Harvard Rest Haven
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Harvard Rest Haven has a Trust Grade of B+, indicating it is above average and recommended for families considering care options. With a state rank of #18 out of 177 and a county rank of #1 out of 2 in Clay County, it is positioned well among local facilities. However, the trend is concerning as the number of issues identified increased from 1 in 2024 to 3 in 2025. Staffing is a strength with a 5/5 rating and a turnover rate of 40%, which is lower than the state average, suggesting experienced staff who are familiar with residents. On the downside, the facility has incurred $13,000 in fines, which is higher than 87% of Nebraska facilities, indicating potential compliance problems. Additionally, while there is average RN coverage, some serious issues were found, such as staff not ensuring cleanliness in the kitchen and failing to follow COVID-19 safety protocols, like not wearing masks properly and not conducting required testing, which could impact the health of residents.
- Trust Score
- B+
- In Nebraska
- #18/177
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 40% turnover. Near Nebraska's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ⚠ Watch
- $13,000 in fines. Higher than 78% of Nebraska facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
- Skilled Nurses ○ Average
- Each resident gets 41 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Nebraska. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
- 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
-
4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (40%)
8 points below Nebraska average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Near Nebraska avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
The Ugly 10 deficiencies on record
Feb 2025
3 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
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(B)
Based on observation, record review and interviews the facility failed to ensure...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
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(E)(iii)
Based on record review, observations, and interviews the facility failed to...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medication Errors
(Tag F0758)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.05(G), 175 NAC 12-006.12
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2024
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0637
(Tag F0637)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12-006.09B1(2)
Based on interview and record review; the facility failed to complete a MDS (M...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2023
6 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12.006.02(8)
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a fall with major injury was reported to Adult Protective Service...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12.006.09D6(7)
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow the provider's oxygen (a colorless, odorless gas) and oxygen humidit...
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
LICENSURE REFERENCE NUMBER NAC 12-006.11E
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure that the kitchen counters and cupboards were clean, and items in the store rooms were not o...
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
Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12.006.17
Licensure Reference Number 175 NAC 12.006.17A
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff wore surgical masks a...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0886
(Tag F0886)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff testing was completed as required, faile...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0888
(Tag F0888)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure all staff had the COVID-19 vaccine or an exemption (the process of being free from obligation) and failed to ensure the facility's C...
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
- • Grade B+ (88/100). Above average facility, better than most options in Nebraska.
- • 40% turnover. Below Nebraska's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • $13,000 in fines. Above average for Nebraska. Some compliance problems on record.
About This Facility
What is Harvard Rest Haven's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns Harvard Rest Haven an overall rating of 5 out of 5 stars, which is considered much above average nationally. Within Nebraska, 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 Harvard Rest Haven Staffed?
CMS rates Harvard Rest Haven's staffing level at 5 out of 5 stars, which is much above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 40%, compared to the Nebraska average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Harvard Rest Haven?
State health inspectors documented 10 deficiencies at Harvard Rest Haven during 2023 to 2025. These included: 10 with potential for harm.
Who Owns and Operates Harvard Rest Haven?
Harvard Rest Haven is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 37 certified beds and approximately 20 residents (about 54% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in Harvard, Nebraska.
How Does Harvard Rest Haven Compare to Other Nebraska Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Nebraska, Harvard Rest Haven's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 2.9, staff turnover (40%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (5 stars) is much above the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Harvard Rest Haven?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "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?"
Is Harvard Rest Haven Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, Harvard Rest Haven 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 5-star overall rating and ranks #1 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 Harvard Rest Haven Stick Around?
Harvard Rest Haven has a staff turnover rate of 40%, which is about average for Nebraska nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.
Was Harvard Rest Haven Ever Fined?
Harvard Rest Haven has been fined $13,000 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Nebraska average of $33,209. 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 Harvard Rest Haven on Any Federal Watch List?
Harvard Rest Haven 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.