WENTZ LIVING CENTER

555 LAKE AVE E, NAPOLEON, ND 58561 (701) 754-2381
Non profit - Corporation 36 Beds Independent Data: November 2025 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation
Trust Grade
66/100
#33 of 72 in ND
Last Inspection: January 2025

Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.

Overview

Wentz Living Center in Napoleon, North Dakota has a Trust Grade of C+, indicating that it is slightly above average but not exceptional. It ranks #33 out of 72 facilities in the state, placing it in the top half, and is the only option in Logan County. The facility is improving, as it has gone from 4 issues in 2024 to zero in 2025. Staffing is a strength, with a 4 out of 5-star rating and a 0% turnover rate, which is well below the state average. However, there are concerns: they have incurred $13,627 in fines, which is average, and a critical incident involved a resident suffering a fall and fractures due to improper use of a mechanical lift. Other issues included failure to maintain sanitary food preparation practices and not using assistive devices during transfers, posing risks to resident safety. Overall, while there are strengths in staffing and recent improvements, families should be aware of these significant safety concerns.

Trust Score
C+
66/100
In North Dakota
#33/72
Top 45%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Getting Better
4 → 0 violations
Staff Stability
○ Average
Turnover data not reported for this facility.
Penalties
○ Average
$13,627 in fines. Higher than 74% of North Dakota facilities. Some compliance issues.
Skilled Nurses
✓ Good
Each resident gets 81 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than 97% of North Dakota nursing homes. RNs are the most trained staff who catch health problems before they become serious.
Violations
○ Average
7 deficiencies on record. Average for a facility this size. Mostly minor or procedural issues.
★★★★☆
4.0
Overall Rating
★★★★☆
4.0
Staff Levels
★★★★☆
4.0
Care Quality
★★★★☆
4.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 4 issues
2025: 0 issues

The Good

  • 4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
  • 4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record

Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, fire safety.

The Bad

Federal Fines: $13,627

Below median ($33,413)

Minor penalties assessed

The Ugly 7 deficiencies on record

1 life-threatening
May 2024 1 deficiency 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

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, review of the facility reported incident (FRI) report, facility policy review, and staff in...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, review of the facility reported incident (FRI) report, facility policy review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to prevent accidents for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #1) who sustained a fall with fractures. Failure to use the appropriate sling sized during a full body mechanical lift transfer resulted in an avoidable fall and fractures for Resident #1 and places all residents at risk for falls and/or injuries. During the investigation survey, the team consulted the State Survey Agency (SSA) and determined an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) situation existed on 05/29/24 at 3:00 p.m. The IJ resulted from a failure by the facility to assess residents for the proper sized sling for use during a full body mechanical lift transfer. This failure resulted in a resident sustaining a fall and fractures. *05/29/24 at 4:00 p.m. The survey team notified the administrator and director of nursing of the IJ situation, provided them with the IJ template, and requested a plan for removal of the immediate jeopardy. * 05/29/24 at 6:30 p.m., The facility provided (via email) an IJ removal plan. The removal plan contained the following: * Therapy or nursing will assess sling size per policy developed * Therapy or nursing staff will communicate to the charge nurse of appropriate sling size, a comment order will be entered into provider orders, it will be care planned in the activities of daily living section and sent to the [NAME] for easy certified nurse aides (CNAs) viewing. * Education will be provided to all nursing/CNA staff working the evening and night shift of 5/29/24 and day shift 5/30/24. Each CNA or nurse upon their first shift since this survey will be educated by reviewing the policy, care plan, [NAME] and signing the education form. *05/30/24 at 10:00 a.m., the survey team accepted the IJ removal plan. The survey team verified the implementation of the plan and removed the IJ as of 05/29/24. The deficient practice remained at a scope and severity of a G after removal of the IJ. Findings included: Review of the facility policy titled Mechanical Dependent Lift occurred on 05/29/24. This policy, dated December 2019, failed to include assessments for the proper sling size for resident's dependent on mechanical lifts for transfers. Review of the facility's initial incident report, submitted to the state agency on 05/28/24, identified Resident #1 slipped out of the sling and onto the floor. Review of Resident #1 medical record occurred on 05/29/24. The care plan identified, .The resident has an ADL [Activities of Daily Living] selfcare performance deficit . requires dependent Mechanical lift . A nursing progress note, dated 05/28/24 at 1:54 p.m., identified the following: . resident is laying on floor . They [CNAs] [certified nursing aides] stated she fell out of sling. During an interview on 05/29/24 at 10:40 a.m., a staff member (#2) stated, We grabbed the Hoyer lift [full body mechanical lift] and used the sling that was with the lift. During the transfer the resident shifted in the sling and fell to the floor. Observation of Resident #1's room during this interview showed a small sling in the resident's bathroom. During a telephone interview on 05/29/24 at 11:13 a.m., a staff member (#3) stated, we placed the resident in the sling, which was a medium. During an interview with a staff member (#4) on 05/29/24 at 1:13 p.m., the staff member confirmed the CNAs used a medium sized sling. During an interview on 05/30/24 at 3:33 p.m., an administrative nurse (#1) agreed residents should have been assessed for sling sizes. The facility failed to assess Resident (#1) for the appropriate device (transfer sling) for a full body mechanical lift and provide staff with the information and education regarding transfers. This resulted in a fall with major injury for Resident #1.
Jan 2024 3 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, review of facility policy, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to use an assistive device necessary to prevent accidents for 1 of 5 sampled resident (Resident ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, review of facility policy, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to use an assistive device necessary to prevent accidents for 1 of 5 sampled resident (Resident #185) observed during gait belt transfers. Failure to use a gait belt during a transfer resulted in pain to Resident #185 and may result in falls and/or injuries. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Gait Belts occurred on 01/04/23. This policy, dated October 2021, stated, . PURPOSE: To prevent injury to the resident . Gaitbelts [sic] are used . when nursing deems necessary. Review of Resident #185's medical record occurred on all days of survey. Diagnoses included repeated falls, pain and mild cognitive impairment. A physical therapy note, dated 01/02/24 at 4:09 p.m., stated, . Transfer: Supine-sit transfers . Sit-stand with CGA {contact guard assist] today with use of gait belt. During an observation on 01/02/24 at 5:09 p.m. a certified nurse aide (CNA) (#2) assisted Resident #185 from a lying position in the bed to a sitting position by pulling on the resident's left arm. The resident grimaced in pain and placed his right hand on his left shoulder The CNA stated, Is that left shoulder still bothering you? Without using a gait belt the CNA pulled on the back of the resident's pants to assist him to a standing position and provided hands on assistance on the resident's waist/bottom as the ambulated using the front wheeled walker. Observation showed the resident was unsteady and shuffled his feet and the CNA stated, Whoa you're a little wobbly today. The CNA held under the resident's left arm while he fell backwards on to the toilet. The resident finished using the toilet and the CNA pulled under the resident's arm to lift him up from the toilet. As the resident was ambulating out of the bathroom, he stated he needed to use the bathroom again. The CNA pulled under the resident's left arm as the resident sat down on the toilet. The resident finished using the toilet and the CNA pulled under the resident's left arm to a standing position. The CNA placed her hands on the resident's waist/buttocks for assistance as he ambulated to the recliner. The CNA held onto the back of the resident's pants as she lowered him into the recliner. During an interview on 01/04/23 at 11:51 a.m., an administrative nurse (#3) confirmed facility staff should not be pulling on or under Resident #185's arms or on clothing and should use a gait belt.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Infection Control (Tag F0880)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, facility policy review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure staff followed standard infection control practices for 2 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #13 and #15)...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, facility policy review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure staff followed standard infection control practices for 2 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #13 and #15) observed during personal cares. Failure to follow infection control practices related to hand hygiene and glove use has the potential to spread infection within the facility. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled:Hand Hygiene: Use of alcohol-based hand rub occurred on 01/04/24. This policy, revised October 2021, stated, . hand hygiene . before and after resident contact . assisting a resident with personal cares . after contact with resident's skin . bodily fluids or excretions . Review of the facility policy titled; Perineal Care occurred on 01/04/24. This policy, revised October 2021, stated, PURPOSE: To prevent infections . wash urethral area first and rectal last . remove your gloves . perform hand hygiene . may apply a barrier cream . apply gloves . apple barrier cream to gloves . remove gloves . perform hand hygiene . - Observation on 01/02/24 at 11:48 a.m. showed a certified nursing assistant (CNA) (#1) entered Resident #13's room and performed incontinent bowel movement cares, removed the contaminated gloves, and donned new gloves. The CNA (#1) failed to perform hand hygiene after removing the contaminated gloves and prior to donning new gloves and applying a protective barrier cream to the resident's bottom. The CNA (#1) removed the gloves, assisted the resident with the blankets and call light and left the room without performing hand hygiene. - Observation on 01/03/24 at 10:51 a.m. showed a CNA (#1) donned gloves and provided perineal care for Resident #15. The CNA cleansed the rectal area of stool using a wet wipe and without removing the soiled gloves, applied a protective barrier ointment to the resident's bottom. During an interview on 01/04/24 at 11:50 a.m., a supervisory nurse (#3) confirmed she expected staff to perform hand hygiene upon entering and exiting a resident's room and in between glove changes.
CONCERN (E)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, review of facility policy, and staff interview, the facility failed to prepare, store, and serve food in a sanitary manner in 1 of 1 kitchen. Failure to monitor the quaternary (q...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, review of facility policy, and staff interview, the facility failed to prepare, store, and serve food in a sanitary manner in 1 of 1 kitchen. Failure to monitor the quaternary (quat) sanitizer concentration may result in unsafe food storage/preparation and foodborne illness. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Kitchen/Table Pail occurred on 01/04/24. This policy, dated 01/03/24, stated, The kitchen pail is to be used for wiping down hard surfaces in the designated kitchen area. This pail will use our Sani-T-10 [quat] solution from dispenser on wall . is changed out to be tested with QUAC [quat] test strips three times a day per schedule and recorded and whenever changed out. The PPMs for the pail should read 150-400. If sanitizer levels are not within correct range, notify dietary manager. Observation on 01/03/24 at 8:50 a.m. showed a dietary staff member (#5) filled a pail with Sani-T-10 plus solution and water. The staff member failed to test the mixture with a QUAC test strip and stated he did not routinely do so. A second dietary staff member (#6) tested the mixture with a QUAC test strip and the strip failed to register a concentration. The dietary staff member (#6) discarded the mixture and prepared a new kitchen pail. Test of the second mixture with the QUAC strip showed a concentration of 200 ppm. During an interview with staff members (#5 and #6) after the above observation, they confirmed kitchen staff do not routinely test or log the sanitizer concentration of the mixture and failed to provide a log of sanitizer testing. During an interview on 01/03/24 at 9:15 a.m., the dietary manager (#7) confirmed she expected staff to test the kitchen pails per policy and log the results.
Jan 2023 3 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Resident Rights (Tag F0550)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on record review, review of facility policy, review of resident rights guide, and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide care in a manner and environment that maintained o...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on record review, review of facility policy, review of resident rights guide, and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide care in a manner and environment that maintained or enhanced the resident's dignity for 1 of 12 sampled residents (Resident #6). Failure to allow Resident #6 the choice to use her own beverage does not respect her personal preference and violates her rights to a dignified existence. Findings include: Review of the policy titled, Resident Rights occurred on 01/26/23. This policy, dated October 2022, stated, . It is the policy of this facility to protect and promote the right of each resident . including the right to a dignified existence, self-determination . The North Dakota Long Term Care Ombudsman Program Resident's Rights Guide, dated 08/01/19, stated, . The facility staff must treat you courteously, fairly and with dignity. Review of Resident #6's medical record occurred on all days of survey. The current care plan stated, . Allow resident to make choices . Respect her choices and resident rights. Progress notes included the following: * 01/15/23 at 3:10 p.m., . Behavior Note . [Resident #6] was in the dining room now at snack time and nurse went up behind her and informed her that I would have to ask her to leave the dining room as she has her pop cup on her chair which she was [sic] been informed is a [sic] infection control issue . * 01/15/23 at 11:44 p.m., . Behavior Note . [Resident #6] came from her room and she did not leave her pop cup in her room she put it on a table in the activity room. [Resident #6] has been instructed numerous times by multiple staff that this is an infection control issue, pop cup taken to her room. * 12/19/22 at 1:05 p.m., . Behavior Note Res. [Resident] brought her pop into the dining room at dinner. Res. has been talked to numerous times about this. Reminded res. that she can not have her pop in the dining room and that she needed to return it to her room. Res stated 'I'll just throw it away'. Resident threw pop away and returned to meal. * 12/15/22 at 1:35 p.m., . Behavior Note . Res did not have her oxygen tank filled prior to staff getting her up for Bingo, but she refused to stay in her room and wait on her concentrator before getting to activity room even though Bingo doesn't start until 1345 [1:45 p.m.]. Res then brings a can of diet coke to the activity room and cracks it open, sets it on the table, and when activity staff tells her that she can't have it in the activity room she gets verbally rude and upset with activity aide, 'well why can the activity staff have theirs in here then?' . * 12/3/22 at 3:00 p.m., . Behavior Note . [Resident #6] waiting in dining room for snack & asks multiple staff for 3 cups of ice for her water bottle. Nurse comes to dining room and sees [Resident #6] has her water bottle with her, which she knows she shouldn't have & has been reminded of multiple times. [Resident #6] getsupset [sic] when told to leave dining room and go put water bottle back in her room. [Resident #6] then finds out that the ice machine is currently out of ice at this current moment, and she will have to wait a few moments for it to produce more ice. She has a panic attack, freaking out on all staff members accusing them of doing everything wrong, breaking the machine, filling ice waters for residents incorrectly, and continuously accusing CNAs [certified nurses' assistant] of being in the wrong. Meanwhile, res still won't leave the DR [dining room] with her water bottle so had to be reminded again. Observation on 01/25/23 at 1:49 p.m., showed a twenty ounce bottle of pop on a table with four unidentified residents and one unidentified staff member during bingo in the activity room. During an interview on 01/24/23 at 4:40 p.m., when asked she feels about not being allowed to have her persona beverage container in the dining room/activity room, Resident #6 stated as far as she knows she is allowed to have it in the activity room but not the dining room. The resident stated she feels like she's a child when staff tell her she has to leave the dining room because she has her personal pop container in her chair and that it upsets her. During an interview on 01/25/23 at 3:15 p.m., when asked why Resident #6 was not allowed to bring her personal beverage container and/or bottle of pop in the dining room, a dietary staff member (#6) stated she had been told this by a previous dietary staff member. During an interview on 01/25/23 at 3:17 p.m., an administrative staff member (#2) stated Resident #6 is not allowed to bring her personal beverage container and/or bottle of pop to the dining room because it is brought from her room, it is an infection control issue because she touches her cup and it is dirty. The administrative nurse (#2) also stated the resident can have her personal beverage container and/or twenty ounce bottle of pop in the activity room. During an interview on 01/25/23 at 3:31 p.m., two administrative staff members (#1 and #5) stated Resident #6 is not allowed to have her personal beverage container or bottle of pop in the dining room or activity room whether it is on the table or in the holder attached to her wheelchair. An administrative staff member (#5) stated, We started this during Covid due to infection control, no residents are allowed to bring personal items into the dining room. The facility failed to honor the resident's right allowing her to have her personal beverage container and/or bottle of pop in the activity room/dining room and failed to treat the resident with dignity and respect her individual preferences.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, record review, review of facility policy, and staff interview, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision necessary to prevent accidents for 1 of 8 sampled residents (Re...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, record review, review of facility policy, and staff interview, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision necessary to prevent accidents for 1 of 8 sampled residents (Resident #16) who required staff assistance for transfers. Failure to stay with the resident in the bathroom as care planned places the resident at risk for falls and/or injuries. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Care Plans - Baseline and Comprehensive Person-Centerted [sic] occurred on 01/26/23. This policy, revised October 2022, stated, . It is the policy of this facility to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident . to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs . Qualified staff responsible for carrying out interventions specified in the care plan will be notified of their roles and responsibilities for carrying out the interventions, initially and when changes are made. Review of Resident #16's medical record occurred on all days of survey and included diagnoses of unspecified dementia, fracture of unspecified part of neck of femur and history of falling. The current care plan stated, . TOILET USE: The resident requires one assist with toileting. FALLS . Do not leave me unattended while toileting as I am a high fall risk. Review of Resident #16's medical record occurred on all days of survey. A progress note dated 07/13/2022 at 12:56 p.m., stated, . Resident yelling for help, CNA [certified nursing assistant] found him on the floor in his bathroom in his room. Laying on his right side . He was on the toilet and fell when getting off . During an observation on 01/24/23 at 10:31 a.m., a CNA (#3) assisted Resident #16 from the wheelchair to the toilet using a gait belt. The CNA showed the resident where the call light was located. The CNA stated that the resident sits on the toilet for about 20 minutes. The CNA closed the bathroom door and walked out of the resident's room into the hallway. At 10:37 a.m., the CNA checked on the resident and at 10:44 a.m., the CNA assisted the resident off the toilet. During an interview on 01/25/23 at 2:51 p.m., an administrative nurse (#1) stated, I would expect staff to stay within eyesight of the resident.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure safe and secure storage of medications in 2 of 2 medication carts (nurses medication cart and medication assistant's cart). Fail...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure safe and secure storage of medications in 2 of 2 medication carts (nurses medication cart and medication assistant's cart). Failure to store all medications securely may result in unauthorized access to medications. Findings include: - Observation on 01/25/23 at 11:27 a.m. showed a registered nurse (RN) (#4) removed four insulin pens from a drawer in the medication cart and placed them on top of the cart. The nurse pushed the medication cart down the hallway to the consultation room and stated, I'll be right back. The nurse returned to the medication cart at 11:32 a.m. Several residents were lined up in the hallway directly across from the medication cart waiting for access to the dining room for lunch. The nurse (#4) failed to securely lock the insulin pens in the medication cart in her absence. - Observation on 01/26/23 at 10:36 a.m. showed a unattended medication cart located on the C wing with an inhaler and a bottle of eye drops on top of the cart. During an interview on 01/26/23 at 10:31 a.m., an administrative nurse (#1) stated she expected staff to keep all medications locked securely in the medication cart when unattended.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

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

Strengths
  • • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 7 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • $13,627 in fines. Above average for North Dakota. Some compliance problems on record.
Bottom line: Mixed indicators with Trust Score of 66/100. Visit in person and ask pointed questions.

About This Facility

What is Wentz Living Center's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns WENTZ LIVING CENTER an overall rating of 4 out of 5 stars, which is considered above average nationally. Within North Dakota, 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 Wentz Living Center Staffed?

CMS rates WENTZ LIVING CENTER's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes.

What Have Inspectors Found at Wentz Living Center?

State health inspectors documented 7 deficiencies at WENTZ LIVING CENTER during 2023 to 2024. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 6 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 Wentz Living Center?

WENTZ LIVING CENTER 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 36 certified beds and approximately 31 residents (about 86% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in NAPOLEON, North Dakota.

How Does Wentz Living Center Compare to Other North Dakota Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in North Dakota, WENTZ LIVING CENTER's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 3.1 and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Wentz Living Center?

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 Wentz Living Center Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, WENTZ LIVING CENTER 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 4-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in North Dakota. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.

Do Nurses at Wentz Living Center Stick Around?

WENTZ LIVING CENTER 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 Wentz Living Center Ever Fined?

WENTZ LIVING CENTER has been fined $13,627 across 1 penalty action. This is below the North Dakota average of $33,215. 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 Wentz Living Center on Any Federal Watch List?

WENTZ LIVING CENTER 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.