Search for Skilled Nursing by ZIP Code:  :

Newton Presbyterian Manor

  1. Home
  2. Skilled Nursing Home Facilities Directory
  3. Kansas (KS)
  4. Newton
Full Name

Phone Number

Email Address

City of interest
We value your privacy. By clicking, you agree to the terms and conditions of our privacy policy. You also consent that we can reach out to you using a phone system that can auto-dial numbers. Your consent is not required to use our service.

Search for nursing homes in your area

ZIP:

Reviews
Overall Rating 3.5 / 5.0 ★★★★★

  • Steve Schmidt
    ★★★★★ a year ago

    We find Presbyterian Manor in Newton a great place to live! It is safe. The surroundings are pleasant and, well cared for. The staff is responsive. My wife and I are so glad we moved here, and highly recommend it to others.

  • A Google User
    ★★★★★ 5 years ago

    The competency level of ALL staff members should be evaluated carefully, prior to placing a loved one in an assisted living facility. Family member have witnessed a "resident", once (6 weeks ago) a vibrant, self-assured, gentle-man becoming just a shell of his former self - heartbreaking.

About Newton Presbyterian Manor

General Information

Legal Business NamePresbyterian Manors Inc
Ownership TypeNon Profit - Corporation
Changed Ownership In The Last 12 MonthsNo
First Accepted MedicareJuly 1, 1994 (23 years)
Capacity60
Residents54
Percent Occupied90%
Program ParticipationMedicare And Medicaid
Resident And Family CouncilsResident
In HospitalNo
Continuing Care Retirement CommunityYes
Special Focus FacilityNo
Auto Sprinkler System In Required AreasYes

Ratings for Newton Presbyterian Manor

Newton Presbyterian Manor
was reviewed by Medicare to have a rating of 5 out of 5. About Medicare Ratings
Overall Rating
Health Inspections Rating
Quality Measures Rating
Staff Rating
RN Staff Rating

Overall Ratings of Kansas Nursing Homes

Fines, Complaints, and Inspection Problems in the Past 3 Years

Compare The Number of Problems

Types of Problems at Nursing Homes

Some issues within a nursing home are much more severe than others. Medicare evaluates each problem based on 2 scales: the number of residents affected by a problem and the severity of the potential or actual harm to residents based on the problem. We have color coded the matrix below to make it easier to pick out the more severe problems. In general, orange and red issues related to the treatment of a resident are considered substandard quality of care.

  Residents Affected
Severity of the Deficiency Few Some Many
Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety J K L
Actual harm that is not immediate jeopardy G H I
No actual harm with potential for more than minimal harm that is not immediate jeopardy D E F
No actual harm with potential for minimal harm A B C

November 28, 2016 - 12 months ago

 Residents AffectedSeveritySource/TypeDescription
DFewPotential for HarmComplaintEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provide adequate supervision to prevent avoidable accidents.

November 9, 2015 - 2 years ago

 Residents AffectedSeveritySource/TypeDescription
DFewPotential for HarmHealth InspectionProvide necessary care and services to maintain or improve the highest well being of each resident .
DFewPotential for HarmHealth InspectionAllow residents the right to participate in the planning or revision of care and treatment.

Staffing Levels Per Resident per Day

Medicare determines the expected staffing time per resident per day depending on level of care the residents of Newton Presbyterian Manor require. It is important to compare the reported time to expected time for a single facility instead of comparing the amount of time per resident of two facilities. Learn why.

3hr 10min
2hr 25min
ReportedExpected
CNA
30min
35min
ReportedExpected
LPN
60min
55min
ReportedExpected
RN
4hr 40min
3hr 55min
ReportedExpected
Total Nursing

This facility also provides approximately 15min per resident per WEEK of physical therapist time.

Quality Measures for Long Stay Residents

100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
95.4%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016KS
Percentage of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
92.8%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016KS
Percentage of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
54.5%
50.0%
37.5%
48.1%
39.7%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016KS
Percentage of low risk long-stay residents who lose control of their bowels or bladder
22.0%
17.0%
25.5%
41.9%
24.3%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016KS
Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antianxiety or hypnotic medication
23.8%
22.1%
14.0%
13.2%
19.3%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016KS
Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to move independently worsened
6.4%
11.3%
15.4%
17.3%
20.2%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016KS
Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication
15.8%
13.6%
15.6%
7.3%
16.7%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016KS
Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased
2.6%
11.7%
13.3%
12.3%
10.4%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016KS
Percentage of long-stay residents who self-report moderate to severe pain
2.1%
5.7%
7.8%
3.8%
7.5%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016KS
Percentage of long-stay residents who lose too much weight
2.9%
8.1%
6.5%
3.3%
5.2%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016KS
Percentage of high risk long-stay residents with pressure ulcers
13.0%
9.6%
5.8%
13.7%
6.4%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016KS
Percentage of long-stay residents who have depressive symptoms
8.5%
3.8%
3.9%
11.5%
6.0%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016KS
Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection
6.4%
3.8%
5.8%
3.8%
4.8%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016KS
Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
2.6%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016KS
Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016KS
Percentage of long-stay residents who were physically restrained

Quality Measures for Short Stay Residents

89.1%
88.9%
93.9%
87.1%
76.2%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016KS
Percentage of short-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
100.0%
97.1%
97.1%
97.1%
74.2%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016KS
Percentage of short-stay residents who were assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
-
-
-
-
69.5%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016KS
* The data for this facility for some quarters is unavailable.
Percentage of short-stay residents who made improvements in function
16.2%
14.3%
25.0%
24.0%
20.9%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016KS
Percentage of short-stay residents who self-report moderate to severe pain
0.0%
0.0%
7.7%
-
2.7%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016KS
* The data for this facility for some quarters is unavailable.
Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
1.9%
Q4 2015Q1 2016Q2 2016Q3 2016KS
Percentage of short-stay residents with pressure ulcers that are new or worsened



Some page content retrieved from Google Places