Lawrence Memorial Hospital SNF
Lawrence, Kansas · CCN 175151
8 surveys since 2011, 1 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
- 33
- Surveys
- 8
- Harm or worse
- 1
- Immediate jeopardy
- 0
Findings where a surveyor recorded actual harm to a resident.
Older surveys no longer in CMS’s monthly file or on Care Compare. They are shown here.
The facility
- Certified beds
- 14
- Ownership
- Government - City
- Chain
- Independent
- County
- Douglas
- Medicare-certified since
- 1985
CMS ratings
- Overall
- 3
- Health inspection
- 3
- Staffing
- 1
- Quality measures
- 5
CMS’s own Five-Star ratings.
Compared with similar facilities
Not shown for this facility: too few citations in window (n=9, floor 20).
Last survey on record
Oct 14, 2024
756 days ago.
Counts surveys with at least one finding. A clean survey leaves no record here, so the real gap may be shorter.
Enforcement
No fines, payment denials or special-focus designation on the current CMS record.
Severity of recent findings
| Severity | Isolated | Pattern | Widespread |
|---|---|---|---|
| Immediate jeopardy | J— | K— | L— |
| Actual harm | G— | H— | I— |
| No harm, potential for more than minimal | D444.4% | E— | F444.4% |
| No harm, potential for minimal | A— | B— | C111.1% |
In the surveyor’s words
From the most serious findings on record at Lawrence Memorial Hospital SNF, in the surveyor’s own words.
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, widespreadF575Oct 14, 2024
The facility identified a census of nine residents. The sample included eight residents. Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to post the required information including a list of names, addresses (mailing and e-mail), and telephone numbers of all pertinent State Agencies and advocacy groups. This deficient practice placed all residents at risk for impaired resident rights. Findings included: - On 10/14/24 at 01:48 PM, an empty resident room had a posting that directed if a resident had a concern, the resident could call the facility's patient advocate and listed the phone number. On 10/14/24 at 02:29 PM, a bulletin board in the hallway displayed thank you cards from residents and families over most of the board. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, widespreadF585Oct 14, 2024
The facility identified a census of nine residents. The sample included eight residents. Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to implement a system to allow residents and/or their representatives to file grievances anonymously. This deficient practice placed the residents at risk for decreased psychosocial well-being. Findings Included: - On 10/14/24 at 01:48 PM an inspection of the facility revealed a posting in an empty resident room that directed if a resident had a concern, they were to call the facility's patient advocate. A Resident Rights poster was located near the nurse's station; however, it did not have directions on how to file anonymous grievances. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, widespreadF620Oct 14, 2024
The facility identified a census of nine residents. The sample included eight residents. Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to establish and implement an admissions agreement that protected the residents' right to personal property. This deficient practice had the risk of loss of personal property, including property of monetary and/or sentimental value, and loss of dignity and personal right to property for residents admitted to the facility. Findings included: - A review of the facility's Consent to Treatment Authorizations/Agreements/Insurance assignments revealed under the section titled Personal Belongings documented the facility maintained a safe for the storage of patient valuables and recommends that residents place any valuables in the safe during their… […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, widespreadF838Oct 14, 2024
The facility identified a census of nine residents. The sample included eight residents. Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to develop a facility assessment that accurately reflected the required sections of a facility assessment including services provided, staff required, staff competencies, and religious practices. This deficient practice placed the residents at risk for unidentified care needs and inadequate care and services. Findings included: A review of the facility-provided Facility Assessment revealed an undated, half-page document, titled Transitional Care Unit Facility Assessment provided by the facility on 10/14/24. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF623Oct 14, 2024
The facility identified a census of nine residents. The sample included eight residents with one resident reviewed for hospitalization . Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to provide written notification within a practicable timeframe of a facility-initiated transfer to Resident (R) 3 or his representative. The facility further failed to notify the State Long Term Care Ombudsman (LTCO) of facility-initiated transfers/discharges for R3. This deficient practice had the risk of miscommunication between the facility and resident/representative and possible missed opportunities for healthcare services for R3, and placed R3 at risk for impaired rights. Findings included: - R3 admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged to the hospital on 07/30/24. […]
Read 20 findings in full →The most serious and the most recent: 20 of 33 on record.
Every survey on record
FindingsAt actual harm or above
- Oct 14, 2024Standard8 findings
- Jun 21, 2023Standard1 finding
- Feb 25, 2020Standard3 findings
- Feb 28, 2019Standard2 findings
- Mar 25, 2016Standard4 findings
- Dec 15, 2014Standard9 findings · 1 harm
- Aug 30, 2013—5 findings
- Aug 30, 2011—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