Ponderosa Villa
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Ponderosa Villa has a Trust Grade of C, meaning it is average compared to other nursing homes, and it ranks #164 out of 177 facilities in Nebraska, placing it in the bottom half of the state. In Dawes County, it ranks #2 out of 2, indicating only one local option is better. Unfortunately, the facility is worsening, with issues increasing from 3 in 2023 to 6 in 2024. Staffing is a relative strength, with a turnover rate of 0%, which is significantly lower than the state average of 49%, but the overall staffing rating is poor at 1 out of 5 stars. There have been no fines recorded, which is a positive sign, and the facility has more RN coverage than many others, ensuring better oversight of resident care. However, some serious concerns have been noted. For instance, a nurse failed to wash their hands after changing a wound dressing, which could lead to infection. Additionally, staff did not receive the required ongoing training in areas such as dementia and abuse, which could compromise the quality of care. Lastly, during a COVID-19 outbreak, staff members did not consistently use Personal Protective Equipment as required, posing a risk to all residents. Overall, while Ponderosa Villa has some strengths, families should be aware of the significant issues that need addressing.
- Trust Score
- C
- In Nebraska
- #164/177
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- Turnover data not reported for this facility.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Nebraska facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ○ Average
- RN staffing data not reported for this facility.
- Violations ○ Average
- 9 deficiencies on record. Average for a facility this size. Mostly minor or procedural issues.
The Good
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in fire safety.
The Bad
Below Nebraska average (2.9)
Significant quality concerns identified by CMS
The Ugly 9 deficiencies on record
Nov 2024
6 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0568
(Tag F0568)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.17(D)
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that quarterly statements of Resident Trust Accounts were sent to residents/resident...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0692
(Tag F0692)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09(J)(i)(1)
Based on observation, record review, and interviews; the facility failed t...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** B.
A record review of Resident 17's care plan revealed the following statements:
-Problem, End of Life decline in ADLs, manifest...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Licensure Reference 175 NAC 1-009.04(D)(i)(2)
Based on observations, record review, and interview; the facility failed to ensure that 3 (Residents 5, 14, and 21) of 3 sampled residents' bathroom sinks...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
B.
A record review of a facility policy titled, Wound Care, last revised in October 2010, revealed the procedure for changing a wound dressing. According to the policy, after discarding a soiled dress...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0947
(Tag F0947)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Licensure Reference 175 NAC 12-006.04(B)(ii)(1)
Based on record reviews and interview, the facility failed to ensure 4 of 4 samp...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2023
3 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
LICENSURE REFERENCE NUMBER 175 NAC 12-006.05 (5)
Based on interview and record review, the facility staff failed to notify a resident and/or their Power of Attorney (POA- a person/representative autho...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** C. Record review of Resident 1's undated facesheet revealed Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with an admitting ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.17
Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility staff failed to...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • No major safety red flags. No abuse findings, life-threatening violations, or SFF status.
- • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Nebraska facilities.
- • Grade C (50/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Ponderosa Villa's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns Ponderosa Villa an overall rating of 1 out of 5 stars, which is considered much below average nationally. Within Nebraska, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. A rating at this level reflects concerns identified through health inspections, staffing assessments, or quality measures that families should carefully consider.
How is Ponderosa Villa Staffed?
CMS rates Ponderosa Villa's staffing level at 1 out of 5 stars, which is much below average compared to other nursing homes.
What Have Inspectors Found at Ponderosa Villa?
State health inspectors documented 9 deficiencies at Ponderosa Villa during 2023 to 2024. These included: 9 with potential for harm.
Who Owns and Operates Ponderosa Villa?
Ponderosa Villa is owned by a government entity. Government-operated facilities are typically run by state, county, or municipal agencies. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 35 certified beds and approximately 20 residents (about 57% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in Crawford, Nebraska.
How Does Ponderosa Villa Compare to Other Nebraska Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Nebraska, Ponderosa Villa's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 2.9 and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Ponderosa Villa?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "Can you walk me through typical staffing levels on day, evening, and night shifts?" "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 below-average staffing rating.
Is Ponderosa Villa Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, Ponderosa Villa has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 1-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Nebraska. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.
Do Nurses at Ponderosa Villa Stick Around?
Ponderosa Villa has not reported staff turnover data to CMS. Staff turnover matters because consistent caregivers learn residents' individual needs, medications, and preferences. When staff frequently change, this institutional knowledge is lost. Families should ask the facility directly about their staff retention rates and average employee tenure.
Was Ponderosa Villa Ever Fined?
Ponderosa Villa has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.
Is Ponderosa Villa on Any Federal Watch List?
Ponderosa Villa 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.