Adel Acres
1919 Greene Street, Adel, IA 50003 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 50 certified beds · (515) 993-4511 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- CMS lists it as a Special Focus candidate — not on the watch list itself, but among the homes CMS is watching because of its recent inspection history
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605, F0607) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has 5 actual-harm citations
- a high number of inspection citations overall (44) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $58,014 in federal fines (most recent 2026-03-26)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 1 to 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 26.2% | 17.1% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 7.0% | 4.6% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.5% | 1.5% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 3.5% | 2.4% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 22.0% | 4.2% | 6.5% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.7% | 3.8% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 19.8% | 16.6% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 33.0% | 20.8% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 81.0% | 95.3% | 95.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.3% | 4.2% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 22.7% | 25.6% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 15.9% | 19.5% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 2.1% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 4.3% | 73.3% | 79.4% | worse |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.12 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 8% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 25% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.02 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 50 beds and averages 38.8 residents a day — about 78% occupied, or roughly 11 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.02 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.42 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.98 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.46 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.25 on weekdays — 24% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.49 to 0.26 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
44 citations, most serious first. The 15 most serious are shown; the remaining 29 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2026-03-26 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, observation, written staff statement, personnel file review, staff interviews and policy review, the facility failed to provide adequate nursing supervision for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #1), which resulted in a resident falling from the bed to the floor, causing the resident significant pain and injuries. The facility reported a census of 41 residents.Findings include:The Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented Resident #1 had diagnoses to include stroke, arthritis, aphasia (a neurological disorder caused by brain damage that impairs a person's ability to speak, write, and understand language) and hemiplegia (paralysis of one entire side of the body) affecting the right dominant side. The MDS indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) should not be conducted as the resident is rarely/never understood. The MDS indicated the resident was dependent (staff does all of the effort, the assistance of two of more staff is required to complete the activity)…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2026-03-26 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review, facility document review, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a significant medication error did not occur for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for medication administration. Resident #35 received one dose of 25 milligram (mg) Oxycodone HCl (an opioid narcotic used for pain management) and two doses of 45mg Oxycodone HCl when Physician Orders stated to administer 15mg. The facility reported a census of 40.Findings include:The Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment completed on 3/10/26 revealed Resident #35 with a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 8, indicating a moderate cognitive impairment. Diagnoses include anxiety, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, depression, heart failure, and respiratory failure. The MDS noted the use of opioids for pain management. The Care Plan, with a target date of 6/5/26, identified Resident #35 with chronic pain related to history of back surgery, history of hip fracture, and neuropathy (nerve damage). Interventions included to monitor for side effects of opiate pain medication, such as…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2025-10-16 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, staff interviews, and policy review the facility failed to follow the physician's order to complete blood sugar (BS) checks and administer intravenous (IV) antibiotics for a resident with diabetes and an infection and failed to notify the physician when an IV antibiotic was not available/or able to be administered for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 residents reviewed. The resident was re-hospitalized for sepsis and had high blood sugars. The facility reported a census of 42 residents. Findings include:The Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #1, dated 9/9/25, included diagnoses of diabetes, septicemia (presence of bacteria in the blood stream), renal (kidney) failure, and aphasia (impairment in a person's ability to comprehend or formulate language). The MDS identified the resident was receiving insulin and hypoglycemic medication (medication for diabetes to lower the blood sugar levels). The MDS indicated the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 6, indicating severe…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2025-10-16 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on electronic health record review, document review, family and staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to promptly identify and intervene for a change in a resident's condition after falls for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for assessment and intervention (Residents #3 and #4). The facility reported a census of 42.Findings include:1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment completed 5/19/25 revealed Resident #4 with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 7 indicating severe cognitive impairment. Diagnoses include anxiety disorder, frontal lobe and executive function deficit, hemiplegia (affecting right dominant side), schizophrenia, and stroke. The MDS noted Resident #4 with two or more falls with no injuries since facility admission on [DATE]. The Care Plan, initiated on 5/16/25, identified Resident #4's impaired cognitive function and assessed at high risk for falls. Interventions included staff assist of 1 with walker and gait belt for transfers, asking yes/no questions to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2025-04-09 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, observations, family and staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure nursing staff completed weekly assessments and provide timely intervention (resulting in worsening of skin impairment) when a resident exhibited a change in skin condition for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for skin concerns or had a change in condition (Resident #30), and failed to document if oxygen provided to a resident when the resident's oxygen saturations dropped below the physician's ordered parameters for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for oxygen (Resident #30). The facility reported a census of 44 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #30 had diagnoses of heart failure, cerebrovascular accident (CVA) (stroke), chronic lung disease, pleural effusion, pulmonary embolism, chronic non-pressure ulcer on her buttock, and dementia. The MDS revealed the resident had severely impaired cognition. The MDS indicated the resident had…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2026-03-26 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespreadHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on facility record review, staff interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to staff a Registered Nurse (RN) for a minimum of eight consecutive hours per day for two of thirty (2 of 30) days reviewed. The facility reported a census of 40 residents. Findings include: Review of the nursing schedule for February of 2026, also including March 1-2 of of 2026, revealed no RN scheduled for the facility on the dates of February 14 and February 15. On 3/25/26 at 1:16 pm, via email, the Administrator stated there was no RN in the building on those days. The undated facility policy Nursing Services-Registered Nurse (RN) included the following documentation: Point 1: The facility will utilize the services of a Registered Nurse for at least 8 consecutive hours per day, 7 days per week. (The requirement for 8 consecutive hours of RN services can be met by any RN or multiples of RNs. The hours worked by the DON would be considered applicable towards the requirement.)
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2026-03-26 · tag F0851 — widespreadElectronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) Staffing Data Report (October 1 - December 31, 2025) review, facility record review, staff interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to submit accurate staffing records to CMS. The facility reported a census of 40 residents. Findings include: The PBJ Staffing Report for Fiscal Year 2026, Quarter 1, reflected the facility failed to have licensed nursing coverage 24 hours a day on ten days of the quarter. Review of the staffing schedule for these days reflected nursing management had worked floor shifts for five of these ten days and staff nurses had worked the remaining five days. On 3/25/26 at 2:27 pm, via email, the Administrator stated the facility underwent a corporate management transition during this quarter. He noted this was his initial PBJ data entry and reported he lacked access to October payroll records as they were maintained by the prior corporation and did not show up in the payroll system.The facility policy Payroll Based Journal, implementation date 11/1/2025…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-03-26 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, and policy review the facility failed to ensure appropriate kitchen sanitation practices were followed. The facility reported a census of 40. Findings include: Monthly Cleaning Checklists, obtained on 3/23/26, observed posted on the reach-in cooler door. Lists were divided up by position (AM Aide, AM Cook, PM Aide, PM Cook). All four sheets were dated for the month of March and listed out different cleaning assignments for each day of the week. Each sheet reflected the vast majority of daily cleaning assignments had only been addressed once during the month. There were several assignments that had no initials and indicated it had not been addressed. During the initial kitchen tour on 3/23/26 at 10:15 AM, the following noted: Drink pitchers without a label (product name or date) on 4 out of 8 pitchersBottom of reach-in cooler floor with dried liquid/food debrisMetal pan with 3 larger tubes of ground hamburger stored on shelf above ready-to-eat cold cuts (ham, turkey, hot dogs) with various incomplete labels (no open date)Plastic storage bag of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-26 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review, staff interview and policy review the facility failed to inform the resident in advance of the risks and benefits of psychotropic medications (medications that affect a person's mental state), the treatment alternatives or other options and was able to choose the option preferred for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for psychotropic medications (Resident #16). The facility reported a census of 40 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #16, dated 1/6/26, documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, indicating intact cognition. The resident had diagnoses to include stroke, anxiety disorder and depression. The MDS indicated the resident had taken antianxiety and antidepressant medication in the look back period. The Care Plan for Resident #16, with a revision date of 1/12/26, included a problem area the resident is at risk for adverse side effects due to use of antianxiety medication to aid with the treatment of the diagnosis of anxiety. The goal was for the resident to be free of adverse side effects from…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-26 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolatedPrevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to attempt a gradual dose reduction for a resident prescribed psychotropic medication (medication that affect a person's mental state) for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for medications (Resident #10). The facility reported a census of 40 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #10, dated 3/3/26, documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 8, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The resident had diagnoses to include non-Alzheimer's dementia and depression. The MDS indicated the resident was taking an antidepressant medication in the look back period. The Care Plan for Resident #10, with a revision date of 3/3/26, included a problem area the resident is at risk for adverse side effects due to use of antidepressant medication to aid with the treatment of the diagnosis of depression. The goad was for the resident to be free of adverse side effects from antidepressant medication use through the next review date. The interventions included: a. Administer…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-26 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to follow physician orders for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Resident #10). The facility reported a census of 40 residents. Findings include:The Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #10, dated 3/3/26, documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 8, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The resident had diagnoses to include renal insufficiency, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, hyperlipidemia and stroke. The MDS indicated the resident was taking a diuretic, a high risk medication, in the look back period. The Care Plan for Resident #10, with a revision date of 3/3/26, included a problem area the resident has edema/fluid volume overload and is at risk for selling/cracking/weeping of affected areas, shortness of breath, stiffness, ability to ambulate and infection. The goal indicated the resident will demonstrate stable fluid volume as evidenced through the next review date. The interventions included:a. Inform physician of any increase in edema.b. Labs…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-26 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to provide appropriate incontinence care for one (Resident #7) of one resident reviewed. The facility reported a census of 40 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #7, dated 12/30/25, included diagnoses of stroke, hemiplegia (paralysis affecting one side of the body), and anxiety disorder. The MDS identified the resident was dependent on staff for toilet hygiene, was always incontinent of urine and bowel. The MDS indicated the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 0, due to resident rarely/never understood. Observation on 3/23/26 at 11:13 AM, Staff A, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) and Staff B, CNA washed hands and applied gloves and gowns. With Resident #7 lying in bed, Staff B cleansed the resident's front peri area. Staff A and Staff B turned the resident to her side, removed a visibly wet attends, and with a clean cloth wiped between the buttocks 3 times, folding the cloth each time, with smears of bowel movement with each wipe, failing to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-26 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to document a medical rationale for adding additional psychotropic medications and increasing the dosage of a current psychotropic medication for 1 of 5 (Res #8) residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility reported a census of 40 residents. Findings include:The Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment of Resident #8 dated 9/9/25 identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 which indicated intact cognition. The MDS identified a PHQ-9 (Patient Health Questionnaire, a screening tool used to assess the frequency of depressed mood) score of 1, which indicated none to little depression. The MDS documented the resident displayed no behavioral symptoms, hallucinations or delusions during the look back period. The MDS documented diagnoses that included anxiety disorder, bipolar disorder and schizophrenia. The Comprehensive Care Plan identified a Focus Area of diagnosis of Bipolar, being at risk for mood swings, agitation, restlessness, poor concentration,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-26 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interviews and policy review, the facility failed to store drugs in a safe manner and in locked compartments. The facility reported a census of 41 residents. Findings include:During a continuous observation of medication administration on 5/27/26, beginning at 8:07 AM, Staff A, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), walked from the [NAME] hallway to the East hallway to obtain a narcotic from the main medication cart. Staff B, Certified Medication Aide (CMA), was the staff member responsible for the main medication cart located at this time in the East hallway. Upon arrival in the East hallway, observed the main medication cart to be unsupervised, with no staff member present. Several residents were observed in the hallway and near the hallway. Medications were observed located on top of the medication cart, to include a clear plastic medication container with several loose medications in the container, a medication card with two tablets remaining in the card (a medication of Spironolactone 100 mg), and a bottle of Sodium Bicarbonate 325 mg pills, approximately…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-26 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure appropriate puree portion sizes for two residents who received a puree diet. The facility reported a census of 40.Findings include:During on observation on 3/25/26 at 11:00 AM, Staff I, Dietary Aide, prepared the lunch meal for two residents on a puree diet. Upon entering the kitchen, Staff I had already pureed the Salisbury Steak to the correct texture. The puree meat was then immediately transferred to a serving dish on the steam table and covered. Staff I did not measure out the puree meat. Staff I explained they had placed two pieces of the Salisbury Steak in the food processor.After equipment had been washed and sanitized, Staff I spooned out two servings of cauliflower, placed in the food processor, and pureed until the correct texture achieved. Staff I transferred the puree cauliflower into a measure cup, obtained the measurement, and referred to the Pureed Diet Portion Sizes/Scoops for the scoop size to use for lunch service. The cauliflower was transferred to a serving dish on the steam…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 29 citations
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-26 · tag F0865 — failed to run a quality-improvement (QAPI) program — isolatedHave a plan that describes the process for conducting QAPI and QAA activities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of the facility's Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) plan, the facilities past 5 surveys, and staff interview, the facility failed to correct their own deficiencies for 2 of 2 areas of concern. The facility reported a census of 41 residents. Findings include:The facility had the following concern identified at the current revisit survey that had been cited at the previous 4 recertification surveys: a.Infection Prevention and Control The facility had the following concern identified at the current revisit survey that had been cited at the previous recertification survey and the previous complaint survey:b.Services Provided Meet Professional StandardsThe undated facility Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) Plan documented the facility will develop, implement, and maintain an effective, comprehensive, data-driven QAPI program that focuses on indicators of the outcomes of care and quality of life. The facility will develop and implement appropriate plans of action to correct identified quality deficiencies and act on available data to make…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-26 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to follow Enhanced Barrier Protection (EBP) and appropriately discard soiled wound care dressings for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for wound care. The facility reported a census of 40.Findings include:The Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment completed on 3/10/26 revealed Resident #35 with a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 8, indicating a moderate cognitive impairment. Diagnoses include peripheral vascular disease (circulation disorder commonly in the legs and feet) . The MDS noted the presence of a surgical wound, requiring wound care, as well as a foot infection. The Care Plan, with a Target Date of 6/5/26, stated Resident #35 required EBP related to the presence of a right ankle wound. Interventions include using EBP during high contact activities. The Order Summary Report, obtained on 3/25/26, listed the use of EBP related to right ankle wound. The report also noted the following wound care order for an abscess to the right heel surgical wound: 1. Soak one gauze packing strip in betadine; 2.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-10-16 · tag F0710 — isolatedObtain a doctor's order to admit a resident and ensure the resident is under a doctor's care.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure the resident had a physician that would provide orders and respond promptly to notification of a resident's elevated blood sugars (BS), abnormal blood lab work, and intravenous (IV) medication for infection not able to be administered for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 residents reviewed. The facility reported a census of 42 residents. Findings include:The Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #1, dated 9/9/25, included diagnoses of diabetes, septicemia (presence of bacteria in the blood stream), renal (kidney) failure, and aphasia (impairment in a person's ability to comprehend or formulate language). The MDS identified the resident was receiving insulin and hypoglycemic medication (medication for diabetes to lower the blood sugar levels). The MDS indicated the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 6, indicating severe cognitive impairment for decision-making.Resident's hospital Discharge summary dated [DATE]…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-09 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on direct observation, staff interview, facility documentation, and facility policy review, the facility failed to implement measures to ensure safety for each resident identified at risk of injury to themselves. The facility reported a census of 44. Findings include: The significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #7, dated 03/27/2025, documented the resident's Brief Interview for Mental Status score (BIMS) was documented as 02, indicating severely intact cognition. It also documented the following relevant diagnoses: hemiplegia or hemiparesis (partial or full paralysis), anxiety disorder, bipolar disorder, and cognitive communication deficit. A continuous direct observation on 04/06/2025 from 10:06 AM until 10:34 AM revealed the shower room door of the South Hall was open, the floor was visibly wet and the shower was still running. During the observation several residents were walking up and down the hall, with Resident #7 ambulating extremely slowly via wheelchair. During the observation surveyors positioned themselves near the door to the shower room to prevent…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-09 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. The facility reported a census of 44. Findings include: A direct observation on 04/06/2025 from 12:21 PM until 01:31 PM revealed the following: At 12:22 PM the Dietary Manager touched the top of the plate while she served food to a resident. At 12:27 PM Staff B, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) placed a clothing protector on a resident, making direct contact with the resident's skin, then served the resident plate while touching the top of the plate without performing hand hygiene. At 12:32 PM Staff B, LPN, again made direct contact with another resident, did not perform hand hygiene, and then began feeding two residents at the same time with no witnessed hand hygiene performed while switching from one resident to another. The Dietary manager was also seen continuing to serve resident meals holding the plates with her thumb near resident food. At 12:35 PM the Dietary manage made direct contact with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-09 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, observations, staff interviews, staff competency checklist and policy review, the facility failed to follow enhanced barrier precautions for 1 of 4 residents sampled and required enhanced barrier precautions and 1 of 1 residents observed for catheter care (Resident #26). The facility staff also failed to use a barrier when emptying the catheter. The facility staff also failed to follow infection control practices for 1 of 4 residents observed during cares (Resident #30). The facility reported a census of 44 residents. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #26 had diagnoses of neurogenic bladder, urinary retention, diabetes, and non-Alzheimer's dementia. The MDS indicated the resident had an indwelling catheter. The Care Plan revised 5/20/24 revealed Resident #26 had a suprapubic catheter and chronic urinary tract infections. The Care Plan directed staff to utilize a gown and gloves for enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) during…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-09 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, observations, resident and staff interviews, and policy review the facility failed to carry out therapy recommendations and provide restorative exercises for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for rehabilitation services and/or limited range of motion (Resident #17). The facility reported a census of 44 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #17 had diagnoses of cerebrovascular accident (CVA) (stroke), lymphedema and a chronic non-pressure ulcer on his buttock. The MDS recorded the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 15, indicating cognition intact. The MDS documented the resident had impaired range of motion (ROM) on one side of his body. The resident required substantial to maximum assistance for toileting, and partial to moderate assistance for transfers and ambulating 10 feet. The MDS recorded the resident had physical therapy (PT) services 7/21/23 to 8/18/23, and no days of restorative nursing program…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-09 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, observations, staff interview, manufacturer recommendations, and policy review the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5%. During observations of medication administration, the facility had 2 errors out of 30 opportunities for error resulting in an error rate of 6.67 % (Residents #19 and #22). The facility identified a census of 44 residents. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #19 had a diagnosis of diabetes. The MDS documented the resident took insulin 6 of 7 days during the look-back period. The Care Plan initiated 3/26/25 revealed the resident had diabetes. The Care Plan directed staff to administer diabetes medication as ordered by the physician. The Order Summary revealed to inject Novolog flexpen 100 unit/ milliliter (ml) subcutaneous (SQ) after meals and at bedtime related to Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus as per sliding scale: if 150 - 199 = 3; 200 - 249 = 5; 250 - 299 = 7; 300 - 349 = 10; 350 -…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-09 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, observation, staff interview, manufacturer's instructions, and policy review the facility failed to administer insulin according to the physician's orders for sliding scale insulin and per manufacturer instructions to ensure the proper amount of insulin administered for one of two residents observed who received insulin during medication pass (Resident #19). The facility failed to update sliding scale orders inside the plastic bin with blood sugar supplies for one of seven residents who took insulin. The facility reported a census of 44 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #19 had a diagnosis of diabetes. The MDS documented the resident took insulin 6 of 7 days during the look-back period. The Care Plan initiated 3/26/25 revealed the resident had diabetes. The Care Plan directed staff to administer diabetes medication as ordered by the physician and educate caregivers on the correct protocol for glucose monitoring and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-09 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolatedEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, menu review, record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to serve the appropriate portions for two of two residents who received pureed diets (Resident #5 and #25). The facility reported a census of 44 residents. Findings include: The facility's Fall/Winter Week 3 Menu for Monday lunch identified chicken, the vegetable of the day (peas), and a dinner roll to be served as part of the planned pureed textured diet for the lunch meal served on 4/7/25. The facility's Resident Summary Report listing each resident's diet identified two residents on a pureed texture diet. During observation on 4/7/25 at 11:37 AM, Staff E, Dietary Cook, reported two residents on a pureed diet, but she planned to make one additional serving. Staff E placed three dinner rolls and three chicken breasts into a robot coupe container, added some chicken broth, and blended the contents together. Staff C poured the contents into a measuring cup and reported a total of two cups. Staff C then poured the pureed contents into a metal pan on the steam table. On 4/7/25 at 11:44 AM Staff…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-09 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on direct observation, clinical record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to protect the personally identifiable information of residents for 1 of 14 residents reviewed (Resident #96). The facility reported a census of 44. Findings include: The Care plan for Resident #96, completed on 04/07/2025, identified the resident had received a skin graft after cancer surgery. It did not document how often or how to bathe the resident. A direct observation on 04/06/2025 at 10:30 AM revealed a note, taped to the staff schedule and facing the dining room accessible to all visitors in the facility, where Resident #96's care information was posted. It documented Resident #96 had a skin graft, currently had a drainage port, and that the resident was limited to only receiving bed baths due to the skin issues. It identified Resident #96 by full name. A direct observation on 04/06/2025 at 01:31 PM revealed an unidentified staff member take the note down from the staff schedule after lunch dining service. In an interview on 04/09/2025 at 12:23 PM with Staff…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-12-17 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews and policy review, the facility failed to secure prescribed medications from the possibility of unauthorized access. The facility reported a census of 42 residents. Findings included: On 12/16/24 at 9:03 AM, two medication carts were observed in front of the nurses' station and facing the dining room Staff A, Certified Medication Aide (CMA) was observed preparing medications at one of the medication carts. She took medications into the dining room with her back positioned toward both medication carts. Both medication carts were observed unlocked with no other staff present. At 9:06 AM, Staff B, Registered Nurse (RN) walked up to the first laptop, put something in the medication cart, then locked it and walked away. At 12:40 PM, Staff B, RN, stated the medication carts should be locked when staff walks away from them. On 12/17/24 at 8:49 AM, Staff A, CMA stated the medication cart should be locked when staff walks away from it and it is never ok to leave it unlocked at that time. She stated she just forgot to lock it on 12/16/24. On 12/17/24 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-12-17 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to properly protect resident information from unauthorized access. The facility reported a census of 42 residents. Findings include: On 12/16/24 at 9:03 AM, two (2) unlocked laptops were observed sitting on medication carts. Staff A, Certified Medication Aide (CMA) walked away from one of the laptops, turned her back to both, and gave medication to a resident. Both laptop screens faced an occupied dining room and had multiple residents' information visible. At 9:06 AM, Staff B, Registered Nurse (RN) walked up to the first laptop, put something in the medication cart, then locked the laptop screen. At 12:50 PM, Staff B, RN, stated when staff walks away from the medication cart, the laptop screen and cart should be locked. She also stated if staff's back is toward the laptop, the cart and laptop should be locked. On 12/17/24 at 8:49 AM, Staff A, CMA stated the medication cart should be locked when staff walks away from it and it is never ok to leave it unlocked at that time. She stated she just forgot to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-12-17 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on direct observation, clinical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to grant a resident the right to choose to wear personal clothing for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #5). The facility reported a census of 42. Findings include: The Annual Minimum data set (MDS) for Resident #5, dated 12/22/2023, included the following relevant diagnoses: diabetes mellitus (diabetes), cerebrovascular accident (stroke), above the knee amputation of the left leg. It documented the resident was dependent on staff for dressing his lower body and required moderate assistance to dress his upper body. It further documented the resident was dependent on staff for all transfers. The Quarterly MDS for Resident#5 documented that a 14 out 15 score for the Brief Interview for Mental Status, which indicated intact cognitive skills. The Care Plan for Resident #5, last revised on 11/14/2024, documented Resident #5 required staff assistance to dress. It also advised readers to document observed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-12-17 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to implement the resident's Care Plan for 1 of 3 residents who fell (#3). The facility reported a census of 42 residents. Findings include: The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 02 out of 15 which indicated severely impaired cognition. It included diagnoses of Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD), Diabetes Mellitus (DM), cerebral infarction due to embolism of middle cerebral artery (stroke caused by a blood clot), intracerebral hemorrhage (stroke caused by brain bleed), hemiplegia (one-sided paralysis), aphasia (loss of ability to understand or express speech), and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). It also revealed the resident was independent with oral hygiene, required setup assistance with personal hygiene, supervision with eating and toileting hygiene, moderate assistance with upper body dressing, maximum assistance with bathing and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-12-17 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to provide assessment and interventions for 1 of 3 residents who fell (#3). The facility reported a census of 42 residents. Findings include: A Facility reported Incident revealed Resident #3 fell on [DATE] at 2:12 AM. The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 02 out of 15 which indicated severely impaired cognition. It included diagnoses of Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD), Diabetes Mellitus (DM), cerebral infarction due to embolism of middle cerebral artery (stroke caused by a blood clot), intracerebral hemorrhage (stroke caused by brain bleed), hemiplegia (one-sided paralysis), aphasia (loss of ability to understand or express speech), and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). It also revealed the resident was independent with oral hygiene, required setup assistance with personal hygiene, supervision with eating and toileting hygiene,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-12-17 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to implement the infection control policy as staff failed to perform hand hygiene during medication administration for one (1) resident (#4) and between feeding two (2) residents (#10, #11). The facility staff also failed to clean a mechanical lift between two residents' use (#6, #9). The facility reported a census of 42 residents. Findings include: 1) On 12/16/24 at 9:09 AM, Staff A, Certified Medication Aide (CMA) prepared Resident #4's medications at a medication cart. One (1) pill fell into the top drawer and Staff A grabbed it with her bare hand and placed it back into the resident's medication cup. She then took it to the resident. At 12:40 PM, Staff B, Registered Nurse (RN) stated if a medication fell and landed anywhere outside the resident's cup, it should be discarded and replaced. She said it was not ok to grab the pill and put it in the resident's cup and give it to them. At 12:45 PM, Staff A, CMA stated if a med fell anywhere other than the resident's medication cup, it should be discarded.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-03 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on the clinical record review, observation, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to follow physician orders for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for medication orders (Resident #1). The facility reported a census of 45 residents. Findings include: The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 2 which indicated severe cognitive impairment. The MDS revealed the Resident Mood Interview score of 14 which indicated moderate depression. The MDS revealed the resident did not have any behaviors. The MDS revealed the resident is maximal assist for eating and dependent level of care for oral hygiene, toileting hygiene, bathing, upper and lower body dressing, putting on and taking off footwear, personal hygiene, roll left and right, and transfers. The MDS reflected the resident always incontinent of bowel and bladder. The MDS documented diagnoses that included: Heart Failure, Hypertension, End-Stage Renal Disease,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-05-23 · tag F0851 — widespreadElectronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) Staffing Data Report (October 1 - December 31) review, facility staffing reports review, employee time cards review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to submit accurate staff reports for the PBJ Staffing Data Report. The facility reported a census of 40 residents. Findings include: The PBJ Staffing Data Report run date 5/15/24 triggered for Excessively Low Weekend Staffing - submitted weekend staffing data is excessively low, and failed to have licensed nursing coverage 24 hours/day - 4 or more days within the quarter with <24 hours/day licensed nursing coverage with specific infraction dates. The report reflected 19 dates with failure to provide 24 hour/day nursing coverage. Review of Facility Daily Assignment Sheets for each day of the months of October, November and December staffing revealed staffing for nurses and Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) scheduled similarly for weekdays and weekends. The documents identified the CNA coverage of shifts by the Director of Nursing (DON),…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-05-23 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure dietary staff practiced food safety procedures when preparing and serving resident meals to reduce the risk of cross contamination and foodborne illness. The facility reported a census of 40 residents. Findings include: During dining observation on 5/20/24 at 12 PM, Staff A, dietary aide, observed wearing a T-shirt with numerous small holes on the front as well as a large, wet stain covering approximately 25%. No apron or clothing protector seen. During kitchen observation on 5/22/24 from 1130 am-1230 am, Staff B, dietary cook, prepared hamburger patties while pureeing lunch items. When she obtained hot water for a puree item, she was seen flipping the hamburger patties as walking by and then resumed pureeing. No hand hygiene was observed in-between these tasks. Staff B, dietary cook, also failed to obtain a final cooking temperature prior to serving the hamburger to residents. Staff B, dietary cook, worked the steam table/prepared resident lunch plates. She was observed coughing and/or sneezing…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-23 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to assure resident's or their representatives completed the Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) Advanced Beneficiary Notices (ABN)/clarified their wishes for 2 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #10 and #37). The facility reported a census of 40 residents. Findings include: 1) According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], Resident #10 scored 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) indicating no cognitive impairment. The SNF ABN form notified Resident #10 beginning on 2/9/24 he may have to pay out of pocket for (skilled) care. The resident signed the form, but the rest of the writing was someone else's. The resident did not choose an option for how he wanted to proceed. The clinical record lacked documentation that the facility asked Resident #10 about choosing an option. 2) According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], Resident #37 scored 4 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) indicating severe…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-23 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on personnel file reviews, staff interviews, and policy review the facility failed to complete the Iowa Criminal History, Iowa Sex Offender Registry, Iowa Central Abuse Registry and Professional License information prior to employment for 1 of 5 employees reviewed (Staff C). The facility census was 40. The personnel file for Staff C, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA), reflected a rehire date of 3/11/24. The file lacked the background check. On 5/22/24 at 1:37 PM the Business Office Manager reviewed Staff C's personnel file and confirmed the only Iowa Criminal History, Iowa Sex Offender Registry, Iowa Central Abuse Registry and Professional License in the file was dated 10/24/23. The staff completed an online verification via the facility's The Single Contact Repository (SING) account for Staff C's background check. The Business Office Manager acknowledged the facility failed to complete a background check for Staff C prior to rehire. The staff stated the facility practice was only the Business Office Manager was to complete the background checks. The background checks would be…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-23 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to submit a Level 2 Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASSR) evaluations for a change in diagnoses or treatment for 2 of 4 residents reviewed (Resident #40 and #18). The facility reported a census of 40. Findings include: 1) The Quarterly Minimal Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented Resident #40 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 1 indicating a severe cognitive impairment. The MDS further documented the resident had diagnoses including depression, anxiety, and a psychotic disorder (other than schizophrenia). The MDS reports the use of high-risk medications including an antianxiety, antidepressant, and antibiotic medications. Current medication orders, as of 5/23/24, include Lamotrigine 25 milligram (mg) daily related to unspecific psychosis (medication initiated on 3/5/24), Sertraline HCl 50mg daily related to anxiety disorder and depression (medication initiated on 2/2/24), Lorazepam 0.5mg three times daily related to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-23 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to assure appropriate care of a catheter for 1 resident reviewed with a catheter (Resident #37). The facility reported a census of 40 residents. Findings include: According to the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], Resident #37 scored 4 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) indicating severe cognitive impairment. The resident depended on staff for toileting hygiene. The resident had an indwelling urinary catheter. The resident had diagnoses including obstructive uropathy (blockage in urinary tract). The Care Plan with a goal target date of 10/23/24 identified the resident had bowel incontinence related to immobility. The interventions included checking the resident every two hours and assisting with toileting as needed, providing pericare after each incontinent episode, and utilizing briefs for dignity. The Care Plan revised 5/15/24 identified the resident required an indwelling catheter due to a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-23 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and staff interview the facility failed to assure residents received the recommended dietary interventions for a history of significant weight loss for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #37). The facility reported a census of 40 residents. Findings include: According to the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], Resident #37 scored 4 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) indicating severe cognitive impairment. The resident depended on staff for toileting hygiene. The resident had diagnoses malnutrition. The Care Plan revised 9/5/23 identified the resident had a potential nutritional problem related to depression, hypertension. The interventions included the resident ate in the dining room (DR), and the registered dietician to evaluate and make diet change recommendations as needed. An EHR Supplement Orders dated 5/22/24 documented Resident #37 had Supplement 2.0, 3 times a day for weight loss. A Nutritional Evaluation dated 5/15/24 documented…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-23 · tag F0836 — isolatedEnsure the facility is licensed under applicable State and local law and operates and provides services in compliance with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws, regulations, and codes, and with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to offer and complete the Veterans Administrator form for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for VA (Resident #30). The facility failed to file the residents paperwork for eligibility for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for VA (Resident #22). The facility reported a census of 40 residents. Findings include: 1. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] documented Resident#30's admission date was 11/28/23. The facility's Action Summary, revealed Resident #30 admitted to facility on 11/28/2023. The VA paperwork was not found for Resident #30. 2. The facility's Action Summary, revealed Resident #22 admitted to facility on 8/1/2023. The paperwork was not submitted to the VA for eligibility status for Resident #22. On 05/23/24 10:55 AM the Administrator acknowledged unable to locate missing documentation for Resident #30. On 05/23/24 12:02 PM the Administrator acknowledged that paperwork was not submitted to the VA for eligibility for Resident #22. On…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-23 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide care in a manner to prevent infection for 2 of 13 residents reviewed (Resident #30 and #37). The facility reported a census of 40 residents. Findings include: 1) According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], Resident #30 scored 2 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) indicating severe cognitive impairment. The resident depended on staff for toileting hygiene. The resident's diagnoses included a stroke. The Care Plan revised 5/14/24 identified the resident had potential/actual impairment to skin integrity of the buttock and arms related to fragile skin, incontinence, limited mobility moisture associated skin damage to the right and left buttock and sacrum. Interventions included providing peri care after each incontinent episode. On 5/21/24 at 11:45 a.m. Staff I Registered Nurse (RN), Staff E Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) , Staff F CNA and Staff G CNA went in to change the resident before…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-04 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, hospital clinical record review, hospital images, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to identify a resident with pressure ulcers/wounds and to assure the resident received treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing of ulcers/wounds for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #1). The facility reported a census of 45 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment identifies the definition of pressure ulcers: Stage I is an intact skin with non-blanchable redness of a localized area usually over a bony prominence. Darkly pigmented skin may not have a visible blanching; in dark skin tones only it may appear with persistent blue or purple hues. Stage II is a partial thickness loss of dermis presenting as a shallow open ulcer with a red or pink wound bed, with slough (dead tissue, usually cream or yellow in color). May also present as an intact or open/ruptured blister. Stage III is full thickness…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-04 · tag F0868 — isolatedHave the Quality Assessment and Assurance group have the required members and meet at least quarterly
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on the review of the Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) sign in sheets, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure all required members attended the quarterly Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) meetings. Specifically, the Director of Nursing (DON)/Infection Preventionist(IP) failed to be present for 2 of the 4 quarterly meetings reviewed. The facility reported a census of 45 residents. Findings include: Review of the QAPI meeting sign-in sheets from April 2023 to March 2024, provided by the Administrator on 4/2/24, revealed the DON/Infection Preventionist attended the meeting on 4/18/23 and 3/12/24. On 4/4/24 at 10:58 AM, the Administrator acknowledged and verified the QAPI sign in sheets lacked the DON/IP signatures except for the months of April 2023 and March 2024. The facility policy titled QAPI last reviewed on 8/20/20 documented the QAA will meet monthly and include the following team members: Administrator, DON, Medical Director, IP, Social Services Designee, Activities Director, Environmental Services, Dietary Manager, Medical…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$58,014 in federal fines across 3 penalties. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.
- $19,135 — penalty dated 2026-03-26
- $22,335 — penalty dated 2026-03-26
- $16,544 — penalty dated 2025-10-16
- Medicare payment denial — starting 2026-04-24 for 52 days
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership Data Not Available |
The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $248K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in IA
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Iowa Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 165555. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-26, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.