Not rated by CMS — ratings are suppressed for new or low-volume facilities.
The next survey window likely opens around January 2027
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 Lifecare Roseau Manor during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Surveyors found that staff failed to use care-planned sling and harness sizes when performing mechanical lift and stand transfers for three dependent residents with conditions such as multiple sclerosis, dementia, arthritis, weakness, and severe cognitive impairment. Assessments and care guides specified small or medium slings/harnesses based on each resident’s status and weight, but staff instead used larger devices that were already in the room or on the unit, without checking the care guides beforehand. Nursing assistants acknowledged using the available large or medium slings and later confirmed, upon review, that the care-planned sizes were smaller than those actually used, despite facility expectations and policy that mechanical lifts be used according to instructions and training.
A resident with an indwelling urinary catheter did not receive proper catheter care when a nursing assistant failed to use hand hygiene after glove removal, placed a urine collection graduate directly on the floor without a barrier, and used double gloves instead of following facility protocols. Staff interviews confirmed these actions were not in line with established infection control and Enhanced Barrier Precautions policies.
Staff did not consistently follow enhanced barrier precautions or perform proper hand hygiene during high-contact care activities for two residents, including one with a history of VRE infection and another dependent on staff for all ADLs. Despite clear care plans and signage, staff failed to wear required PPE and did not sanitize hands after glove removal, contrary to facility policy and CDC guidelines.
A resident with Alzheimer's and dementia exited a facility without staff knowledge, resulting in injuries after being found outside. Despite being identified as an elopement risk, the resident was able to open doors and leave, as a housekeeper turned off the alarm without checking for residents. Previous elopement attempts had been documented, highlighting a need for better supervision.
Improper Sling and Harness Sizes Used for Mechanical Lift Transfers
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure appropriate sling and harness sizes were used with mechanical lift and stand devices for multiple dependent residents, contrary to their assessments and care guides. One resident with multiple sclerosis, dementia, weakness, and dysphagia was assessed as unable to safely bear weight and required a full body lift with a medium (yellow) sling; however, surveyors observed a large (green) sling under her in the dining room and in her room, and a nursing assistant confirmed the large sling had been used for transfers despite the care guide specifying a medium sling. Another resident with arthritis, reduced mobility, weakness, and severe cognitive impairment was assessed to transfer with a mechanical lift using a small (red) sling, but was observed seated on a large (green) sling in the dining room and had a large sling on her wheelchair in her room. Two nursing assistants confirmed they had transferred this resident using the large sling, acknowledged the care guide called for a small sling, and stated they typically used whatever sling was already in the room without reviewing the care guide prior to transfers. A third resident with dementia, weakness, unsteadiness on feet, and severe cognitive impairment was assessed as non-ambulatory and required transfers with a mechanical stand and a small (red) harness, but was observed being transferred from the toilet to bed using a medium (yellow) harness. The nursing assistant involved initially stated the resident should have a medium harness, then, upon reviewing the care guide, verified that a small harness was care planned and explained she used what was already in the room. Another nursing assistant stated that sling size was based on height and weight and that staff used the sling available on the unit. The assistant administrator stated that staff were expected to ensure the sling was placed properly, the lift was in good condition, and the sling/harness size was appropriate for the resident prior to transfers, and facility policy required employees to use mechanical lift devices in accordance with instructions and training.
Failure to Follow Catheter Care and Infection Control Protocols
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency was identified when a nursing assistant failed to provide proper urinary catheter care for a resident with severe cognitive impairment and an indwelling urinary catheter due to obstructive uropathy and an enlarged prostate. The resident's care plan required staff to use Enhanced Barrier Precautions, including wearing gloves and gowns during high-contact care activities, and to position the catheter bag appropriately, monitor for signs of infection, and use proper hand hygiene. During an observed care episode, the nursing assistant donned double gloves without using hand sanitizer, placed the resident's urine collection graduate directly on the floor without a barrier, and failed to perform hand hygiene after removing the top layer of gloves. The assistant stated that double gloving was a personal practice and acknowledged that it was not in line with facility expectations. The assistant also admitted to not using a disposable washcloth under the graduate, which was contrary to facility instructions to prevent the spread of infection. Interviews with nursing and administrative staff confirmed that facility policy required hand hygiene after glove removal and the use of a barrier between the floor and the graduate when draining catheter bags. The facility's policies on hand hygiene, indwelling urinary catheter care, and Enhanced Barrier Precautions all emphasized these practices to prevent contamination and infection. The observed failure to follow these protocols constituted a deficiency in providing appropriate catheter care and infection control.
Failure to Consistently Implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions and Hand Hygiene
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to consistently implement enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) and appropriate hand hygiene practices as required by CDC guidelines and facility policy. In one instance, a cognitively intact resident with a history of vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) infection in urine was care planned for EBP, which required staff to wear gloves and gowns during high-contact care activities such as transferring and toileting. Despite clear signage and care plan instructions, staff assisted the resident with transferring from bed to wheelchair and toileting without donning the required gowns. Staff interviews revealed a lack of awareness and adherence to EBP protocols, with one nursing assistant admitting to forgetting to wear PPE and another unsure of the reason for the precautions. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure proper hand hygiene during personal care for another resident with severe cognitive impairment and total dependence on staff for activities of daily living. During morning care, a nursing assistant removed soiled gloves after cleaning the resident but did not perform hand hygiene before donning new gloves or after completing care. This lapse was observed despite the facility's policy and staff interviews confirming the expectation to use hand sanitizer or wash hands after glove removal, especially after contact with body fluids or excretions. The observations and staff interviews demonstrated that the facility did not consistently follow its own policies or CDC recommendations regarding the use of PPE and hand hygiene during high-risk resident care activities. These failures were directly observed during care provision and confirmed by staff statements, indicating a breakdown in infection prevention and control practices for residents at risk of infection or colonization with multidrug-resistant organisms.
Inadequate Supervision Leads to Resident Elopement and Injury
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adequately supervise and respond to an alarm sounding exit door, resulting in a resident with Alzheimer's and dementia exiting the facility without staff knowledge. The resident, who was identified as having severe cognitive impairment and was at risk for elopement, was found outside the facility on the ground next to his wheelchair with abrasions and bent glasses. The incident occurred when the resident was able to open a set of double doors and exit through the front entry, despite the alarm sounding. The resident's care plan had identified him as an elopement risk and included interventions such as allowing him to vent frustration and distracting him with activities. However, on the day of the incident, a housekeeper turned off the alarm without checking if a resident had exited the building. This oversight allowed the resident to leave the facility unnoticed, leading to his fall and injuries outside. Previous incidents of elopement involving the same resident had been documented, indicating a pattern of behavior and a need for increased supervision. Despite these prior events, the facility's response to the alarm was inadequate, as staff failed to verify the resident's whereabouts before silencing the alarm. This lack of proper supervision and response to the alarm contributed to the resident's elopement and subsequent injuries.
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 15 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — 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 Roseau
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Warroad Care Center | 19.7 mi | — | 13 | 0 |
| Lifecare Greenbush Manor | 22.3 mi | — | 2 | 0 |
| Karlstad Healthcare Center Inc | 39.3 mi | — | 7 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Lifecare Roseau Manor.
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.