Deficiency Index

River Valley Health and Rehabilitation Center LLC

Redwood Falls, Minnesota · CCN 245237

21 surveys since 2010, 10 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
133
Surveys
21
Harm or worse
10
Immediate jeopardyall corrected before survey
4
The record, 2010–2026
’10’15’20’25’26
No harm recordedHarm or worseNot surveyed
Immediate jeopardy4

Findings at the most serious level CMS records. All were recorded as past non-compliance — corrected before the survey.

Beyond CMS’s monthly file15/21

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

The facility

Certified beds
43
Ownership
For profit - Corporation
Chain
MONARCH HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT
County
Redwood · rural
Medicare-certified since
1981

CMS ratings

Overall
3
Health inspection
3
Staffing
3
Quality measures
3

CMS’s own Five-Star ratings.

Compared with similar facilities

Since 2021, this facility recorded somewhat fewer weighted findings than its peer group.

Weighted by harm level, against 55 for-profit facilities with fewer than 66 beds in Minnesota.

Last survey on record

Mar 24, 2026

230 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 day3.623.62
Registered-nurse hours per resident day1.39—
Annual nurse turnover83.7%50.0%

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

Enforcement

Fines
$14,310 across 1 penalty

Federal civil money penalties and remedies as CMS currently publishes them. Amounts may still be under appeal.

Severity of recent findings

Citations by CMS scope and severity. Rows are harm level, columns are how widespread the finding was.
SeverityIsolatedPatternWidespread
Immediate jeopardyJ14.8%K—L—
Actual harmG—H—I—
No harm, potential for more than minimalD1466.7%E14.8%F523.8%
No harm, potential for minimalA—B—C—
CMS’s current file: 21 of the 133 citations on record.

Most frequently cited here

In CMS’s current monthly file.

  • F5802×

    Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.

  • F7272×

    Have a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.

  • F6001×

    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.

  • F6071×

    Develop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.

  • F6091×

    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.

In the surveyor’s words

From the most serious findings on record at River Valley Health and Rehabilitation Center LLC, in the surveyor’s own words.

  • Immediate jeopardy, isolatedF689Jan 27, 2025

    Based on interview and document review the facility failed to comprehensively assess proper full body mechanical lift sling type and size according to manufacturer recommendations to ensure safety for 1 of 1 residents (R1). This resulted in immediate jeopardy (IJ) for R1 who had a history of behaviors during lift transfers, fell from the lift and suffered a shoulder fracture. The immediate jeopardy began on 1/19/25, when staff used a hygiene (toileting) sling that was too large causing R1 to experience pain resulted in behaviors and fell through the lift sling to the floor. The administrator, director of nursing, corporate nurse, and regional director of operations were notified of the IJ at 5:00 p.m. on 1/27/25. […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, widespreadF727May 13, 2025

    Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure a registered nurse (RN) was on duty a minimum of eight consecutive hours per day for four of 30 days reviewed for RN coverage. This had the potential to affect all 35 residents residing at the facility. Findings include: Review of the nursing staff schedules from 4/13/25-5/13/25, identified there was no RN that worked for a minimum of eight hours per day. During an interview on 5/13/25 at 12:35 p.m., scheduling coordinator (SC)-A stated the facility was supposed to have an RN scheduled eight hours per day. It had been difficult lately, but she tried her best to fill the gaps utilizing facility staff, corporate agency staff, and outside staffing agencies. There had been gaps with RN coverage on the weekends recently. […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, widespreadF727Feb 5, 2025

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a registered nurse (RN) was on duty a minimum of 8 consecutive hours per day for 5 of 7 days reviewed. This had the potential to affect all 32 residents living in the facility. Findings include: Review of the nursing staff schedules and time punches for 8/29/24, 9/8/24, 9/28/24, 9/29/24 and 1/11/25 identified there was no evidence an RN had worked for a minimum of 8 hours per day. Interview on 2/5/25 at 11:23 a.m., with RN-B identified the facility was short on RN coverage and either she or the director of nursing (DON) would attempt to cover those shifts as charge nurse or floor nurse, however some days no replacements could be assigned. She confirmed for the above dates, there was no RN working. […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, widespreadF851Feb 5, 2025

    Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to submit accurate staffing data based on payroll and other verifiable, auditable data during 1 of 1 quarter reviewed (Quarter 4), to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), according to specifications established by CMS. This had the potential to affect all 32 residents living in the facility. Findings include: Review of the July 2024, Electronic Staffing Data Submission Payroll-Based Journal (PBJ) Frequently Asked Questions, located at https://www.cms.gov/medicare/quality-initiatives-patient-assessment-instruments/nursinghomequalityinits/downloads/pbj-policy-manual-faq-11-19-2018.pdf, identified reporting shall be based on the employee ' s primary role. […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, widespreadF867Feb 7, 2024

    Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to have evidence of a Performance Improvement Project (PIP) which focused on high risk or problem-prone areas identified thorough and appropriate data collection and analysis and evaluation of the identified concern(s) during QAPI. This had the potential to affect all 35 residents. Interview on 2/7/24 at 1:56 p.m., with registered nurse (RN)-A identified she has heard of a PIP before, and thinks maybe some staff are watching for urinary tract infections, but was unsure what the PIP was or what her role in the PIP project could be. RN-A thought if there was a PIP there may be signage in the staff breakroom. RN-A received online general QAPI training but had not received training specific for the facilities QAPI plan. […]

Read 29 findings in full →The most serious and the most recent: 29 of 133 on record.

Every survey on record

FindingsAt actual harm or above

  • Mar 24, 2026Standard4 findings
  • May 13, 2025Complaint1 finding
  • Feb 5, 2025Standard7 findings
  • Jan 27, 2025Complaint1 finding · 1 harm
  • Feb 7, 2024Standard7 findings
  • Nov 8, 2023Complaint1 finding
  • Dec 21, 2022Standard2 findings
  • Sep 29, 2020Complaint5 findings · 3 harm
Show the 13 earlier surveys
  • Feb 27, 2020Standard3 findings
  • Aug 16, 2019Complaint1 finding
  • Dec 13, 2018Standard5 findings
  • Jan 11, 2018Standard19 findings
  • Nov 15, 2017Complaint2 findings · 1 harm
  • Apr 21, 2017Standard13 findings · 1 harm
  • Jun 2, 2016Standard9 findings
  • Apr 17, 2015Standard13 findings
  • Feb 27, 2014Standard3 findings
  • Nov 29, 2012—12 findings · 1 harm
  • Dec 15, 2011—18 findings
  • Jan 27, 2011—4 findings
  • Dec 21, 2010—3 findings · 3 harm

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