Overview

Address
P O BOX 278, 4800 HOSPITAL PARKWAY, BEATRICE, NE 68310
Phone
(402) 228-3344
Hospital Type
Critical Access (CAH)
Ownership
Non-Profit
Emergency Services
Yes
3 /5
CMS Overall Rating
p30
Critical Access (CAH) — Small rural hospital (≤25 inpatient beds) at least 35 miles from the nearest hospital. Reimbursed at 101% of cost rather than standard DRG rates. Exempt from most CMS payment adjustment programs.

CMS Star Rating — Quality Domain Breakdown

CMS computes the overall star rating from five quality domains. Each domain compares this hospital's measures against national benchmarks.

Mortality 3 of 7 measures reported
3
Better No different Worse
30-day death rates for heart attack, heart failure, pneumonia, COPD, stroke, CABG, and kidney disease.
Safety of Care 2 of 8 measures reported
2
Better No different Worse
Healthcare-associated infections and patient safety indicators (PSI-90 composite).
Readmission 7 of 11 measures reported
7
Better No different Worse
30-day unplanned readmission rates for heart attack, heart failure, pneumonia, COPD, hip/knee replacement, and CABG.
Patient Experience 8 of 8 measures reported
8 measures reported (comparative data not available for this domain)
HCAHPS survey scores — patient-reported experience with communication, responsiveness, cleanliness, and discharge planning.
Timely & Effective Care 7 of 12 measures reported
7 measures reported (comparative data not available for this domain)
Process-of-care measures including flu immunization, blood clot prevention, and appropriate use of imaging.

Complications & Deaths

30-day mortality rates, patient safety indicators, and complication rates. "Better" means statistically significantly better than the national rate.

Measure Score vs. National Denominator
COMP_HIP_KNEE Number of Cases Too Small
Hybrid_HWM 4.00 No Different Than the National Rate 129
MORT_30_AMI Number of Cases Too Small
MORT_30_CABG
MORT_30_COPD 10.40 No Different Than the National Rate 34
MORT_30_HF 15.30 No Different Than the National Rate 30
MORT_30_PN 23.80 Worse Than the National Rate 110
MORT_30_STK Number of Cases Too Small
PSI_03
PSI_04
PSI_06
PSI_08
PSI_09
PSI_10
PSI_11
PSI_12
PSI_13
PSI_14
PSI_15
PSI_90

Patient Experience (HCAHPS)

Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems — standardized patient survey measuring satisfaction with care.

Measure Score Star Rating
H_COMP_1_A_P: Nurses "always" communicated well 81%
H_COMP_1_SN_P: Nurses "sometimes" or "never" communicated well 3%
H_COMP_1_U_P: Nurses "usually" communicated well 16%
H_COMP_1_LINEAR_SCORE: Nurse communication - linear mean score
H_COMP_1_STAR_RATING: Nurse communication - star rating 4
H_NURSE_RESPECT_A_P: Nurses "always" treated them with courtesy and respect 89%
H_NURSE_RESPECT_SN_P: Nurses "sometimes" or "never" treated them with courtesy and respect 2%
H_NURSE_RESPECT_U_P: Nurses "usually" treated them with courtesy and respect 9%
H_NURSE_LISTEN_A_P: Nurses "always" listened carefully 77%
H_NURSE_LISTEN_SN_P: Nurses "sometimes" or "never" listened carefully 3%
H_NURSE_LISTEN_U_P: Nurses "usually" listened carefully 20%
H_NURSE_EXPLAIN_A_P: Nurses "always" explained things so they could understand 77%
H_NURSE_EXPLAIN_SN_P: Nurses "sometimes" or "never" explained things so they could understand 5%
H_NURSE_EXPLAIN_U_P: Nurses "usually" explained things so they could understand 18%
H_COMP_2_A_P: Doctors "always" communicated well 79%
H_COMP_2_SN_P: Doctors "sometimes" or "never" communicated well 5%
H_COMP_2_U_P: Doctors "usually" communicated well 16%
H_COMP_2_LINEAR_SCORE: Doctor communication - linear mean score
H_COMP_2_STAR_RATING: Doctor communication - star rating 3
H_DOCTOR_RESPECT_A_P: Doctors "always" treated them with courtesy and respect 83%
H_DOCTOR_RESPECT_SN_P: Doctors "sometimes" or "never" treated them with courtesy and respect 3%
H_DOCTOR_RESPECT_U_P: Doctors "usually" treated them with courtesy and respect 14%
H_DOCTOR_LISTEN_A_P: Doctors "always" listened carefully 78%
H_DOCTOR_LISTEN_SN_P: Doctors "sometimes" or "never" listened carefully 5%
H_DOCTOR_LISTEN_U_P: Doctors "usually" listened carefully 17%
H_DOCTOR_EXPLAIN_A_P: Doctors "always" explained things so they could understand 75%
H_DOCTOR_EXPLAIN_SN_P: Doctors "sometimes" or "never" explained things so they could understand 6%
H_DOCTOR_EXPLAIN_U_P: Doctors "usually" explained things so they could understand 19%
H_COMP_5_A_P: Staff "always" explained 62%
H_COMP_5_SN_P: Staff "sometimes" or "never" explained 16%
H_COMP_5_U_P: Staff "usually" explained 22%
H_COMP_5_LINEAR_SCORE: Communication about medicines - linear mean score
H_COMP_5_STAR_RATING: Communication about medicines - star rating 3
H_MED_FOR_A_P: Staff "always" explained new medications 74%
H_MED_FOR_SN_P: Staff "sometimes" or "never" explained new medications 9%
H_MED_FOR_U_P: Staff "usually" explained new medications 17%
H_SIDE_EFFECTS_A_P: Staff "always" explained possible side effects 50%
H_SIDE_EFFECTS_SN_P: Staff "sometimes" or "never" explained possible side effects 23%
H_SIDE_EFFECTS_U_P: Staff "usually" explained possible side effects 27%
H_COMP_6_N_P: No, staff "did not" give patients this information 11%
H_COMP_6_Y_P: Yes, staff "did" give patients this information 89%
H_COMP_6_LINEAR_SCORE: Discharge information - linear mean score
H_COMP_6_STAR_RATING: Discharge information - star rating 4
H_DISCH_HELP_N_P: No, staff "did not" give patients information about help after discharge 12%
H_DISCH_HELP_Y_P: Yes, staff "did" give patients information about help after discharge 88%
H_SYMPTOMS_N_P: No, staff "did not" give patients information about possible symptoms 10%
H_SYMPTOMS_Y_P: Yes, staff "did" give patients information about possible symptoms 90%
H_CLEAN_HSP_A_P: Room was "always" clean 77%
H_CLEAN_HSP_SN_P: Room was "sometimes" or "never" clean 5%
H_CLEAN_HSP_U_P: Room was "usually" clean 18%
H_CLEAN_LINEAR_SCORE: Cleanliness - linear mean score
H_CLEAN_STAR_RATING: Cleanliness - star rating 4
H_QUIET_HSP_A_P: "Always" quiet at night 66%
H_QUIET_HSP_SN_P: "Sometimes" or "never" quiet at night 3%
H_QUIET_HSP_U_P: "Usually" quiet at night 31%
H_QUIET_LINEAR_SCORE: Quietness - linear mean score
H_QUIET_STAR_RATING: Quietness - star rating 4
H_HSP_RATING_0_6: Patients who gave a rating of "6" or lower (low) 5%
H_HSP_RATING_7_8: Patients who gave a rating of "7" or "8" (medium) 18%
H_HSP_RATING_9_10: Patients who gave a rating of "9" or "10" (high) 77%
H_HSP_RATING_LINEAR_SCORE: Overall hospital rating - linear mean score
H_HSP_RATING_STAR_RATING: Overall hospital rating - star rating 4
H_RECMND_DN: "NO", patients would not recommend the hospital (they probably would not or definitely would not recommend it) 4%
H_RECMND_DY: "YES", patients would definitely recommend the hospital 77%
H_RECMND_PY: "YES", patients would probably recommend the hospital 19%
H_RECMND_LINEAR_SCORE: Recommend hospital - linear mean score
H_RECMND_STAR_RATING: Recommend hospital - star rating 5
H_STAR_RATING: Summary star rating 4

Healthcare Associated Infections

Standardized Infection Ratios (SIR). A SIR < 1.0 means fewer infections than predicted based on national baseline data.

Measure Score (SIR) vs. National
HAI_1_CILOWER
HAI_1_CIUPPER
HAI_1_DOPC 251.000
HAI_1_ELIGCASES 0.068
HAI_1_NUMERATOR 0.000
HAI_1_SIR
HAI_2_CILOWER N/A No Different than National Benchmark
HAI_2_CIUPPER 2.319 No Different than National Benchmark
HAI_2_DOPC 529.000 No Different than National Benchmark
HAI_2_ELIGCASES 1.292 No Different than National Benchmark
HAI_2_NUMERATOR 0.000 No Different than National Benchmark
HAI_2_SIR 0.000 No Different than National Benchmark
HAI_3_CILOWER
HAI_3_CIUPPER
HAI_3_DOPC 15.000
HAI_3_ELIGCASES 0.391
HAI_3_NUMERATOR 0.000
HAI_3_SIR
HAI_4_CILOWER
HAI_4_CIUPPER
HAI_4_DOPC 1.000
HAI_4_ELIGCASES 0.008
HAI_4_NUMERATOR 0.000
HAI_4_SIR
HAI_5_CILOWER
HAI_5_CIUPPER
HAI_5_DOPC 3106.000
HAI_5_ELIGCASES 0.065
HAI_5_NUMERATOR 0.000
HAI_5_SIR
HAI_6_CILOWER 0.042 No Different than National Benchmark
HAI_6_CIUPPER 4.165 No Different than National Benchmark
HAI_6_DOPC 2608.000 No Different than National Benchmark
HAI_6_ELIGCASES 1.184 No Different than National Benchmark
HAI_6_NUMERATOR 1.000 No Different than National Benchmark
HAI_6_SIR 0.845 No Different than National Benchmark

Timely & Effective Care

Process-of-care measures including ED wait times, treatment timeliness, and preventive care.

Measure Score Condition
EDV low Emergency Department
GMCS Electronic Clinical Quality Measure
GMCS_Malnutrition_Diagnosis_Documented Electronic Clinical Quality Measure
GMCS_Malnutrition_Screening Electronic Clinical Quality Measure
GMCS_Nutrition_Assessment Electronic Clinical Quality Measure
GMCS_Nutritional_Care_Plan Electronic Clinical Quality Measure
HH_HYPER Electronic Clinical Quality Measure
HH_HYPO 1.0 Electronic Clinical Quality Measure
HH_ORAE Electronic Clinical Quality Measure
IMM_3 85.0 Healthcare Personnel Vaccination
OP_18a 99.0 Emergency Department
OP_18b 94.0 Emergency Department
OP_18c 142.0 Emergency Department
OP_18d 202.0 Emergency Department
OP_22 0.0 Emergency Department
OP_23 Emergency Department
OP_29 Colonoscopy care
OP_31 Cataract surgery outcome
OP_40 Electronic Clinical Quality Measure
SAFE_USE_OF_OPIOIDS 18.0 Electronic Clinical Quality Measure
SEP_1 83.0 Sepsis Care
SEP_SH_3HR 94.0 Sepsis Care
SEP_SH_6HR 100.0 Sepsis Care
SEV_SEP_3HR 89.0 Sepsis Care
SEV_SEP_6HR 93.0 Sepsis Care
STK_02 Electronic Clinical Quality Measure
STK_03 Electronic Clinical Quality Measure
STK_05 Electronic Clinical Quality Measure
VTE_1 97.0 Electronic Clinical Quality Measure
VTE_2 97.0 Electronic Clinical Quality Measure

Unplanned Hospital Visits

Readmission and ED return rates within 30 days of discharge.

Measure Score vs. National
EDAC_30_AMI Number of Cases Too Small
EDAC_30_HF -11.20 Average Days per 100 Discharges
EDAC_30_PN 0.00 Average Days per 100 Discharges
Hybrid_HWR 14.70 No Different Than the National Rate
OP_32 12.20 No Different Than the National Rate
OP_35_ADM Number of Cases Too Small
OP_35_ED Number of Cases Too Small
OP_36 Number of cases too small
READM_30_AMI Number of Cases Too Small
READM_30_CABG
READM_30_COPD 17.40 No Different Than the National Rate
READM_30_HF 18.70 No Different Than the National Rate
READM_30_HIP_KNEE Number of Cases Too Small
READM_30_PN 16.00 No Different Than the National Rate

Financial Health (Cost Report — FY 2023)

All Data

Every labeled metric surfaced for this hospital, with national medians and percentiles where a benchmark is available.

Download CSV

Show 51 rows
Source Metric Value National Median Pctl. Raw key
Cost Report Cost-to-Charge Ratio 0.50 metrics.cost_to_charge_ratio
Cost Report Current Ratio 1.55 metrics.current_ratio
Cost Report Employees per Bed 14.97 metrics.employees_per_bed
Cost Report fiscal_year 2,023 fiscal_year
Cost Report Fund Balance ($) $60,509,487 metrics.fund_balance
Cost Report Net Income ($) $9,264,149 metrics.net_income
Cost Report Net Patient Revenue ($) $88,608,495 metrics.net_patient_revenue
Cost Report Operating Margin (%) 0.1% metrics.operating_margin
Cost Report Total Assets ($) $101,491,955 metrics.total_assets
Cost Report Total Costs ($) $73,602,826 metrics.total_costs
Cost Report Total Liabilities ($) $40,982,468 metrics.total_liabilities
Cost Report Total Margin (%) 9.5% metrics.total_margin
Cost Report Uncompensated Care (%) 1.3% metrics.uncompensated_care_pct
General Information Address P O BOX 278, 4800 HOSPITAL PARKWAY Address
General Information City/Town BEATRICE City/Town
General Information Count of Facility MORT Measures 3 Count of Facility MORT Measures
General Information Count of Facility Pt Exp Measures 8 Count of Facility Pt Exp Measures
General Information Count of Facility READM Measures 7 Count of Facility READM Measures
General Information Count of Facility Safety Measures 2 Count of Facility Safety Measures
General Information Count of Facility TE Measures 7 Count of Facility TE Measures
General Information Count of MORT Measures Better 0 Count of MORT Measures Better
General Information Count of MORT Measures No Different 3 Count of MORT Measures No Different
General Information Count of MORT Measures Worse 0 Count of MORT Measures Worse
General Information Count of READM Measures Better 0 Count of READM Measures Better
General Information Count of READM Measures No Different 7 Count of READM Measures No Different
General Information Count of READM Measures Worse 0 Count of READM Measures Worse
General Information Count of Safety Measures Better 0 Count of Safety Measures Better
General Information Count of Safety Measures No Different 2 Count of Safety Measures No Different
General Information Count of Safety Measures Worse 0 Count of Safety Measures Worse
General Information County/Parish GAGE County/Parish
General Information Emergency Services Yes Emergency Services
General Information Facility ID 281364 Facility ID
General Information Facility Name BEATRICE COMMUNITY HOSPITAL & HEALTH CENTER, INC Facility Name
General Information Hospital overall rating 3 Hospital overall rating
General Information Hospital overall rating footnote Hospital overall rating footnote
General Information Hospital Ownership Voluntary non-profit - Private Hospital Ownership
General Information Hospital Type Critical Access Hospitals Hospital Type
General Information Meets criteria for birthing friendly designation Meets criteria for birthing friendly designation
General Information MORT Group Footnote MORT Group Footnote
General Information MORT Group Measure Count 7 MORT Group Measure Count
General Information Pt Exp Group Footnote Pt Exp Group Footnote
General Information Pt Exp Group Measure Count 8 Pt Exp Group Measure Count
General Information READM Group Footnote READM Group Footnote
General Information READM Group Measure Count 11 READM Group Measure Count
General Information Safety Group Footnote Safety Group Footnote
General Information Safety Group Measure Count 8 Safety Group Measure Count
General Information State NE State
General Information TE Group Footnote TE Group Footnote
General Information TE Group Measure Count 12 TE Group Measure Count
General Information Telephone Number (402) 228-3344 Telephone Number
General Information ZIP Code 68310 ZIP Code
Methodology

Full methodology →