Complete Care at Glendale West
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Complete Care at Glendale West has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the quality of care provided. Ranked #199 out of 321 facilities in Wisconsin, this places the nursing home in the bottom half of all facilities in the state, and #14 out of 32 in Milwaukee County, meaning only a few local options rank lower. The facility's situation is worsening, with issues increasing from 9 in 2024 to 13 in 2025. Staffing is rated as average with a turnover rate of 45%, which is slightly better than the state average, but there is concerningly less RN coverage than 81% of other state facilities. Additionally, the home has been fined a total of $11,180, which is typical for facilities in the area. Some serious incidents noted include a resident developing a severe pressure injury due to inadequate care and another resident who fell and sustained a head injury because they were not assisted properly during a transfer. While the facility has some strengths, such as decent staffing levels, the significant flaws highlighted in the inspections raise important concerns for families considering this option for their loved ones.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Wisconsin
- #199/321
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 45% turnover. Near Wisconsin's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ○ Average
- $11,180 in fines. Higher than 62% of Wisconsin facilities. Some compliance issues.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 43 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Wisconsin. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 34 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (45%)
3 points below Wisconsin average of 48%
Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Below Wisconsin average (3.0)
Below average - review inspection findings carefully
Near Wisconsin avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 34 deficiencies on record
May 2025
13 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0605
(Tag F0605)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility did not ensure a resident receiving an antidepressant medication was comprehe...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Assessments
(Tag F0636)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility did not conduct a comprehensive assessment of depression/mood with the admiss...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0645
(Tag F0645)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure residents are accurately screened for a mental disorder prior ...
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
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility did not develop a comprehensive plan of care for residents on antidepressant ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0685
(Tag F0685)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility did not ensure residents with vision impairment received prope...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure adequate supervision and safety to prevent an ac...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Unnecessary Medications
(Tag F0759)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure the medication rate was below 5 percent in 1 (R422) of 3 residents observed receiving medications. The facility medicati...
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 F0760
(Tag F0760)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure the residents were free of significant medication errors for 1...
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
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure the medical record for 1 (R33) of 18 residents r...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility did not establish and maintain an infection prevention and co...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 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
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interviews, the facility did not ensure each Resident is treated with dignity and respect that promoted...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 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 F0572
(Tag F0572)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure 4 Residents (R172, R23, R13 and R65) of 18 sampled residents w...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 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 F0655
(Tag F0655)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2.) R13 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and was readmitted again on 4/30/25.
R13's original admission to the ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2024
2 deficiencies
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
Grievances
(Tag F0585)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to identify resident concerns as grievances and failed...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 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
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure that foods were prepared in a way that prevented...
Read full inspector narrative →
Sept 2024
1 deficiency
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 F0804
(Tag F0804)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to serve food that was palatable, at the appropriate temperature, for two of seven residents (Residents (R) 12 and R13) who were...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 2024
2 deficiencies
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
Pharmacy Services
(Tag F0755)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff interviews and record review, the facility failed to monitor the delivery of narcotic medication for one of three...
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 F0804
(Tag F0804)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff interview, and facility documentation review the facility failed to ensure food was served at palata...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2024
4 deficiencies
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
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility did not provide care and treatment in accordance with professional standards ...
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
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility did not ensure 1 (R13) of 6 residents received adequate supervis...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 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 F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interviews and record review the facility did not ensure that drugs and biological's used in the facility ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 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
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility did not ensure food was stored and prepared safely, for 71 of 75...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2023
2 deficiencies
1 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility did not ensure 1 of 4 sampled residents (R13) reviewed for falls failed to pr...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 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 F0804
(Tag F0804)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation and interviews, the facility failed to ensure food was served at a palatable temperatures for 3 of 8 residents.
Residents on the Oakland Unit complained that breakfast foods were...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2022
10 deficiencies
1 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility did not ensure residents received care consistent with professi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0558
(Tag F0558)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interview the facility did not ensure residents received services with reasonable accomodation of resid...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility did not ensure 1 (R5) of 1 residents received the appropriate intervention for...
Read full inspector narrative →
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, interview, and record review the Facility did not ensure 1 (R28) of 6 Residents reviewed for accidents had their care plan interventions implemented.
R28's call light was observe...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Tube Feeding
(Tag F0693)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility did not ensure residents that were fed by enteral means or rece...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0757
(Tag F0757)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the Facility did not ensure each Resident's drug regimen was free from unnecessary drugs for 1 (R23) of 5 Residents reviewed.
* R23's pulse was not taken two time...
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** 2. R63 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that include: Paranoid Schizophrenia, pressure ulcer of the sacral ...
Read full inspector narrative →
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, interview and record review, the Facility did not establish and maintain an infection control program designed to help prevent the development and transmission of disease and inf...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3.) R55 admitted to the facility on [DATE] and has diagnoses that include Acute Respiratory Failure with Hypoxia, Protein Calori...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0625
(Tag F0625)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3.) R55 admitted to the facility on [DATE] and has diagnoses that include Acute Respiratory Failure with Hypoxia, Protein Calori...
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
- • 45% turnover. Below Wisconsin's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s), 1 harm violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 34 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $11,180 in fines. Above average for Wisconsin. Some compliance problems on record.
- • Grade F (31/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Complete Care At Glendale West's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns Complete Care at Glendale West an overall rating of 2 out of 5 stars, which is considered below average nationally. Within Wisconsin, 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 Complete Care At Glendale West Staffed?
CMS rates Complete Care at Glendale West's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 45%, compared to the Wisconsin average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Complete Care At Glendale West?
State health inspectors documented 34 deficiencies at Complete Care at Glendale West during 2022 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 1 that caused actual resident harm, 30 with potential for harm, and 2 minor or isolated issues. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates Complete Care At Glendale West?
Complete Care at Glendale West is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by COMPLETE CARE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 94 certified beds and approximately 74 residents (about 79% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in GLENDALE, Wisconsin.
How Does Complete Care At Glendale West Compare to Other Wisconsin Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Wisconsin, Complete Care at Glendale West's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 3.0, staff turnover (45%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Complete Care At Glendale West?
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 Complete Care At Glendale West Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, Complete Care at Glendale West 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 2-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Wisconsin. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.
Do Nurses at Complete Care At Glendale West Stick Around?
Complete Care at Glendale West has a staff turnover rate of 45%, which is about average for Wisconsin 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 Complete Care At Glendale West Ever Fined?
Complete Care at Glendale West has been fined $11,180 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Wisconsin average of $33,191. 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 Complete Care At Glendale West on Any Federal Watch List?
Complete Care at Glendale West 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.