Deficiency Index

Harbor Haven Health & Rehabilitation

Fond du Lac, Wisconsin · CCN 525534

15 surveys since 2010, 3 of them producing a finding at harm level or worse.

Data as of , released by CMS on October 8, 2026. Source: CMS Provider Data Catalog.

Citations on record
61
Surveys
15
Harm or worse
3
Immediate jeopardy
2
The record, 2010–2026
’10’15’20’25’26
No harm recordedHarm or worseNot surveyed
Immediate jeopardy2

Findings at the most serious level CMS records.

Beyond CMS’s monthly file13/15

Older surveys no longer in CMS’s monthly file or on Care Compare. They are shown here.

The facility

Certified beds
85
Ownership
Government - County
Chain
Independent
County
Fond Du Lac
Medicare-certified since
1994

CMS ratings

Overall
5
Health inspection
5
Staffing
5
Quality measures
4

CMS’s own Five-Star ratings.

Compared with similar facilities

Not shown for this facility: too few citations in window (n=4, floor 20).

Last survey on record

Jun 30, 2026

132 days ago.

Counts surveys with at least one finding. A clean survey leaves no record here, so the real gap may be shorter.

Staffing

MeasureThis facilityPeer median
Nurse hours per resident day4.314.50
Registered-nurse hours per resident day1.08—
Annual nurse turnover33.3%37.6%

As reported by the facility to CMS, beside the peer-group median.

Enforcement

No fines, payment denials or special-focus designation on the current CMS record.

Severity of recent findings

Citations by CMS scope and severity. Rows are harm level, columns are how widespread the finding was.
SeverityIsolatedPatternWidespread
Immediate jeopardyJ—K—L—
Actual harmG—H—I—
No harm, potential for more than minimalD3100.0%E—F—
No harm, potential for minimalA—B—C—
CMS’s current file: 3 of the 61 citations on record.

In the surveyor’s words

From the most serious findings on record at Harbor Haven Health & Rehabilitation, in the surveyor’s own words.

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF609Mar 1, 2023

    Based on record review and staff interview, the facility did not ensure all alleged violations involving resident-to- resident altercations were reported timely to the State Agency (SA) and/or reported timely to the facility's administration for 4 Residents (R) (R5, R4, R1 and R2) of 6 sampled residents. The facility's administration was informed of a resident-to-resident altercation between R4 and R3 on 2/11/23. During the investigation, the facility was alerted to a previous resident-to-resident altercation between R4 and R5 on 2/11/23. Staff did not report the interaction between R4 and R5 to the facility's administration timely. […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF880Jun 30, 2026

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to prevent the development and transmission of communicable disease and infection for 1 resident (R) (R7) of 2 sampled residents. R7 was on enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) for a left heel pressure injury. Staff did not appropriately change gloves and cleanse hands during wound care. Findings include: The facility's Isolation Precautions policy, revised 3/2025, indicates: .Guidelines for Standard Precautions: .B. Gloves: Wear gloves (clean, nonsterile gloves are adequate) when touching blood, body fluids, non-intact skin, mucous membranes, and contaminated items. […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF558Feb 21, 2024

    Based on observation, resident and staff interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure call lights were within reach for 1 Resident (R) (R24) of 20 sampled residents. On 2/19/24, Surveyor observed R24's call light on the wall behind an armoire. The call light contained a call button, but not a cord. The call light was not within reach or easily accessible to R24. Findings include: The facility's Resident Call Light policy, dated 6/16/97, indicates: Every resident shall have a functioning call light accessible to them at all times while on bedrest, therefore, allowing the resident to call for assistance from nursing staff as needed (as they are cognitively and physically able) .8. Position call light so as to make it accessible to resident. […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF697Feb 21, 2024

    Based on staff and resident interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure effective pain management was provided for 1 Resident (R) (R218) of 20 sampled residents. R218 was not provided effective pain management from 12/21/23 through 12/26/23. Findings include: The facility's Pain Management policy, dated 11/30/216, contained the following information: Pain is whatever the experiencing person says it is, existing whenever he/she says it does .4. Complete an assessment of the pain and document the assessment in ECS (electronic medical charting system) when any of the following conditions are present: a. Pain rating of 4 or greater (moderate and above); b. Continues unchanged for 48 hours; c. Daily pain is reported for 7 days. […]

Read 23 findings in full →The most serious and the most recent: 23 of 61 on record.

Every survey on record

FindingsAt actual harm or above

  • Jun 30, 2026Standard1 finding
  • Feb 21, 2024Standard and complaint2 findings
  • Mar 1, 2023Complaint1 finding
  • Feb 4, 2019Standard2 findings
  • Aug 16, 2016Standard3 findings
  • Jun 15, 2015Standard3 findings
  • Jun 4, 2014Standard9 findings
  • Apr 30, 2014Complaint1 finding
Show the 7 earlier surveys
  • Dec 10, 2013—1 finding
  • May 21, 2013—12 findings · 2 harm
  • Apr 12, 2012—7 findings
  • Jan 10, 2012—5 findings · 1 harm
  • Mar 4, 2011—8 findings
  • Sep 30, 2010—5 findings
  • Sep 22, 2010—1 finding

Surveys that found no deficiencies are not in CMS’s files and do not appear here.

Comparable facilities

The nearest facilities to this one in the same peer group, by weighted findings.

Deficiency Index is independent and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or approved by CMS, Medicare, or any government agency. About this data · Report a correction