The Bridges at Ankeny
3510 Northwest Ablilene Road, Ankeny, IA 50023 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 100 certified beds · (515) 963-9815 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (41) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $9,110 in federal fines (most recent 2026-03-17)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (99%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- CMS ownership filings flag it as owned by a private-equity firm or REIT — a category that performs worse on staffing on average, though that average says nothing certain about this home, and CMS filings undercount these ties, so other homes here may have them unflagged (what the research actually shows →)
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 | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 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 | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 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 held steady at 3 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 | 19.3% | 17.1% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.5% | 4.6% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 1.5% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 2.5% | 2.4% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.8% | 4.2% | 6.5% | better |
| 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 | 3.5% | 3.8% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 21.7% | 16.6% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 5.3% | 20.8% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.7% | 95.3% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.6% | 4.2% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 38.8% | 25.6% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 2.7% | 19.5% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.3% | 2.1% | 1.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 89.8% | 73.3% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 26.4% | 20.9% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 10.8% | 13.2% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.40 | 1.49 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.26 | 2.08 | 1.80 | better |
‡ 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.
66.8% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 303 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 73.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 163 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: not reported. This home filed no therapist hours at all in its payroll data for this quarter. That is a gap in what it reported, and we do not read it as an absence of therapy — the homes that file nothing here include ones that discharged hundreds of Medicare rehab patients in the very same period, who plainly received therapy from someone. Because we cannot tell a home that under-reports from one that genuinely provides little, this home is left out of the comparison above rather than scored at zero. Ask it directly how many therapist hours a rehab resident gets, and on which days.
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 | 66.8%CMS range 61.9–70.9 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.0%CMS range 6.4–11.8 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 73.0% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 68.7% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 66.9% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 98.4% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 98.3% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this 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 | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.5% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 2.1% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 5.2%CMS range 3.2–8.3 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.78 | 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 100 beds and averages 94.9 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 5 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. 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 3.55 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.78 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.23 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 3.13 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.72 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.87 to 0.56 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 99% is well above the national median of 45%. 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 fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. 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.
41 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 29 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2026-03-17 · 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 record review, policy review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure all residents received medication as ordered by a physician and failed to prevent potentially serious medication errors when staff administered the wrong medications or dosage for 3 of 3 residents reviewed (Residents #103, #105 and #102). Resident #103 received the wrong medications, transferred to the hospital where he was admitted to the hospital and had bradycardic episodes (temporary or sustained drop in heart rate below 60 beats per minute). The facility reported a census of 90 residents.The facility corrected the immediate concern prior to the survey on 3/9/26 when the facility staff implemented the following corrective actions: The facility conducted a root cause analysis of how and why the medication errors occurred. The facility did evaluations of medication pass with staff that are responsible for giving residents medications. The facility provided medication pass education, and review of the policy for medication…
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 before2024-09-19 · 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 2. The Quarterly Minimum Data Sample (MDS) for Resident #10, dated 06/24/24, which documented relevant diagnoses of heart failure, hypertension, renal failure, and respiratory failure. It documented Resident #10 is fully dependent for transfers, requiring two-person assistance and a mechanical lift device. The Care plan for Resident #10, last revised on 07/18/24, documented the resident requires two-person assistance with use of a mechanical lift device for all transfers. A direct observation on 09/17/24 at 12:20 PM revealed Staff K, Certified Nurses Aide (CNA), and Staff L, CNA, performing a mechanical lift transfer for Resident #10. During the transfer, Staff L failed to engage the stability legs to ensure the safety of the resident during the transfer. Additionally, Staff K failed to notice the stability legs were not engaged during the transfer. Additionally, staff members did not participate in a time-out to ensure safe strap placement for the resident before beginning to transfer. 3. In an interview 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 before2026-06-10 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
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 observations, interviews and documentation review, the facility failed to provide grooming for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #7). Resident #7 was noted to have caked dried on food in his mustache and beard on 2 separate days. Refusals of care were not documented. The facility reported a census of 96. Findings include:A Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], documented diagnoses for Resident #7 included stroke, hemiplegia (loss of strength/movement on one side of the body), and non-Alzheimer's dementia. A Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), documented this resident had a score of 3 out of 15, indicating that this resident had a sever cognitive deficit. Resident #7 required substantial to maximal assistance for personal hygiene, bathing, and transfers. On 6/8/26 at 3:45 p.m., Resident #7 was lying in bed. His beard and facial hair were crusted all around mouth with reddish dried on matter (food). This Resident did not answer when asked if staff help him with cleaning his beard. He looked away.…
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 · D2026-06-10 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolatedEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
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 resident interview, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to notify a qualified staff member of an intravenous (IV) pump that was not working properly resulting in a delay of the resident's continuous IV medication for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for medication administration (Resident #12). The facility reported a census of 96 residents. The facility corrected the noncompliance prior to the beginning of the survey on 6/9/26 by doing the following; a. The scheduler was immediately educated on the need to ensure a registered nurse (RN) or licensed practical nurse (LPN) with IV certification was on the schedule at all times while an IV is in the building. b. The master schedule was reviewed to identify and areas of concern that may not have IV staff. c. Staff education to LPN's who are not certified included the purpose as follows; to ensure safe resident care and prevent delays in treatment, all nursing staff must understand expectations for IV-related issues when and IV-certified nurse is…
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 · E2026-03-17 · 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, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed toEnsure sanitary and safe conditions in the three kitchenettes and six service areas in the facility maintained for food services. These failures posed the risk of food borne illness to the residents receiving food from the kitchenettes and service areas.Maintain best practices in accordance with professional standards of food service safety. The deficient practice has the potential to result in food borne illness among the residents that consumed food from the kitchen. The facility reported a resident census of 90. Findings include: Observation on 3/10/2026 at 12:35 p.m. of the 100 hall and 200 hall kitchenette revealed a stainless steel prep counter that had a coffee maker and toaster placed on it with crumbs on top of the toaster and a white dried substance on the counter with debris on the counter and the stainless steel shelf above the counter with debris on it. Observation and interview on 3/10/2026 at 2:15 p.m. of the 300 hall and 400 hall kitchenette revealed the reach-in freezer with dried…
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 before2026-03-17 · 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, observation, staff interviews and policy review, the facility failed to implement Transmission Based Precautions (TBP) for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for TBP (Resident #5). The facility also failed to demonstrate proper mechanical lift sanitation practices and Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) use to prevent cross contamination for 3 of 6 units reviewed for infection control (Units #100, #500 and #600). The facility failed to provide filter changes/cleaning to a non-invasive device (BiPAP) machine for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for BiPAP use (Resident#1). The facility reported a census of 90.Findings include:1.The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #1 had diagnoses of pneumonia, sepsis and obstructive sleep apnea. It also indicated that she did not have a BiPAP or had used it in the last 14 days. She had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15. The Care Plan initiated on 2/27/26 indicated that Resident #1 had an altered…
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 before2026-03-17 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when 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 clinical record review, observation, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to obtain orders and accurate settings for a Bilevel Positive Airway Pressure (BiPAP) to ensure safe and accurate delivery of respiratory therapy for 1 of 2 resident reviewed for respiratory care (Resident #1). The facility reported a census of 90 residents.Findings include:The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #1 had diagnoses of pneumonia, sepsis and obstructive sleep apnea. It also indicated that she did not have a non-invasive mechanical ventilator (BiPAP) or had used it in the last 14 days. She had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15.The Care Plan initiated on 2/27/26 indicated that Resident #1 had an altered respiratory status and diagnoses of pneumonia and obstructive sleep apnea. It lacked documentation of BiPAP use.The Nursing Admission/readmission assessment dated [DATE] indicated under the respiratory assessment that Resident #1 used a BiPAP…
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 · D2026-03-17 · tag F0732 — isolatedPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the daily nurse staffing information was posted for 18 days of the 31 days reviewed (February 10 to March 12, 2026). This failed practice had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility and their representatives, visitors, and others who wanted to review the facility's current staffing levels. The facility reported a census of 90 residents. Findings include: Observation on 3/10/2026 at 1:43 p.m. revealed the daily staff posting, located at the front of the building, to the right of the administrator's office was dated 2/28/2026. Previous postings were behind the 2/28/2026 form and included postings for February 10th, 12th through 19th, 24th through 26th, and 28th. There were no postings found for February 11th, 20th, 21st, 22nd, 23rd, 27th and after the February 28th posting. Observation on 3/11/2026 at 7:20 a.m. revealed the daily staff posting by the administrator's office remained the 2/28/2026 posted form. Observation on 3/12/2026 at 7:35 a.m. revealed the daily…
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 before2025-05-15 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — patternEnsure 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 observation, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to administer medications according to the Physician's order and in a timely manner for 4 of 4 residents reviewed. (Res #1, #2, #4 and #8 ) The facility identified a census of 84 residents. Findings include: 1. Review of the facilities Medication Administration Audit Report form dated 5.9.25 at 10:19 a.m. revealed the facility staff failed to administer the following resident medications according to their Physician's orders: Resident #1 - a. Morphine Sulfate (for pain) 20 milligrams (mgs) per milliliter (ml) 0.5 ml by mouth (po) every four (4) hours for pain, air hunger and/or shortness of breath (sob). On 4.15.25 the physician ordered time of admission had been 12 p.m. and 8 p.m. however staff actually administered the medication at 4:46 p.m. and 9:56 p.m. b. Magic mouthwash (thrush) 5 ml po every day (qd). On 4.16.25 the medication had been ordered at 7 a.m. but administered at 12:28 p.m. c. Ativan (anti-anxiety) 0.5 mg tablet po every 4 hours. On 4.16.25 the medication had been ordered at 8 a.m. and 12…
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 before2025-05-15 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — patternProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, a call light audit report, resident, family and staff interview, Resident Council Notes and facility policy review, the facility failed to answer resident call lights in a timely manner (within 15 minutes) for 2 of 7 residents reviewed. (Resident #1, #6 ) The facility identified a census of 84 residents. Findings include: 1. An observation 5.8.25 revealed the call monitor located at the nurse's station on the 300 hallway with the following: The call light on for Resident #10 for 16 minutes so far. The time on the monitor itself read 10:13 a.m. on the bottom right hand corner. Now the monitor read the call light on for 17 minutes then staff responded and turned the call light off. A Location Event Report form dated 5.8.25 included the following late call light response times: a. 9:56 a.m. until 10:13 a.m. - 17 minutes. 2. An observation 5.8.25 at 1:33 p.m. revealed the call light monitor at the nurse's station on the 600 hall with a call light on for Resident #9 for 18 minutes which had been turned on at 1:15 p.m. The time on the upper right hand corner of the…
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 before2025-05-15 · 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
Based on observation, clinical record review, staff and resident interview and facility policy review, the facility staff failed to follow appropriate infection control practices during an outbreak status and when 1 of 3 residents (Resident #4, #5) presented on barrier precautions. The facility identified a census of 84 residents. Findings include: 1. According to a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated 5.8.25 Resident #4 had diagnosis that included Renal Insufficiency, Anxiety, Chronic Respiratory Failure, muscle weakness and required assistance with personal cares. The assessment indicated the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 11 out of 15 (moderately impaired cognitive skills) and required substantial/maximum assistance with toileting hygiene. A Care Plan addressed a Problem area and Interventions as stated and dated below: a. Self-care deficit as evidence by required assistance with activities of daily living (adl's), impaired balance during transitions and required assistance with ambulation. (revised 4.22.25) 1. Assistance of one (1) with 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 · Dcited before2025-05-15 · 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
Based on clinical record review and staff interview the facility failed to maintain a complete and accurate Care Plan for 1 of 3 residents reviewed. (Res #1) The facility identified a census of 84 residents. Findings include: On an Encounter Note for Resident #1 dated 3.26.25 the Physician typed an addendum dated 5.14.25 with information that included the following: a. The patient was admitted to the facility under hospice care, with the diagnosis of a malignant neoplasm of the brain and lung. Part of the treatment included oral inhalers for breathing assistance. She was instructed to rinse her mouth after each dose of the inhalers. She refused to rinse her mouth after each inhaler treatment and she unfortunately developed stomatitis (a condition that caused painful swelling and sores inside the mouth.) It had been the Physician's opinion, within a reasonable degree of medical certainty, that the cause of the stomatitis was the patient's refusal of the oral rinses after the inhaler treatment. Review of the resident's Care Plan (not dated) revealed the facility failed to have…
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 · Dcited before2025-05-15 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, clinical record review, resident and staff interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide proper perineal care for 1 of 3 residents reviewed. (Res #4 ) The facility identified a census of 84 residents. Findings include: According to a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated 5.8.25 Resident #4 had diagnosis that included Renal Insufficiency, Anxiety, Chronic Respiratory Failure, muscle weakness and required assistance with personal cares. The assessment indicated the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 11 out of 15 (moderately impaired cognitive skills) and required substantial/maximum assistance with toileting hygiene. A Care Plan addressed a Problem area and Interventions as stated and dated below: a. Self-care deficit as evidence by required assistance with activities of daily living (ADL's), impaired balance during transitions and required assistance with ambulation. (revised 4.22.25) 1. Assistance of one (1) with a front wheeled walker (FWW) and provision of perineal care with every incontinence episode 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 · Ecited before2025-02-20 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — patternProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
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, clinical record review, document review, resident, family, and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide sufficient staff to ensure call lights were answered within a reasonable amount of time (within 15 minutes) to provide needed care and supervision to residents. Family members and residents reported having to wait thirty to sixty minutes for the call light to be answered numerous times during the week. Observation of the call light system revealed the call lights were answered between one to sixty four minutes. The facility reported a census of 83 residents. Findings include: Observations revealed the following: On 2/19/25 at 7:37 AM, the Palatium Care Monitor located at the nurse's station revealed call lights had been on for the following rooms and the amount of time the call light had been on at that time: room [ROOM NUMBER] - 21 minutes room [ROOM NUMBER] - 32 minutes room [ROOM NUMBER] - 24 minutes room [ROOM NUMBER] - 27 minutes On 2/19/25 at 7:45 AM, the Palatium Care…
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 before2025-02-20 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
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, family and staff interview, the facility failed to involve the resident and/or resident's representative in care conferences and ensure care conferences held at least quarterly for one of three residents reviewed for care conferences (Resident #63). The facility reported a census of 83 residents. Findings include: The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #63 had diagnoses of cerebrovascular accident (CVA)(stroke), cancer, and dementia. The MDS revealed the resident admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The MDS indicated the resident had severely impaired decision making skills. The MDS indicated the resident's preferences for the family or significant other to be involved in care discussions The Progress Notes dated 8/28/24 at 10:11 AM revealed a Care Conference was held on 8/28/24. In an interview on 2/17/25 at 1:29 PM, a family member reported only two care conferences held in the past year, and only one care conference held since the new company took…
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 before2025-02-20 · 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 direct observation, clinical record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to follow accepted professional standards and practices regarding medication being left in the open. The facility reported a census of 83. Findings include: 1. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #20, dated 02/06/2025, documented the resident was rarely or never understood. It documented the following relevant diagnoses: Hypertension (high blood pressure), Renal Insufficiency (kidney failure), Hyperlipidemia (high cholesterol), Alzheimer's disease, Non-Alzheimer's dementia, Malnutrition, Anxiety disorder, Depression, and hypokalemia (low potassium). The Care Plan for Resident #20, last revised on 12/03/2024, instructed staff members to administer medication as ordered and to monitor the resident for side effects and effectiveness. The Medication Administration Record (MAR) documented the resident was to receive Potassium Chloride ER 20 milliequivalents, once a day for low potassium.…
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 before2025-02-20 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
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, family interview and policy review the facility failed to provide oral hygiene cares as directed in the care plan for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for oral cares (Resident # 63 and #25). The facility reported a census of 83 residents. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #63 had diagnoses of cerebrovascular accident (CVA) (stroke), hemiplegia (paralysis on one side of the body), cancer, and non-Alzheimer's dementia. The MDS revealed the resident had impaired memory and severely impaired decision-making skills. The MDS documented the resident dependent for oral hygiene. The MDS assessment under Section L left blank, indicated the resident did not have broken or loosely fitting dentures or mouth pain. The Care Plan revised 2/27/24 revealed the resident had a history of CVA with left sided hemiplegia and required assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADL's). The resident had her own teeth. The Care Plan directed staff to encourage 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 · D2025-02-20 · 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 record review, observations, and family and staff interviews, and policy review the facility failed to carry out therapy recommendations and provide restorative exercises for 3 of 4 residents reviewed for restorative services and/or limited range of motion (Resident #36, #54 and #63). The facility reported a census of 83 residents. Findings include: 1. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #36 had diagnoses of cerebrovascular accident (CVA) (stroke), hemiplegia (paralysis on one side of the body), Alzheimer's Disease, dementia, and weakness. The MDS documented the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 8, indicating moderately impaired cognition. The MDS documented Physical Therapy (PT) and Occupational Therapy (OT) services started on 4/4/24 The MDS indicated the resident had impaired Range of Motion (ROM) to the upper and lower extremities on one side. The resident required partial to moderate assistance for eating, substantial 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 before2025-02-20 · 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 observations, record review, staff interview, and policy review the facility staff failed to ensure a resident's bed was placed in a low position to ensure the resident's safety for one of five residents reviewed for transfers (Resident #12). The facility reported a census of 83 residents. Findings include: The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated revealed 12/27/24 revealed Resident #12 had diagnoses of dementia, osteoporosis, and anxiety disorder. The MDS recorded the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 10, indicating moderately impaired cognition. The MDS indicated the resident dependent on staff for bed mobility and transfers. The Care Plan revised on 12/23/24 revealed the resident had impaired cognitive function and impaired thought processes as evidenced by short and long term memory deficit and impaired decision-making related to diagnosis of dementia. The resident also had a risk of falls related to poor safety awareness, functional impairment, and use 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 · D2025-02-20 · 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 record review, observations, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to provide complete incontinence care for one of four residents observed (Resident #27) for incontinence care. The facility reported a census of 83 residents. Findings include: The Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #27 had diagnoses of end stage renal disease, obstructive uropathy (a urinary tract disorder), and diabetes. The MDS indicated the resident had an indwelling catheter and had dependence on staff for toileting. The Care Plan revised 6/12/24 revealed the resident had a suprapubic catheter. The Care Plan directed staff to provide catheter care per facility policy. On 2/18/25 at 2:45 PM, Staff A, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) and Staff B, CNA, washed their hands and donned a pair of gloves. Staff A and Staff B transferred Resident #27 from the broda chair to the bed using a mechanical lift. The cushion in the Broda chair was visibly wet. Staff A and Staff B…
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 · D2025-02-20 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, resident and staff interview, and facility document review, the facility records failed to maintain complete and accurate documentation for 1 of 22 residents reviewed (Resident # 23). The facility reported a census of 83. Findings Include: The Annual minimum data set (MDS) for Resident #23, dated 02/06/2025, documented her brief interview for mental status score (BIMS) as 14, indicating intact cognition. In an interview on 02/18/2025 at 01:51 PM with Resident #23, she reported that on 02/12/2025 she was ambulating independently in her room when she slipped and fell over her four wheeled walker. She reported she was assisted to her feet by the Certified Nurses' Assistants (CNAs) and assessed after her fall by one of the nurses. She did not initially report pain, but noted that by 02/15/2025 she was in so much pain that her prescribed pain medication no longer helped. At this point she was convinced to go to the emergency room for assessment. She reports that after assessment in…
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 before2025-02-20 · 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 record review, observations, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure staff utilized Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP's) when cares provided for one of six resident sampled on EBP's (Resident #27). The facility reported a census of 83 residents. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #27 had diagnoses of end stage renal disease, obstructive uropathy, and diabetes. The MDS indicated the resident had an indwelling catheter. The MDS revealed the resident had dependence on staff for toileting. The Care Plan revised 6/12/24 revealed the resident had a suprapubic catheter. The resident required EBP's related to presence of indwelling suprapubic catheter. The Care Plan directed staff to implement and adhere to EBP's during completion of high contact activities, and hand hygiene prior to and after cares. Observations revealed the following: a. On 2/17/25 at 9:49 AM, an EBP sign hung on the wall in the resident's room and a 3-drawer bin sat on the floor by…
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 before2024-09-19 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — patternProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
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 observations, call light event report, resident, family and staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to answer call lights in a timely manner within 15 minutes and adequately assess and ensure sufficient staff to meet the residents' needs for 6 of 6 nursing units. The facility reported a census of 87 resident. Findings include: Observations revealed the Palatium Care Alert monitor located on the counter at the nurse's station revealed the following: a. On 9/17/24 at 12:28 PM, room [ROOM NUMBER]'s call light had been on for 20 minutes. b. On 9/17/24 at 12:49 PM, room [ROOM NUMBER]'s call light had been on for 32 minutes, room [ROOM NUMBER]'s call light had been on 18 minutes, and room [ROOM NUMBER]'s call light had been on for 21 minutes. c. On 9/18/24 at 3:31 PM, room [ROOM NUMBER]'s call light had been on for 33 minutes. The Detailed Event Report dated 9/11/24 - 9/16/24 revealed call light response times greater than 15 minutes in a 24-hour period on the following dates: 9/11/24 -50…
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 · E2024-09-19 · tag F0838 — failed to assess facility resources and resident needs — patternConduct and document a facility-wide assessment to determine what resources are necessary to care for residents competently during both day-to-day operations (including nights and weekends) and emergencies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on facility assessment review, and resident, family, and staff interviews, the facility failed to adequately evaluate their resident population and identify required resources and staffing levels needed to provide the necessary care and services needed for current residents. The facility reported a census of 87 residents. Findings include: A review of the Facility Assessment updated on 3/2024 revealed the facility assessment updated as indicated and whenever a significant change including facility capacity or the services provided. A facility assessment utilized to determine the resources needed to care for the resident population served during day-to-day operations as well as during emergency situations. The facility's assessment included the following: a. Part 1 - Resident Profile - Average census: 45-59 - Average Skilled Care residents per day: 15-25 - Average long-term care residents per day: 60-75 The facility assessment included the acuity of residents and the ADL (activities of daily living) assistance required for residents on the 300-400 and 500-600 halls. The…
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 · D2024-09-19 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
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, and policy review the facility failed to provide toileting assistance and care for a resident in an environment that maintained or enhanced dignity for one of ten residents sampled (Residents #7). The facility reported a census of 87 residents. Findings include: The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #7 had diagnoses of liver cirrhosis and cancer. The MDS indicated the resident had dependence on staff for transfers and toileting hygiene. The MDS documented the resident had frequent bowel incontinence. The Care Plan revised 7/18/24 revealed the resident had bowel incontinence and at risk for impaired skin and infection in the periarea. The resident also required assistance with activities of daily living (ADL's) due to incontinence. The Care Plan directed staff to provide assistance of two for toileting and keep the call light within reach for the resident to notify nursing he needed to use the toilet or had an…
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 · D2024-09-19 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on direct observation and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain a safe, clean, and homelike environment due to food being left on the floor of the dining hall for multiple days without having been cleaned. The facility reported a census of 87. Findings include: A direct observation on 09/16/24 at 12:19 PM of the memory care unit dining hall revealed eggs with a dried appearance on the floor and the tables of the dining hall, a garbage can overflowing with trash from previous dining services, as well as smears of jelly and and unidentifiable substance on the floors. These were not cleaned before seating residents in the dining hall and serving them lunch. A second direct observation of the memory care unit dining hall on 09/16/24 at 05:03 PM revealed the eggs and other food items remained on the floor from an earlier meal. The garbage had not been emptied. A third direct observation on 09/17/24 at 12:44 PM revealed the food items still on the floor, easily identified as now dry egg, smears of jelly, and unidentifiable substances remained in the same locations 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-19 · 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
Based on direct observation, family and staff interviews, and facility document review, the facility failed to follow Care Plans for 1 of 18 residents observed (Resident #3). The facility reported a census of 87. Findings include: The Quarterly Minimum Data Sample (MDS) for Resident #3, dated 07/19/24, documented relevant diagnoses of cerebral infarction (stroke), anxiety disorder, and non-Alzheimer's Dementia. It further documented a history of falls, and a daily behavior of scratching oneself. The MDS documented the resident had severely impaired cognitive skills for daily decision making. The Care plan, last revised on 08/07/24, documented the need for Geri-Sleeves (protective sleeves for the arms or legs that are designed to protect the resident's skin against skin tears, bruising, and abrasions) as well as fall mats to be placed by the bed while the resident is laying in bed to prevent injury in the event of a fall. The Medication Administration Record (MAR) dated from 09/01/24 to 09/18/24 directed staff as follows; (start date 1/10/24) Geri-Sleeves to both upper extremities 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 before2024-09-19 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when 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 direct observation, clinical record review, and family and staff interviews, the facility failed to administer oxygen and other respiratory treatments in accordance with physician orders and resident Care Plans for 1 of 13 residents on oxygen or respiratory therapies (Resident#3). The facility reported a census of 87. Findings include: The Quarterly Minimum Data Sample (MDS) for Resident #3, dated 07/19/24, documented relevant diagnoses of cerebral infarction (stroke), anxiety disorder, and non-Alzheimer's Dementia, congestive heart failure, respiratory failure, cerebral vascular event (stroke), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The MDS documented the resident had experienced shortness of breath when laying flat, and was on oxygen therapy. The Care plan, last revised on 08/07/24, documented the need for continuous oxygen via a nasal cannula. It did not specify what oxygen saturation was within a normal or ideal range for Resident #3. Review of the electronic health record (EHR) documentation…
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 · D2024-09-19 · tag F0800 — isolatedProvide each resident with a nourishing, palatable, well-balanced diet that meets his or her daily nutritional and special dietary needs.
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, staff interview, and facility document review, the facility failed to serve each resident with a nourishing, well-balanced diet that takes into consideration the preferences of the resident for 1 of 18 residents assessed (Resident #6). The facility reported a census of 87. Findings include: A direct observation of the meal service on 09/17/24 at 12:44 PM revealed a slow, chaotic service in which lunch did not begin being served until 01:13 PM. During the service kitchen and nursing staff were seen assisting residents in the dining room, but no assistance was provided to residents who chose to eat in their rooms or were otherwise confined to their beds. Meal service in the dining hall ended at 01:53 PM, at which point the remaining food, including two resident meals, was removed from the floor. A direct observation on 09/17/24 from 2:00 PM until 02:50 PM showed that after lunch service in the dining hall ended, the residents who had not dined with their peers in the dining hall were…
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 before2024-09-19 · 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 clinical record review, observation, staff interview, and policy review the facility staff failed to wear gloves and follow Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) and infection control practices for 1 of 10 residents reviewed (Resident #7). The facility reported a census of 87 residents. Findings include: The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #7 had diagnoses of liver cirrhosis, cancer, chronic kidney disease, and neurogenic bladder. The MDS documented the resident had a catheter. The Care Plan revised 9/10/24 revealed Resident #7 had a catheter and on EBP. The resident also had a history of urinary tract infection and sepsis (a life-threatening complication of infection). The Care Plan directed staff to use enhanced barrier precautions during completion of high contact activities. During observation on 9/16/24 at 1:50 PM, Staff F, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA), donned a gown and a pair of gloves. Staff F obtained supplies and drained the urine contents 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 · Ecited before2024-04-04 · 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 4. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #9, dated 3/15/24, documents the resident is always incontinent of urine and frequently incontinent of bowel. The MDS further documents diagnoses to include debility, cardiorespiratory conditions, coronary artery disease, heart failure and renal insufficiency. The Care Plan for Resident #9, with an initiation date of 4/2/24, documents under the problem section the resident is incontinent of bowel and bladder and instructs staff under the interventions section to clean peri-area with each incontinence episode. During an observation 4/2/24 at 2:34 PM, Staff J, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA), began to perform peri care to Resident #9 after an episode of bowel incontinence, with Staff K, Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), present. Staff J did not wash her hands prior to placing gloves on her hands to begin the peri care, and with a wipe cleaned back to front for the first swipe of peri care. The remaining wipes were performed front to back. The mechanical sling was…
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 F0622 — isolatedNot transfer or discharge a resident without an adequate reason; and must provide documentation and convey specific information when a resident is transferred or discharged.
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 interview, and policy review, the facility failed to provide discharge and medical information to the receiving health care institution at the time of discharge for one of four residents reviewed who transferred to the hospital (Resident #76). The facility reported a census of 82 residents. Findings include: 1. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #76 readmitted to the facility from the hospital on 2/11/2024. Review of the facility's electronic medical record Census List revealed Resident #76 had transferred to the hospital on 2/11/2024, and re-admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The Progress Note dated 2/11/2024 at 05:00 AM., documented that Resident #76 transported to hospital for placement of G-tube. The clinical record lacked documentation of information sent when the resident transferred to the hospital on 2/11/2024. During an interview 04/03/2024 at 4:17 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) reported no transfer form completed…
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 F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, 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 notify the Long Term Care (LTC) Ombudsman of a resident transfer as required for 1 of 4 residents reviewed who were transferred from the facility (Residents #76). The facility reported a census of 82 residents. Findings include: The Quarterly7 MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment dated [DATE] and the Census List for Resident #76 documented that the resident had transferred from the facility on 2/11/2024, and reentered the facility on 2/11/2024. The clinical record lacked documentation of notification to the LTC Ombudsman that Resident #76 had transferred to the hospital as required by federal regulation. During an interview 04/03/2024 at 2:47 PM the Administrator and Administrator's Assistant stated the facility did not report to the Ombudsman whenever residents had an Emergency Department (ED) visit In an email on 04/03/2024 at 01:47 PM, the Administrator wrote no ombudsman policy, they followed the state/federal regulations.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-04 · 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 clinical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to develop and update the comprehensive Care Plan with Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) Level II service recommendations for one of one resident reviewed who had a PASRR Level II determination (Residents #19). The facility reported a census of 82 residents. Findings include: The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #19 admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses of non-Alzheimer's dementia, anxiety disorder, depression, and bipolar disorder. The Care Plan revised 2/15/24 revealed the resident had a diagnoses of bipolar disease and at risk for extreme mood swings, agitation, and paranoia. The resident had a PASRR completed and a Level II determined. The Care Plan directed staff to follow any specialized services and specialized rehabilitation services recommended. The Care Plan lacked the PASRR recommended services. The PASRR dated 1/26/24 revealed a Level II…
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 before2024-04-04 · 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 observation, record review, family and staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for 3 of 18 residents reviewed for care plans (Resident #48, #55 and #76). The facility reported a census of 82 residents. Findings include: 1. The Entry Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #48, with a date of 12/27/23, documents the resident was admitted to the care facility on 12/27/23 from a skilled nursing facility. Review of the electronic health record (EHR) for Resident #48 reveals a progress note on 12/27/23, titled admission summary, documenting the resident admitted to the nursing facility with lower dentures. During an interview 4/2/24 at 10:02 AM, a family member advised there have been times while visiting Resident #48 the resident did not have her dentures in, the resident has a partial lower plate. During an observation 4/2/24 at 12:55 PM, Resident #48 was not wearing her dentures. This was during lunch service. The Care Plan for…
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 before2024-04-04 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
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 review and revise a resident's Care Plan (Resident #26) to meet the resident's needs for catheter care for 1 of 18 residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans. The facility reported a census of 82 residents. Findings include: The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] for Resident #26 documented the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 8, which indicated moderately impaired cognition. The MDS further documented diagnoses to include medically complex conditions, cancer, heart failure, cirrhosis, septicemia (blood poisoning by bacteria) and urinary tract infection (in the last 30 days). The MDS documented the resident admission date of 2/21/24 from a short-term general hospital. Progress Note BAA-SNF/Covid assessment dated [DATE] at 7:00 PM documented as follows; incontinent of bowel and bladder, pull ups, briefs, urinal used every two hours, and as needed. No urinary catheter noted. BAA-Order Note…
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 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, observation, staff interview, manufacturer instructions, and policy review, the facility failed to assure a medication error rate of less than 5%. During observation of medication administration, the facility had 2 errors out of 32 opportunities for error resulting in an error rate of 6.25% (Residents #11). The facility identified a census of 82 residents. Findings include: 1. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #11 had diagnoses of diabetes. The MDS documented the resident took insulin during the 7-day lookback period. The Medication Administration Record (MAR) for Resident #11 listed Glargine insulin 30 units subcutaneously (SQ) and Humalog (lispro) insulin 2 units SQ administered by Staff B, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) on 4/2/24 during the AM for diabetes. During observation on 4/2/24 at 8:20 AM, Staff B, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), prepared to administer insulin for Resident #11. Staff B reported Resident #11's blood sugar…
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 before2024-04-04 · 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 two of two insulin flexpens properly to ensure the proper amount of insulin administered during medication pass (Resident #11). The facility reported a census of 82 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #11 had diagnoses of diabetes. The MDS documented the resident took insulin during the 7-day lookback period. The Medication Administration Record (MAR) for Resident #11 listed Glargine insulin 30 units subcutaneously (SQ) and Humalog insulin 2 units SQ administered on 4/2/24 during the AM for diabetes by Staff B, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN). During observation on 4/2/24 at 8:20 AM, Staff B, LPN, prepared to administer insulin for Resident #11. Staff B reported Resident #11's blood sugar 249. Staff B dialed the Lantus flexpen to 30 (units), and the Humalog flexpen to 2 (units). Staff B administered the Lantus…
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 · D2024-02-01 · 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 observations, staff interviews, provider interview, clinical record review, and facility policy review the facility failed to provide assessment and intervention to identify pressure ulcer development for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #4). Resident #4 developed a wound on her coccyx and the nurse who applied the treatment failed to assess the area and identify the pressure ulcer (PU). The facility failed to do a nursing assessment when applying the treatment to the area. The wound on Resident #4's coccyx (tailbone) was determined to be a Stage 2 Pressure Ulcer. The facility's nurses were not staging pressure ulcers and there was confusion regarding who was to identify the areas as pressure and then stage areas if they were pressure. The facility reported a census of 96 residents. Findings include: The MDS (Minimum Data Set) 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…
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 before2024-02-01 · 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 staff interviews, observations, clinical record review, and facility policy review the facility failed to provide perineal (peri) care (groin and buttocks care) using accepted infection control practices for 1 out of 2 residents reviewed (Resident #4). An observation revealed that a Certified Nurse Aide provided peri care to Resident #4 without removing gloves between clean and dirty sites and used the same gloves to apply a cream to an open area on Resident #4's coccyx (tailbone). The facility reported a census of 96 residents. Findings include: A Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE], documented diagnoses for Resident #4 to include cerebral infarction, Stage 2 pressure ulcer of the sacral region, and non-Alzheimer's dementia. The Brief Interview for Mental Status for Resident #4 documented a score of 5 out of 15, which indicated severe cognitive impairment. The MDS documented the resident dependent on staff for transfers, required maximal assistance for turning from side to side and dependent on staff for…
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.
- No harm found · B2024-04-04 · tag F0641 — patternEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
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 interview, and policy review, the facility failed to accurately complete a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for one of eighteen resident's reviewed in the sample (Residents #19). The facility reported a census of 82 residents. Findings include: The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #19 admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses of non-Alzheimer's dementia, anxiety disorder, depression, and bipolar disorder. The MDS documented the resident not currently considered by the state level II PASRR (pre-admission screening and record review) process to have serious mental illness and/or intellectual disability or a related condition. The Care Plan revised 2/15/24 revealed the resident had a diagnoses of bipolar disease and at risk for extreme mood swings, agitation, and paranoia. The resident had a PASRR completed and a Level II determined. The PASRR dated 1/26/24 revealed a Level II outcome. The PASRR included the resident's…
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
$9,110 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $9,110 — penalty dated 2026-03-17
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.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to CAMPBELL STREET SERVICES — 22 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 3 of 5 | 2.1 | +0.9 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.0 | ≈ chain avg |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 3.4 | +1.6 vs chain |
The other 21 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.1★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
CMS ownership filings flag an owner of this facility as a private-equity firm. That’s a fact worth knowing: peer-reviewed research links private-equity and REIT ownership to lower staffing and more citations on average — though any individual home can run well or poorly regardless. Read the inspection and staffing record above on its own merits.
- BIRCHWOOD HEALTHCARE PARTNERS LLC — private equity · 50.40% share · 5% Or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest
Source: CMS SNF ownership filings (PECOS). These flags are self-reported and undercount — federal auditors (GAO) and researchers find CMS captures only a fraction of true private-equity and REIT ties, so the absence of a flag on other homes is not proof they lack investor owners. How investor ownership affects care →
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| HOLDCO ANKENY, IA, LLC | Organization | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/05/2024 |
| 5V+ SENIORS HEALTHCARE FUND GP, LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2024 |
| 5V+ SENIORS HEALTHCARE FUND, LP | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/04/2024 |
| BIRCHWOOD HEALTHCARE PARTNERS LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/05/2024 |
| INVESTCO ANKENY, IA, LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/05/2024 |
| BAKST, DAVID | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/05/2024 |
| BROWN, JEREMY | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/05/2024 |
| BROWN, STEVEN | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/05/2024 |
| DOLE, ISAAC | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/05/2024 |
| REALCO ANKENY, IA, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/05/2024 |
| 5V+ SENIORS HEALTHCARE GP MANAGER, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/01/2024 |
| CAMPBELL STREET SERVICES LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/05/2024 |
| OAKCO ANKENY, IA, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/05/2024 |
| MILLER, DANIEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/01/2024 |
| MOFFITT, MICHELLE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 08/21/2024 |
| PIERCE, WILLIAM | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 08/01/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 41 rows in the source record cover these 16 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
9 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
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.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. 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, FY2024). 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 165616. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-17, 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.