures, incontinence, and impaired mobility did not receive weekly skin assessments as required by facility policy. Despite being care planned for impaired skin integrity, there was no documentation of skin assessments for nearly two weeks, during which time multiple bruises and discolorations developed and were only identified later by nursing staff. Staff interviews confirmed that weekly assessments and immediate reporting of changes were expected, but these actions were not carried out.
A resident who required mechanical lift transfers was moved by a single CNA, despite facility policy requiring two staff for such transfers. During the transfer, the lift tipped over and the resident fell to the ground, resulting in tenderness to the head and back. The CNA reported that the resident often requested single-person transfers and that this was a common practice, even though all staff had been trained on the two-person policy. Staffing records indicated that additional help was available at the time of the incident.
The facility did not implement or enforce safety measures for residents who smoked or vaped, including failing to provide or require adaptive devices, not completing required safety assessments, and allowing unsecured lighters and cigarettes in resident rooms. Residents were observed smoking near entrances, discarding cigarette butts unsafely, and sustaining burn injuries, while the facility lacked fireproof receptacles and did not monitor smoking materials, placing all residents at immediate risk.
A nurse administered pantoprazole to a resident by taking it from another resident's blister pack when the medication was unavailable, without a formal tracking process and in violation of facility policy. Staff interviews confirmed this practice was not appropriate, and the incident involved a resident with complex medical needs, including quadriplegia and GERD.
The facility did not ensure that kitchen surface sanitizing solutions and fruit and vegetable cleaning solutions were maintained at proper concentrations, as required by manufacturer guidelines. Multiple observations and staff interviews revealed that solutions were below target levels, not regularly tested, and not documented, affecting all residents who received food from the kitchen.
The facility did not ensure the produce wash solution dispenser was functioning properly, resulting in repeated failures to achieve the recommended antimicrobial concentration for cleaning fresh produce. Despite available test strips and posted instructions, there was no formal process or documentation for regular monitoring, and the dispenser was found to be empty and later malfunctioning, affecting food safety for residents.
A resident with multiple medical conditions was left exposed by a CNA during toileting assistance, as the CNA walked away to empty a urinal without covering the resident's buttocks and genitals. The resident expressed discomfort with the situation, and the DON acknowledged that leaving a resident exposed was not ideal. Facility policies require staff to maintain resident dignity and respect during care.
A resident with paralysis and total dependence on staff for bed mobility was repeatedly found with the call light out of reach, despite care plan instructions and staff awareness of the need for accessibility. The resident, unable to use one side of the body, resorted to whistling or yelling for help. Facility policies lacked specific procedures to ensure call lights were always within reach.
A resident with hemiplegia and hemiparesis, who was nonverbal and fully dependent on staff, did not have an individualized care plan addressing communication needs. The care plan inappropriately included interventions such as use of a call light, which the resident could not operate, and lacked guidance for staff on how to communicate or assess the resident's well-being. Staff and the POA expressed concerns about misinterpretation of the resident's cues and the use of pain medication without first trying non-pharmacological interventions.
The facility did not update care plans for two residents after significant changes in their medical care, including discontinuation of contact precautions and antibiotics for one resident with a stage 4 pressure ulcer, and failure to add anticonvulsant use and remove enteral feeding interventions for another resident with anoxic brain damage and seizures. Nursing staff and the DON confirmed that care plans were not revised to reflect these changes, despite facility policy requiring timely updates.
Surveyors identified infection control deficiencies involving two residents: one had soiled suction tubing and an uncovered yankauer tip in contact with the wall, while another had a urinary catheter drainage bag resting on the floor. Staff interviews and policy reviews confirmed these practices did not meet facility standards for aseptic technique and sanitary equipment handling.
The facility did not display variance decisions in a location readily accessible to residents and the public, as required by state law. The posting was initially placed in a restricted area near office supply shelves by Administration offices, which was not accessible to the public, and only later moved to a more visible area. This failure denied all residents and their representatives access to information about the criminal history of facility employees.
Failure to Timely Report Alleged Verbal Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to immediately report an allegation of verbal abuse to the State Survey Agency as required by federal regulations. During an IDT care conference, a resident with diagnoses including Parkinson's disease, anxiety disorder, PTSD, and depression expressed concerns about the use of profanities and inappropriate names by a staff member. When questioned further, the resident identified the staff member involved. Despite this disclosure, no formal investigation was conducted, and the incident was not reported to the State Survey Agency within the required two-hour timeframe. Interviews confirmed that the Administrator, DON, and Resident Advocate were present during the meeting when the allegation was made and were aware of the resident's concerns. The facility's own abuse policy mandates immediate reporting of all abuse allegations, but this protocol was not followed. The failure to report the alleged verbal abuse promptly had the potential to place vulnerable residents at risk.
Failure to Investigate and Report Alleged Verbal Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to respond appropriately to an allegation of verbal abuse involving one resident with a history of Parkinson's disease, anxiety disorder, PTSD, and depression. The resident and their representative reported that a licensed nurse used profanities and derogatory language towards the resident on multiple occasions. The resident expressed unhappiness and fear of retaliation, and the concern was also documented during an IDT care conference. Despite these allegations, the facility did not conduct a thorough or formal investigation, nor did they document any inquiry into the matter. The incident was not reported to the State Survey Agency as required, and there was no evidence that the facility followed its own abuse policy regarding investigation and reporting. Additionally, the alleged staff member continued to work scheduled shifts, including in the unit where the resident resided, while the allegations were unresolved. The facility's abuse policy mandates immediate reporting, investigation, and removal of the alleged perpetrator from resident contact until the investigation is complete. However, these steps were not taken, and there was no documentation of witness interviews or notification to the resident's family or legal representative. The lack of action left the resident at risk of continued abuse and contributed to their distress.
Failure to Conduct Required Monthly Inspections of Mechanical Lifts
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to conduct required monthly inspections of all seven facility-owned Hoyer (mechanical) lifts, as well as personal mechanical lifts owned by two residents. According to the facility's policy and the manufacturer's manual, monthly inspections and maintenance logs are required to ensure the safety and functionality of these lifts. The Maintenance Director admitted that inspections were not performed as frequently as required and that no maintenance logs were kept. The Administrator confirmed that there was no documentation of maintenance or inspection for any of the lifts. One resident, who was cognitively intact and dependent on staff for transfers, experienced an incident where her personal mechanical lift tipped over during a transfer, though she was not injured. There was no documentation in her care plan or physician orders regarding the use of her personal lift, nor any record of monthly inspections. The resident stated that the facility did not inspect her lift, and the Maintenance Director confirmed no inspections were performed on it. A second resident, who was severely cognitively impaired and also dependent on staff for transfers, had a personal mechanical lift in his room. There was no physician order or care plan documentation for the use of this lift, and no evidence of monthly inspections. The Maintenance Director confirmed that he had not inspected this lift either. The Administrator acknowledged that neither resident's personal lift had been assessed for safety and that the facility lacked documentation of required inspections.
Failure to Timely Report Abuse, Neglect, and Injuries of Unknown Origin
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to report injuries of unknown origin and allegations of abuse and neglect immediately to the Resident Advocate (RA) and within two hours to the State Survey Agency (SSA) for three residents reviewed for abuse and neglect. According to the facility's policy, all such incidents should be reported immediately, but not later than two hours if serious bodily injury is involved, or within 24 hours if not. However, in each of the three cases, there were significant delays in reporting. For one resident with severe cognitive impairment and total dependence on staff for activities of daily living, an incident occurred where a CNA allegedly forcefully handled the resident during care, causing the resident to cry out in pain. The CNA who witnessed the event did not report it to the nurse until nearly seven hours later, and the incident was not reported to the RA or SSA until many hours after that. The initial report submitted to the SSA was blank and did not contain any information regarding the allegation. Another resident with severe cognitive impairment and a history of fractures was found with multiple bruises of unknown origin. The bruising was identified by staff, but the initial report to the SSA was not submitted until approximately five hours after discovery. In a third case, a resident with hemiplegia and vascular dementia was found in a saturated brief and bedding, leading to an allegation of neglect. The incident was reported to the administrator and RA with significant delays, and the SSA was not notified until 18.5 hours after the initial allegation. In all cases, staff and administration interviews confirmed that reporting did not occur within the required timeframes.
Failure to Thoroughly Investigate Allegations of Abuse and Injuries of Unknown Origin
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to thoroughly investigate allegations of abuse and injuries of unknown origin for two residents with severe cognitive impairment. In the first case, a resident with dementia and a history of behavioral issues was allegedly subjected to rough handling by a CNA during incontinence care, as reported by another CNA. The investigation did not include a physical assessment of the resident for signs of abuse, nor were other non-interviewable residents under the care of the accused CNA assessed. Only four residents were interviewed, and not all relevant staff were interviewed or provided written statements. The CNA accused of abuse was suspended but returned to work and completed required abuse training only after working several shifts without having done so. In the second case, another resident with dementia and multiple fractures was found with multiple bruises of unknown origin. The investigation included interviews with the nurse and CNAs present at the time the bruising was discovered, as well as three alert residents on the same floor. However, there was no documentation that staff who had cared for the resident in the days prior were interviewed to determine the cause of the bruising or why it had not been reported earlier. Additionally, other non-interviewable residents on the same floor were not assessed for signs of abuse or neglect. Facility policy required that all allegations of abuse or neglect, including injuries of unknown origin, be thoroughly investigated, with all pertinent information reviewed, witnesses identified, and interviews conducted with all relevant parties. The failure to assess non-interviewable residents for signs of abuse and to interview all staff involved in the care of the affected residents resulted in incomplete investigations, as confirmed by facility leadership during interviews.
Failure to Complete Weekly Skin Assessments for At-Risk Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to complete routine weekly skin assessments for one resident, as required by its own policy. The resident, who had diagnoses including dementia, fractures, incontinence, and impaired mobility, was care planned for impaired skin integrity and at risk for pressure ulcer development. Despite these risks and the care plan interventions specifying adherence to facility protocols for skin breakdown prevention, there was no documented evidence of skin assessments from 04/02/25 through 04/13/25. The last documented skin assessment was on 04/01/25, and the next was not until 04/13/25, when multiple bruises and areas of discoloration were observed and documented by nursing staff. Interviews with staff confirmed that weekly skin assessments were expected and that any changes in skin integrity should be reported immediately. However, the absence of documentation and delayed identification of bruising indicated that these assessments were not performed as required. The Corporate Quality Nurse confirmed the lack of documented assessments during the specified period and acknowledged that the bruising might have been identified sooner if the assessments had been completed as per policy.
Failure to Follow Two-Person Mechanical Lift Policy Results in Resident Fall
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when a resident who required mechanical lift transfers was moved by a single certified nurse aide (CNA), contrary to the facility's policy mandating two staff members for such transfers. The resident, who was cognitively intact and dependent on staff for transfers due to diagnoses including hypertensive heart and chronic kidney disease with heart failure, was being transferred from bed to wheelchair using a Hoyer lift. During the transfer, the lift tipped over, causing the resident to fall to the ground while still in the lift. The CNA involved reported that the resident typically requested only one CNA for transfers and that this practice was common among staff, despite the policy requiring two staff members. The incident was documented in the resident's progress notes, which described the fall and subsequent assessment revealing tenderness to the head and back. The CNA's statement confirmed that she was the only aide assigned to the resident's hall at the time and that she attempted the transfer alone, as was reportedly the resident's preference. Other staff members interviewed confirmed their understanding of the two-person policy for mechanical lifts and stated that they would call for assistance when needed. The resident also confirmed that she had previously requested single-person transfers but acknowledged the incident and stated that staff now use two people for her transfers. Review of facility records showed that the CNA involved had received training and signed an agreement to follow the lift safety policy, which explicitly required two staff for mechanical lift transfers. Staff competency records indicated that all nursing staff had been assessed as competent in using mechanical lifts. Staffing records for the day of the incident showed that there were multiple aides and nurses on duty, suggesting that additional help was available. The deficiency was identified through observation, interviews, and record review, which established that the facility failed to ensure adherence to its own policy, resulting in an unsafe transfer and a fall.
Failure to Ensure Safe Smoking and Vaping Practices Creates Immediate Jeopardy
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a resident environment free from accident hazards, specifically related to smoking and vaping practices among residents. Multiple residents who smoked or vaped were not provided with appropriate safety measures, such as the use of required adaptive devices like smoking aprons, despite assessments indicating their necessity. Observations revealed that residents smoked near facility entrances and discarded cigarette butts on the ground or in non-fireproof trash cans containing ignitable materials, with no fireproof receptacles available. Additionally, residents were observed smoking without the required adaptive equipment, and some had visible burn injuries and burn holes in their clothing as a result of unsafe smoking practices. Annual smoking safety screening assessments were not completed for several residents who smoked, and no safety assessments were performed for residents who used electronic cigarettes (vapes). The facility's policy stated it was a smoke-free and vape-free campus, requiring residents and staff to smoke or vape off property, but in practice, residents continued to smoke on or near the property without supervision or designated safe areas. Interviews with residents and staff confirmed that residents kept their own cigarettes and lighters in their rooms or on their person, and the facility did not maintain accountability for these items. Resident rooms were unsecured and often left open, increasing the risk of access to lighters and smoking materials by other residents, including those with cognitive impairments. The lack of secure storage for lighters, absence of fireproof receptacles, failure to enforce the use of adaptive safety devices, and incomplete or missing safety assessments for both smokers and vapers created an environment with immediate risk of injury or death. These deficiencies were observed through direct observation, interviews, and record reviews, and affected multiple residents with significant medical histories, including those with paralysis, cognitive impairment, and other serious health conditions. The situation resulted in an immediate jeopardy finding under CFR 483.25(d) Accidents.
Improper Medication Administration from Another Resident's Supply
Penalty
Summary
A Licensed Nurse (LN) administered a dose of pantoprazole to a resident by removing the medication from a blister pack labeled for a different resident. The LN stated that when a resident's medication was unavailable, they would borrow the same medication from another resident's supply if both were prescribed the same drug. The LN did not have a formal process for tracking borrowed medications, instead relying on verbal communication with the oncoming nurse or returning the medication if working the next day. This practice was observed during a medication pass and confirmed through interviews with the LN and other staff. Record reviews showed that both residents had physician orders for pantoprazole, but the facility's policy explicitly prohibited administering medications ordered for one resident to another. Interviews with another LN and the Director of Nursing confirmed that this practice was not appropriate and was against facility policy. The incident involved a resident with significant medical needs, including quadriplegia and GERD, and demonstrated a failure to ensure that nursing staff had the appropriate competencies to administer medications accurately.
Failure to Maintain Proper Sanitizer and Produce Wash Concentrations
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain proper concentrations of kitchen sanitizing solutions and fruit and vegetable cleaning solutions, as required by professional standards and manufacturer guidelines. Observations revealed that multiple red buckets labeled for Ecolab sanitizing solution were used throughout the kitchen, including at the food preparation line, dishwashing station, and food preparation sinks. When tested with manufacturer-provided test strips, the sanitizer solutions in these buckets consistently showed concentrations below the required target levels. Staff interviews confirmed that while the solutions were supposed to be changed every one to two hours and tested for concentration, there was no documentation or log of when tests were performed or their results. Additionally, the facility's own policy required regular testing and documentation, which was not followed. Further observations showed that the Ecolab Antimicrobial Fruit & Vegetable Treatment dispenser, used to wash produce before serving, was not dispensing solution at the recommended concentration. Test strips indicated a dilution ratio of zero, and the solution container was found to be empty. Even after replacing the container, the dispenser continued to fail to deliver the correct concentration due to a suspected air blockage and a malfunctioning motor, as later confirmed by a technician. There were no logs maintained to document the testing of the produce wash solution, and staff relied on periodic, undocumented checks. These deficiencies affected all 57 residents who received food from the kitchen, as the improper concentrations of sanitizing and cleaning solutions created a potential for foodborne illness and cross-contamination. The lack of proper monitoring, documentation, and maintenance of both the surface sanitizer and produce wash solutions directly led to the facility's failure to meet required food safety standards.
Failure to Maintain Functional Produce Wash Dispenser in Kitchen
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the produce wash solution dispenser used in the kitchen was operating correctly, which affected the cleaning of fresh produce served to 57 residents. Observations revealed that the dispenser for Ecolab Antimicrobial Fruit & Vegetable Treatment was present and test strips were available, but when the solution was tested directly from the dispenser, the test strips consistently indicated a dilution ratio of 0, showing that the solution was not at the manufacturer's recommended concentration. It was discovered that the solution container was empty, and after replacement, the dispenser still failed to deliver the correct concentration. Further inspection by the kitchen manager suggested that air in the line was preventing proper dispensing, and later, a technician identified a malfunctioning motor as the cause. Interviews revealed that there were no logs maintained to document regular testing of the solution's concentration, and the kitchen manager relied on periodic checks during dining services. The facility's only guidance for monitoring the solution was a manufacturer’s poster instructing staff to periodically check the wash solution using test strips. There was no formal policy or process in place to ensure consistent monitoring or documentation of the solution’s concentration.
Failure to Maintain Resident Dignity During Personal Care
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when a certified nursing assistant (CNA) failed to maintain a resident's dignity during personal care. The resident, who had a history of Parkinson's disease, left femur fracture, osteoporosis, strokes, and heart failure, required extensive assistance for toileting. During an observed episode, the CNA pulled down the resident's shorts and brief, exposed the resident's buttocks and genitals, and then walked away to empty a urinal, leaving the resident exposed until the CNA returned to complete care. The resident later reported feeling uncomfortable with being left exposed, and the Director of Nursing acknowledged that such exposure during care was not ideal. Facility policies reviewed emphasized the importance of resident dignity and respect during care, including during lifting and movement. The incident demonstrated a failure to provide care in a manner that promoted dignity and respect for the resident.
Failure to Ensure Call Light Accessibility for Dependent Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident's call light was consistently within reach, as required to reasonably accommodate the resident's needs and preferences. The resident, who had a history of dysphagia following a nontraumatic intracerebral hemorrhage, unspecified dementia with behavioral disturbances, seizures, and anemia, was observed multiple times lying in bed with the call light out of reach, specifically between the headboard and mattress. The resident was totally dependent on staff for repositioning and turning in bed and was unable to use the left side of the body due to a stroke. The care plan specified that the call light should be within reach and that safety checks should occur every hour. Interviews with the resident, the resident's representative, and staff confirmed that the call light was often not accessible, leading the resident to whistle or yell for help instead. The facility's policies on routine resident checks and call light use did not include procedures to ensure the call light was always within reach. Documentation and staff interviews further indicated that the resident required assistance with bed mobility and that the lack of access to the call light was a recurring issue.
Failure to Individualize Care Plan for Nonverbal Resident with Communication Needs
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop and implement an individualized care plan that addressed the specific communication needs of a nonverbal resident with hemiplegia and hemiparesis following a nontraumatic intracerebral hemorrhage. The resident was entirely dependent on staff for all care and interactions, unable to move any part of their body, and could not use a call light. Despite this, the care plan included interventions such as ensuring the call light was within reach and encouraging its use, which were not appropriate for the resident's condition. There was no documentation or guidance for staff on how to communicate with the resident or how to assess the resident's well-being, particularly in relation to pain management. Interviews with staff and the resident's POA revealed concerns that staff may have been misinterpreting the resident's nonverbal cues, leading to the administration of non-scheduled pain medication without first attempting non-pharmacological interventions, as preferred by the POA. The CNA interviewed confirmed the absence of written guidance on communication strategies for the resident, and the DON acknowledged that the care plan should have been individualized to include communication needs and that the call light intervention was not suitable for this resident.
Failure to Update Care Plans After Changes in Resident Status and Treatment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to update and revise care plans for two residents following significant changes in their medical status and treatment. For one resident with quadriplegia, orthopedic aftercare, and a stage 4 pressure ulcer, the care plan continued to reflect the use of contact barrier precautions and antibiotic therapy for MRSA, despite both interventions having been discontinued. Observations showed signage for enhanced barrier precautions at the resident's doorway, but interviews with nursing staff confirmed that neither contact precautions nor doxycycline therapy were still in place. The care plan, last revised prior to these changes, was not updated to reflect the discontinuation of these interventions. For another resident with anoxic brain damage and unspecified convulsions, the care plan did not include the initiation of anticonvulsant medications, despite provider orders and medication administration records confirming ongoing use of Keppra and clobazam. Additionally, the care plan continued to reference enteral feedings via PEG tube, even though the PEG tube had been removed, enteral feedings discontinued, and the resident was transitioned to an oral diet. Documentation in provider orders, nursing notes, and surgical consults confirmed the removal of the PEG tube and the resident's ability to eat by mouth, but the care plan was not revised to reflect these changes. Interviews with the Director of Nursing confirmed that the care plans for both residents were not updated as required following changes in their conditions and treatments. Facility policy requires ongoing assessment and timely revision of care plans to reflect current standards of practice and resident needs, but this was not followed in these cases.
Infection Control Deficiencies in Suction Equipment and Catheter Bag Handling
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain an effective infection prevention and control program, as evidenced by improper handling and maintenance of medical equipment for two residents. For one resident with central pontine myelinolysis, contractures, and muscle spasms, observations revealed that the suction canister tubing was stained brown and the yankauer suction tip was uncovered and touching the wall. The tubing and tip remained in this unsanitary condition for several days, despite facility policy requiring replacement every 7 days or when visibly soiled. The Infection Preventionist confirmed that the tubing should have been changed when soiled and that the yankauer should not have been stored in contact with the wall. Another resident with quadriplegia, cerebral palsy, and neuromuscular bladder dysfunction was observed with a urinary catheter drainage bag resting on the floor. Staff interviews confirmed that drainage bags should not be placed on the floor and that facility policy requires catheter tubing and drainage bags to be kept off the floor to maintain aseptic technique. The improper positioning of the drainage bag was acknowledged as an infection control concern by both nursing and infection prevention staff.
Failure to Post Variance Decisions in a Conspicuous Location
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to comply with state law requiring the posting of variance decisions in a conspicuous location accessible to residents and the public. Observations on 3/23/25 revealed that there were no visible postings of variance decisions in areas readily accessible to residents or the public throughout the facility. When questioned, the HR Director indicated that the posting was located beside office supply shelves at the end of a back hallway near the Administration offices, an area only accessible by walking behind the receptionist's desk or through a conference room. The Director of Nursing confirmed that this location was not accessible to the public. The deficiency was further substantiated when the HR Director later stated that the variance decision posting was relocated to a wall in the main plaza area by the dining room entrance. The lack of proper posting denied all residents and their representatives, based on a census of 60, the right to knowledge regarding the criminal history of facility employees, as required by 7 AAC 10.940. The report does not mention any specific residents or their medical conditions in relation to this deficiency.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the citations issued around you in the last 12 months — including the immediate-jeopardy cases — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near Palmer
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maple Springs Of Wasilla | 7.3 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Centennial Post Acute | 31.9 mi | — | 9 | 0 |
| Polaris Transitional Care | 34 mi | — | 10 | 0 |
| Polaris Extended Care | 34 mi | — | 4 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Maple Springs Of Palmer.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release August 2026) and official state health department websites.