VALLEY VIEW HEALTHCARE & REHAB
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Valley View Healthcare & Rehab has a Trust Grade of B, indicating it is a good choice for care, with solid services. It ranks #85 out of 337 facilities in Minnesota, placing it in the top half of state options, and #1 out of 3 in Houston County, meaning it is the best local option. However, the facility is experiencing a worsening trend, with issues increasing from 2 in 2024 to 3 in 2025. Staffing is a strength, achieving a 5/5 star rating with a low turnover of 21%, well below the state average of 42%. On the downside, the facility has faced $26,685 in fines, which is concerning as it is higher than 87% of Minnesota facilities, suggesting ongoing compliance problems. Specific incidents noted include a critical failure to monitor a resident's sudden change in mental and physical status, which could have serious implications if not addressed. Additionally, there were concerns about the call light system being ineffective, potentially impacting the ability of residents to communicate their needs. Lastly, the facility has not employed a full-time registered dietitian, which raises concerns about the quality of food and nutrition services provided to residents. Overall, while there are strengths in staffing and care quality, these significant weaknesses warrant careful consideration.
- Trust Score
- B
- In Minnesota
- #85/337
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ✓ Good
- 21% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 27 points below Minnesota's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
- Penalties ⚠ Watch
- $26,685 in fines. Higher than 83% of Minnesota facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 79 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than 97% of Minnesota nursing homes. RNs are the most trained staff who catch health problems before they become serious.
- Violations ○ Average
- 10 deficiencies on record. Average for a facility this size. Mostly minor or procedural issues.
The Good
-
5-Star Staffing Rating · Excellent nurse staffing levels
-
5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Low Staff Turnover (21%) · Staff stability means consistent care
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover is low (21%)
27 points below Minnesota average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, staff retention, fire safety.
The Bad
Below median ($33,413)
Moderate penalties - review what triggered them
The Ugly 10 deficiencies on record
Jan 2025
3 deficiencies
1 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and document review the facility failed to complete a comprehensive assessment, monitor, and notify the physi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to process and implement bilevel positive airway pressure (BIPAP) or...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0919
(Tag F0919)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a complete wireless call light system in which staff were provided with functioning devices in their possession. This h...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2024
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to appropriately assess a change of condition (COC) for 1 of 2 residents (R9) reviewed for hospitalization who had changes fro...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0883
(Tag F0883)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to appropriately vaccinate against pneumonia upon admission for 5 of...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2023
5 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0561
(Tag F0561)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's preferences to keep his room do...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0692
(Tag F0692)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to provide soft bite sized food and encourage to alternate consumption of liquids and solids during meals as ordered for 1 of ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0801
(Tag F0801)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on interview, and document review, the facility failed to employ either a full time registered dietitian (RD) or a qualified dietary manager (DM) to carry out the functions of the food and nutri...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to label, date, and cover food stored in kitchen refrigerator and freezer storage. The facility also failed to discard hot dog...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0921)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to keep the kitchen's small mixer, sheet pans, two kitchen drawers, and a shelf where food preparation equipment was stored cl...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "What changes have you made since the serious inspection findings?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • 21% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 27 points below Minnesota's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s), $26,685 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 10 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $26,685 in fines. Higher than 94% of Minnesota facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
About This Facility
What is Valley View Healthcare & Rehab's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns VALLEY VIEW HEALTHCARE & REHAB an overall rating of 5 out of 5 stars, which is considered much above average nationally. Within Minnesota, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.
How is Valley View Healthcare & Rehab Staffed?
CMS rates VALLEY VIEW HEALTHCARE & REHAB's staffing level at 5 out of 5 stars, which is much above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 21%, compared to the Minnesota average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Valley View Healthcare & Rehab?
State health inspectors documented 10 deficiencies at VALLEY VIEW HEALTHCARE & REHAB during 2023 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 9 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates Valley View Healthcare & Rehab?
VALLEY VIEW HEALTHCARE & REHAB is owned by a non-profit organization. Non-profit facilities reinvest revenue into operations rather than distributing to shareholders. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 40 certified beds and approximately 31 residents (about 78% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in HOUSTON, Minnesota.
How Does Valley View Healthcare & Rehab Compare to Other Minnesota Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Minnesota, VALLEY VIEW HEALTHCARE & REHAB's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (21%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (3 stars) is at the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Valley View Healthcare & Rehab?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations.
Is Valley View Healthcare & Rehab Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, VALLEY VIEW HEALTHCARE & REHAB has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 5-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Minnesota. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.
Do Nurses at Valley View Healthcare & Rehab Stick Around?
Staff at VALLEY VIEW HEALTHCARE & REHAB tend to stick around. With a turnover rate of 21%, the facility is 25 percentage points below the Minnesota average of 46%. Low turnover is a positive sign. It means caregivers have time to learn each resident's needs, medications, and personal preferences. Consistent staff also notice subtle changes in a resident's condition more quickly.
Was Valley View Healthcare & Rehab Ever Fined?
VALLEY VIEW HEALTHCARE & REHAB has been fined $26,685 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Minnesota average of $33,346. While any fine indicates a compliance issue, fines under $50,000 are relatively common and typically reflect isolated problems that were subsequently corrected. Families should ask what specific issues led to these fines and confirm they've been resolved.
Is Valley View Healthcare & Rehab on Any Federal Watch List?
VALLEY VIEW HEALTHCARE & REHAB is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.