Immanuel Living d/b/a The Terraces at Buffalo Hill
Nursing Home, Assisted Living, Independent Living, Memory Care & Skilled Nursing · Kalispell, MT
Immanuel Living d/b/a The Terraces at Buffalo Hill
Nursing Home, Assisted Living, Independent Living, Memory Care & Skilled Nursing · Kalispell, MT
Immanuel Living d/b/a The Terraces at Buffalo Hill accepts Medicare.
Overview of Immanuel Living D/b/a the Terraces at Buffalo Hill
Forty Claremont Street in Kalispell sits inside a very walkable stretch of Flathead County, Montana, close enough that many errands don’t require a car. That’s where Immanuel Living D/b/a the Terraces at Buffalo Hill operates a 140-bed community spanning independent living, assisted living, and memory care. Patty Cordell administers the property.
Rehabilitation services, respite care, and around-the-clock staffing form the operational backbone. Residents recovering from surgery or illness can use outpatient therapy and short-term rehabilitation without leaving the property, and memory care is available for those who need closer supervision and specialized daily support.
A heated swimming pool and fitness center anchor the wellness side of things, while walking paths and gardens give residents room to move outdoors. Meals come through several restaurant-style venues, including the Wooden Nickel Bistro and Lounge. Guest suites accommodate visiting family, and a general store plus library and business center round out daily life on-site. Underground and covered parking is available too. Monthly pricing starts at $5,700, and Medicare is accepted here.
Inspection records point to medication management and care planning and documentation as the areas regulators have focused on. Taken with its layered care options, from independent living through memory support, the community is set up for residents whose needs may shift over time, along with the families planning around that change.
140-bed community Rank #8 / 103Bed count — State benchmarkedThis home is ranked 8th out of 103 homes we track in Montana for bed count. Shows this facility's certified or reported bed count compared to other Montana facilities. Larger communities may offer more amenities, programs, and on-site services for residents and families.Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings cover every community we track in Montana that reports data for that category. Communities without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.Click the rank badge to see the full State ranking.Click here to see the full State ranking.
A larger shared setting that may offer more common spaces and organized community services.
1 year in operation Rank #62 / 91Years in operation — State benchmarkedThis home is ranked 62nd out of 91 homes we track in Montana for years in operation. Shows how long this facility has been in operation compared to other Montana facilities. Longer operating histories may benefit residents, families, and staff.Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings cover every community we track in Montana that reports data for that category. Communities without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.Click the rank badge to see the full State ranking.Click here to see the full State ranking.
A newer community that may feature more recent facilities and programs.
Walk Score: 84 / 100 Rank #11 / 149Walk Score — State benchmarkedThis home is ranked 11th out of 149 homes we track in Montana for walk score. Shows how walkable this facility's neighborhood is compared to the average walk score across Montana facilities. Higher scores benefit residents, families, and staff.Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings cover every community we track in Montana that reports data for that category. Communities without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.Click the rank badge to see the full State ranking.Click here to see the full State ranking.
Very walkable. Most errands can be accomplished on foot, and many essentials are within a short walk.
About this community
Facility TypeAssisted Living Facility
StatusCurrent
IssuanceDecember 29, 2024
ExpirationDecember 28, 2027
License Number13217
Immanuel Living d/b/a The Terraces at Buffalo Hill is administered by Patty Cordell.
Accept Medicare
Rehabilitation Services
Respite Care
24-Hour Staffing
Pets not allowed
Fitness Center
Swimming Pool
Garden
Walking Paths
Dining
Bistro
Lounge
Salon
Parking
General Store
Library
Business Center
Specific ProgramsOutpatient Therapy
Starting Price$5,700 per month
Inspection History
In Montana, the Department of Public Health and Human Services, Quality Assurance Division is the state body responsible for inspecting and licensing all senior residential care facilities.
Since 2015 · 11 years of data
These figures come from state-published and/or federal inspection records. The period covered can vary depending on document availability.
2 deficiencies
1 inspection
Inspection Scorecard
This scorecard compares key inspection, deficiency, and complaint metrics at this facility against the Montana state average. Metrics rated ≥15% worse than average are highlighted in red; those ≥15% better are highlighted in green.
Since 2015 vs. Montana state average
Overall vs. MT average
0 Worse
No metrics in this bucket.
2 Better
Metrics better than Montana average:
• Total deficiencies (91% below)
• Deficiencies per inspection (39% below)
• Total deficiencies (91% below)
• Deficiencies per inspection (39% below)
Deficiencies
| This Facility | MT Average | vs. MT Avg |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Total deficiencies
Formal regulatory issues recorded by inspectors across all inspection types.
| 2 | 23 | This facility has 91% fewer total deficiencies than a typical Montana nursing home (2 vs. MT avg 23).↓ 91% better |
|
Deficiencies per inspection
Average deficiencies per inspection.
| 2.0 | 3.3 | This facility has 39% fewer deficiencies per inspection than a typical Montana nursing home (2 vs. MT avg 3.3).↓ 39% better |
Inspections
| This Facility | MT Average | vs. MT Avg |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Total inspections
Combined count of all inspections conducted at this facility.
| 1 | 7 | This facility has had 86% fewer total inspections than the Montana average (1 vs. MT avg 7). More inspections can mean more regulatory scrutiny rather than worse care.↓ 86% fewer |
Places of interest near Immanuel Living d/b/a The Terraces at Buffalo Hill
0.0 miles from city center
Estimated distance in miles from Kalispell's city center to Immanuel Living d/b/a The Terraces at Buffalo Hill's address, calculated via Google Maps.
Calculate Travel Distance to Immanuel Living d/b/a The Terraces at Buffalo Hill
Add your location
Compare Nursing Homes around the area
Info below is compiled from CMS reports & the MT Dept. of Public Health & Human Services (DPHHS), senior community websites & trusted data sources such as Walk Score & BBB.
Communities are listed from highest to lowest based on our ranking methodology.
The facility name. Click to view the full profile page on Assisted Living Magazine, including photos, services, and contact info.
|
CMS (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the federal agency that regulates nursing homes) Overall 5-star rating — a composite of Health Inspection, Staffing, and Quality Measures scores. 5 stars = top 10% nationally. 1 star = bottom 10%. The single most important number to start with when comparing facilities.
|
Care Types in This Table
NH (Nursing Home):
24/7 skilled nursing care for residents with complex, ongoing medical needs.
SNF (Skilled Nursing Facility):
Round-the-clock nursing care, often for recovery after surgery, injury, or illness.
RC (Respite Care):
Short-term temporary care that gives family caregivers a break.
HOS (Hospice Care):
Comfort-focused care for those with a terminal illness, prioritizing quality of life over treatment.
|
Neighborhood or city area where the facility is located. Proximity to family, hospitals, and green space matters for both quality of life and ease of visitation. Consider drive time and transit access when evaluating location.
|
Licensed bed capacity. Larger facilities (300+ beds) often have more specialized programs but can feel institutional. Smaller homes (under 150 beds) tend to deliver more personalized care. Compare with Avg Res/Day to understand how full the facility typically runs.
|
Percentage of licensed beds filled on an average day. Color indicates financial health: green (90%+) = operationally strong, typically profitable. Amber (80–89%) = stable but leaving revenue on the table. Orange (70–79%) = financial strain likely, may struggle with fixed costs. Red (<70%) = significant distress, closure or ownership change risk increases sharply.
|
This facility's occupancy rate compared to the statewide average for similar facilities. A positive number means above-average demand. Facilities running 5%+ above the state average are typically the most sought-after in their market — a strong proxy for reputation.
|
CMS-adjusted total nurse hours per resident per day (RN + LPN + CNA combined). The national average is approximately 3.5 hrs. Higher is better — more direct care time per resident. Below 3.0 is a red flag. CMS weights RN hours more heavily because RNs handle complex clinical decisions that CNAs cannot.
|
CMS Health Inspection star rating (1–5 stars), based on the 3 most recent annual state surveys plus any complaint investigations. This is the hardest rating to manipulate — it reflects real surveyor findings on-site. 5 stars = fewest deficiencies found. 1 star = most. It carries the heaviest weight in the Overall CMS rating.
|
CMS Staffing star rating (1–5 stars), based on daily nurse staffing hours submitted to CMS via verified payroll data. Compares RN, LPN, and CNA coverage relative to resident acuity level. 5 stars = well above expected staffing. Weekend staffing is evaluated separately, as that's where many facilities quietly reduce coverage.
|
CMS Quality Measures star rating (1–5 stars), based on 15 clinical outcome metrics including fall rates, pressure ulcers, antipsychotic drug use, and hospital readmissions. Captures actual resident health outcomes, not just compliance. High QM combined with low Health Inspection scores can indicate a facility with strong care but weak documentation practices.
|
Registered Nurse hours per resident/day compared to the statewide average. RNs are the highest-skilled nursing staff — they assess residents, manage medications, and respond to emergencies. A value of +50% means RN coverage is 50% above the state norm. Negative values are a concern for residents with complex or acute medical needs.
|
Total nursing staff hours (RN + LPN + CNA combined) per resident/day vs. the statewide average. A broader measure than RN vs State — it captures the entire care team. A facility can have high total staffing but low RN hours, meaning more aides and fewer nurses. Read both columns together for the full picture.
|
Total dollar amount of federal monetary fines (civil money penalties) issued by CMS in the past 3 years. Fines are only levied for serious violations — typically actual harm to residents, repeated uncorrected deficiencies, or systemic non-compliance. Even a single fine is noteworthy. Multiple fines strongly suggest a pattern, not isolated incidents.
|
Total health deficiency citations from the most recent standard inspection cycle. Minor citations (scope A–C) are common and often administrative in nature. Higher counts aren't always disqualifying, but should be read alongside Severe Citations to understand actual harm levels. Under 10 is strong for a large facility; 30+ warrants a closer look.
|
Average deficiency citations per CMS inspection (survey) in the reporting window — total citations divided by the number of inspections. Lower is better; compare alongside total Citations and Severe Citations for context.
|
Citations at CMS scope/severity level G or higher — G–I means actual harm occurred; J–L means residents were placed in immediate jeopardy. (D–F is potential for harm only). Examples include unaddressed falls, medication errors causing injury, neglect, or abuse.
|
Average number of residents in the building on any given day, derived from annual census data. Reflects true operating scale — a 400-bed facility running 200 residents/day operates very differently from one at 390. Higher resident counts generally mean more funded staffing hours.
|
Better Business Bureau rating (A+ to F). Reflects complaint history, business transparency, and how family disputes were resolved. A+ means no significant unresolved complaints. A blank (—) means the facility isn't BBB-accredited, which is common for healthcare providers and not necessarily a negative signal.
|
Walk Score® (0–100). Measures walkability of the surrounding area. 90–100 = Walker's Paradise. 70–89 = Very Walkable. 50–69 = Somewhat Walkable. Below 50 = Car-Dependent. Higher scores benefit family visitors, resident outings, and staff commuting.
|
The licensed owner or operator of record filed with CMS — the individual or organization legally accountable for the facility. Searching the operator name across other facilities can reveal chain or multi-site ownership, which matters: chain-operated homes tend to have more variable quality outcomes than independently run facilities.
|
What the home actually collects for resident care, after contractual allowances, bad debt and discounts — not gross billings. Taken from the latest complete annual cost report, so it is comparable across homes reporting the same period. Revenue alone doesn't indicate care quality, but it funds staffing and capital reinvestment. Pair with Payroll %. Figures are from each facility's most recent complete fiscal year — hover a value for the exact year; a * marks homes that report an older period than most facilities.
|
Staff salaries plus wage-related benefits from the latest complete annual cost report. Contract and agency labour is counted separately, under other operating costs, so a home leaning on agency staff can show a low figure here. Payroll is the cost most directly tied to care quality — compare with Payroll % for full context. Figures are from each facility's most recent complete fiscal year — hover a value for the exact year; a * marks homes that report an older period than most facilities.
|
Payroll as a share of NET PATIENT REVENUE (not gross revenue). Both figures come from the same cost-report year. A higher figure means more of each revenue dollar goes to staff pay. Read with the Staffing star rating to judge whether spend translates into coverage — and note that homes whose patient revenue covers only part of their operation can read implausibly high. The Montana average is: 47.0% Figures are from each facility's most recent complete fiscal year — hover a value for the exact year; a * marks homes that report an older period than most facilities.
|
CMS Certification Number: the unique federal identifier for this skilled nursing provider.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Libby of Cascadia, LLC dba Libby Care Center | NH SNF | Libby | 101
Facility
101
MT AVG
70
Rank
#24 / 103 |
75.5%
Facility
75.5%
MT AVG
65.6%
Rank
#12 / 30 | +15% | 3.37
Facility
3.37
MT AVG
4.53
Rank
#26 / 30 | -7% | -26% | $22.7k
Facility
$22.7k
MT AVG
$83.8k
Rank
#13 / 31 | 18
Facility
18
MT AVG
29.7
Rank
#8 / 31 | 4.5
Facility
4.5
MT AVG
5.7
Rank
#8 / 31 | 2 | 76 | - |
76
Facility
76
MT AVG
45
Rank
#19 / 149 | Cascadia Montana Operations LLC | $9.0MFiscal year ending 12/2023
Facility
$9.0MFiscal year ending 12/2023
MT AVG
$8.2M
Rank
#6 / 18 | $4.2MFiscal year ending 12/2023
Facility
$4.2MFiscal year ending 12/2023
MT AVG
$3.7M
Rank
#7 / 18 | 46.9%Fiscal year ending 12/2023
Facility
46.9%Fiscal year ending 12/2023
MT AVG
47%
Rank
#8 / 18 | 275040 | ||||
| Valle Vista Rehabilitation and Nursing LLC | NH HOS RC SNF | Lewistown | 101
Facility
101
MT AVG
70
Rank
#24 / 103 |
52.8%
Facility
52.8%
MT AVG
65.6%
Rank
#20 / 30 | -19% | 3.63
Facility
3.63
MT AVG
4.53
Rank
#17 / 30 | -39% | -20% | $0
Facility
$0
MT AVG
$83.8k
Rank
#1 / 31 | 15
Facility
15
MT AVG
29.7
Rank
#4 / 31 | 3.8
Facility
3.8
MT AVG
5.7
Rank
#4 / 31 | - | 53 | - |
79
Facility
79
MT AVG
45
Rank
#15 / 149 | Charly Bello Family Limited Partnership | $4.1M*Fiscal year ending 12/2022These figures are from this home's most recent complete cost report — an older period than most facilities report. Compare with that in mind. | $2.0M*Fiscal year ending 12/2022These figures are from this home's most recent complete cost report — an older period than most facilities report. Compare with that in mind. | 49.9%*Fiscal year ending 12/2022These figures are from this home's most recent complete cost report — an older period than most facilities report. Compare with that in mind. | 275021 | ||||
| Eureka of Cascadia, LLC dba Mountain View of Cascadia | NH SNF | Eureka | 49
Facility
49
MT AVG
70
Rank
#62 / 103 |
95.7%
Facility
95.7%
MT AVG
65.6%
Rank
#2 / 30 | +46% | 3.42
Facility
3.42
MT AVG
4.53
Rank
#26 / 30 | +2% | -25% | $0
Facility
$0
MT AVG
$83.8k
Rank
#1 / 31 | 13
Facility
13
MT AVG
29.7
Rank
#3 / 31 | 4.3
Facility
4.3
MT AVG
5.7
Rank
#6 / 31 | - | 47 | - |
58
Facility
58
MT AVG
45
Rank
#48 / 149 | Dianna Carvey | $3.3M*Fiscal year ending 12/2022These figures are from this home's most recent complete cost report — an older period than most facilities report. Compare with that in mind. | $2.1M*Fiscal year ending 12/2022These figures are from this home's most recent complete cost report — an older period than most facilities report. Compare with that in mind. | 62%*Fiscal year ending 12/2022These figures are from this home's most recent complete cost report — an older period than most facilities report. Compare with that in mind. | 275084 | ||||
| Logan Health – Conrad – LTC | NH | Conrad | 59
Facility
59
MT AVG
70
Rank
#59 / 103 |
68.1%
Facility
68.1%
MT AVG
65.6%
Rank
#17 / 30 | +4% | 5.01
Facility
5.01
MT AVG
4.53
Rank
#6 / 30 | +8% | +11% | $27.0k
Facility
$27.0k
MT AVG
$83.8k
Rank
#14 / 31 | 42
Facility
42
MT AVG
29.7
Rank
#18 / 31 | 8.4
Facility
8.4
MT AVG
5.7
Rank
#29 / 31 | 1 | 40 | - |
57
Facility
57
MT AVG
45
Rank
#51 / 149 | - | - | - | - | 275119 |
Frequently Asked Questions about Immanuel Living d/b/a The Terraces at Buffalo Hill
Is Immanuel Living d/b/a The Terraces at Buffalo Hill in a walkable area?
Immanuel Living d/b/a The Terraces at Buffalo Hill has a walk score of 84. Very walkable. Most errands can be accomplished on foot, and many essentials are within a short walk.
What is the license number of Immanuel Living d/b/a The Terraces at Buffalo Hill?
According to MT state health department records, Immanuel Living d/b/a The Terraces at Buffalo Hill's license number is 13217.
When does Immanuel Living d/b/a The Terraces at Buffalo Hill's license expire?
According to MT state health department records, Immanuel Living d/b/a The Terraces at Buffalo Hill's license expires on December 28, 2027.
How long has Immanuel Living d/b/a The Terraces at Buffalo Hill been in business?
Immanuel Living d/b/a The Terraces at Buffalo Hill has been operating for approximately 1 year, based on available licensing and registration records.
Are pets allowed at Immanuel Living d/b/a The Terraces at Buffalo Hill?
No, Immanuel Living d/b/a The Terraces at Buffalo Hill has a no-pet policy.
Who is the administrator of Immanuel Living d/b/a The Terraces at Buffalo Hill?
Patty Cordell is the administrator of Immanuel Living d/b/a The Terraces at Buffalo Hill.
How many beds does Immanuel Living d/b/a The Terraces at Buffalo Hill have?
Immanuel Living d/b/a The Terraces at Buffalo Hill has 140 beds.
Guides for Better Senior Living
Care Cost Calculator: See Prices in Your Area
Nursing Home Data Explorer
Don’t Wait Too Long: 7 Red Flag Signs Your Parent Needs Assisted Living Now
The True Cost of Assisted Living in 2025 – And How Families Are Paying For It
Understanding Senior Living Costs: Pricing Models, Discounts & Financial Assistance
Updated on
