Green House Living for Sheridan
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Green House Living for Sheridan has a Trust Grade of F, indicating poor quality and significant concerns with care. It ranks #31 out of 33 facilities in Wyoming, placing it in the bottom half of the state, and #3 out of 3 in Sheridan County, meaning there are no better local options available. The facility's performance trend is stable, with 11 issues reported consistently over the past two years. Staffing is a relative strength, boasting a 4/5 star rating and an impressive 0% turnover rate, meaning staff members are likely to be experienced and familiar with the residents. However, the facility has a troubling $112,544 in fines, the highest in Wyoming, which raises red flags about compliance issues. Specific incidents include a failure to maintain proper nutritional oversight for a resident, leading to severe weight loss, and two cases where timely care for skin conditions was not provided, resulting in infections and delayed hospitalization. While the RN coverage is strong, exceeding 91% of state facilities, these serious deficiencies indicate that families should carefully consider the overall quality of care provided at this nursing home.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Wyoming
- #31/33
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Holding Steady
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- Turnover data not reported for this facility.
- Penalties ⚠ Watch
- $112,544 in fines. Higher than 81% of Wyoming facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 119 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than 97% of Wyoming nursing homes. RNs are the most trained staff who catch health problems before they become serious.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 34 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
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
Below Wyoming average (2.9)
Significant quality concerns identified by CMS
Well above median ($33,413)
Significant penalties indicating serious issues
The Ugly 34 deficiencies on record
Mar 2025
11 deficiencies
1 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Deficiency F0692
(Tag F0692)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, medical record review, staff interview, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to maintain a...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0744
(Tag F0744)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, medical record review, and resident representative and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure resi...
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 medical record review, staff interview, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure residents' drug regimen was free of unnecessary drugs for 1 of 6 sample residents (#26) ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
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, resident and staff interview, and recipe review, the facility failed to ensure palatable food was served to 1 of 4 resident cottages (Founders). The cottage census was 9. The fin...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
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, staff interview, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure residents were treated wit...
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 F0679
(Tag F0679)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, resident and staff interview, medical record review, activity calendar review, and policy and procedure re...
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 F0725
(Tag F0725)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff, resident representative, and resident interview, and facility staffing review, the facility 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
Deficiency F0883
(Tag F0883)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on medical record review, staff interview and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to document if residents were educated about the benefits and potential side effects of the influen...
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
Antibiotic Stewardship
(Tag F0881)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on medical record review, staff interview, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure an antibiotic stewardship program was implemented. The census was 28. The findings were:...
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 F0882
(Tag F0882)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a qualified infection preventionist was designated. The census was 28. The findings were:
Interview with the facility administrator on 3/10/25 a...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0729
(Tag F0729)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on employee file review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the CNA abuse registry was checked prior to resident contact for 4 of 4 CNA files (#6, #7, #8, #9) reviewed. The census...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2024
1 deficiency
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
Safe Environment
(Tag F0921)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on resident and staff interview, medical record review, and facility incident report review, the facility failed to ensure...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 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
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on medical record review, and elder and staff interview, the facility failed to have a system in place to ensure respiratory care was provided consistent with the elder's goals and preferences f...
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 F0725
(Tag F0725)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, review of medical records, staff job descriptions, facility incident reports, the payroll report, and the ...
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 F0837
(Tag F0837)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on review of the Wyoming Administrative Rules, Nursing Home Administrators, Chapter 2: Licensure Requirements, the facility assessment, the Wyoming Healthcare Facility Change Form, and staff and...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Staffing Information
(Tag F0732)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of the posted nurse staffing data and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the posted 24/7 hour nursin...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2024
6 deficiencies
2 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
Deficiency F0658
(Tag F0658)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on medical record review, staff interview, facility investigation review, performance improvement plan review, professiona...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on medical record review, staff interview, facility investigation review, performance improvement plan review, and policy ...
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
Investigate Abuse
(Tag F0610)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on medical record review, staff interview, and facility investigation review, the facility failed to ensure a thorough inv...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** In regard to wound care:
1. Observation of wound care for elder #3 on 1/31/24 at 11:13 AM showed the wound care nurse donned glo...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0576
(Tag F0576)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on resident and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure elders' right to receive mail delivery including Saturdays....
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0727
(Tag F0727)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on schedule review, daily staff posting review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure an RN was on duty for at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week. The Census was 37. The...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2023
3 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
Transfer Requirements
(Tag F0622)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of medical records, and staff and elder representative interview, the facility failed to demonstrate the need fo...
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 F0573
(Tag F0573)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on medical record review, staff and elder representative interview, and review of policy and procedures the facility faile...
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
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of medical records, and staff and elder representative interview, the facility failed to ensure a written notice...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2022
9 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
Based on medical record review, staff interview, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure elders or elders' representatives received a written transfer notice for 1 of 1 sample e...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0625
(Tag F0625)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on medical record review, staff interview, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure elders or elders' representatives received a written notice of the bed-hold policy for 1...
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** Based on observation, medical record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a care plan was comprehensive re...
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, medical record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure appropriate safety devices were ...
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** Based on medical record review, staff interview, and review of policy and procedure, the facility failed to ensure appropriate b...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0865
(Tag F0865)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on the review of the 10/28/21 recertification 2567, QAPI meeting minutes review and staff interview, the facility failed t...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Antibiotic Stewardship
(Tag F0881)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on medical record review, staff interview, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure an effective antibiotic stewardship program was implemented to identify appropriate use ...
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** Based on observation, staff interview, review of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) guidance, review of the CDC community tra...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0888
(Tag F0888)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on staff interview, staff vaccine documentation review, and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure a procedure was in place to monitor for compliance regarding additional pre...
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
- • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: Special Focus Facility, 4 harm violation(s), $112,544 in fines, Payment denial on record. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 34 deficiencies on record, including 4 serious (caused harm) violations. Ask about corrective actions taken.
- • $112,544 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in Wyoming. Major compliance failures.
- • Grade F (0/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Green House Living For Sheridan's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns Green House Living for Sheridan an overall rating of 1 out of 5 stars, which is considered much below average nationally. Within Wyoming, 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 Green House Living For Sheridan Staffed?
CMS rates Green House Living for Sheridan's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes.
What Have Inspectors Found at Green House Living For Sheridan?
State health inspectors documented 34 deficiencies at Green House Living for Sheridan during 2022 to 2025. These included: 4 that caused actual resident harm, 27 with potential for harm, and 3 minor or isolated issues. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Green House Living For Sheridan?
Green House Living for Sheridan 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 48 certified beds and approximately 30 residents (about 62% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in Sheridan, Wyoming.
How Does Green House Living For Sheridan Compare to Other Wyoming Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Wyoming, Green House Living for Sheridan's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 2.9 and health inspection rating (1 stars) is much below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Green House Living For Sheridan?
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 Green House Living For Sheridan Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, Green House Living for Sheridan has documented safety concerns. The facility is currently on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes nationwide). The facility has a 1-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Wyoming. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.
Do Nurses at Green House Living For Sheridan Stick Around?
Green House Living for Sheridan 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 Green House Living For Sheridan Ever Fined?
Green House Living for Sheridan has been fined $112,544 across 12 penalty actions. This is 3.3x the Wyoming average of $34,204. Fines at this level are uncommon and typically indicate a pattern of serious deficiencies, repeated violations, or failure to correct problems promptly. CMS reserves penalties of this magnitude for facilities that pose significant, documented risk to resident health or safety. Families should request specific documentation of what issues led to these fines and what systemic changes have been implemented.
Is Green House Living For Sheridan on Any Federal Watch List?
Green House Living for Sheridan is currently an SFF Candidate, meaning CMS has identified it as potentially qualifying for the Special Focus Facility watch list. SFF Candidates have a history of serious deficiencies but haven't yet reached the threshold for full SFF designation. The facility is being monitored more closely — if problems continue, it may be added to the official watch list. Families should ask what the facility is doing to address the issues that led to this status.