No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Friendship Home Association

714 Division, Audubon, IA 50025 · Non profit - Corporation · 46 certified beds · (712) 563-2651 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (712) 563-2651 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0607) — cited Aug 2024$11,536 in federal fines
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • the CMS record shows $11,536 in federal fines (most recent 2023-11-06)
  • nursing-staff turnover (60%) runs well above the national median (45%)

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.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
215 Main St · (712) 999-2237 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
316 Broadway St · (712) 563-2655 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
104 Market St · (712) 563-2519 · Call to confirm hours
Park
1108 S Division St · (712) 563-2742 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
815 E Division St · (712) 563-3333

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 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 3 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 3 to 5 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.

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased17.9%17.1%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight6.3%4.6%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%1.5%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection4.9%2.4%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms3.2%4.2%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury1.2%3.8%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened12.7%16.6%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication16.7%20.8%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine97.7%95.3%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers0.7%4.2%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control20.1%25.6%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table36.5%19.5%17.1%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.321.491.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days3.312.081.80worse

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.

0.11U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.05hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.01hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.11 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 7% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 2% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identifiednot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF staynot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsenednot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalizationnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFsnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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

0.54
RN hours/ resident / day
0.71
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.66
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.92
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.40
RN hoursweekends
60.5%
Total nursing turnover
60.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 46 beds and averages 37.0 residents a day — about 80% occupied, or roughly 9 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.92 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.54 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.66 is at or above 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 3.34 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.16 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.60 to 0.40 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 60% is well above the national median of 45%.

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

0
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-06-19)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2024-08-01)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

11 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · D2025-09-04 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
    Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on Electronic Health Records (EHR) review, observation, document review, Medication Administration Record - Treatment Administration Record (MAR-TAR), staff interview and family interview the facility failed to notify the resident's representative / family / Power of Attorney (POA) for a new physicians order and change in condition when a wander guard was placed on the resident for 2 of 3 residents (Residents #2 and #3) reviewed. The facility reported a census of 42 residents. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented Resident #2 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 2 indicating severe cognitive impairment. The MDS also documented Resident #2 had diagnoses of dementia with psychotic disturbances and Alzheimer's disease with late onset. Review of Resident #2's undated EHR titled, Clinical Resident Profile documented Resident #2 had a POA.Observation on 9/3/25 of Resident #2 with a wander guard placed on the right lower leg.Review of Resident #2's MDS dated…

    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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-09-04 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical Medication Administration Records - Treatment Administration Records (MAR-TAR), Electronic Health Records (EHR) review, document review, family interview, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to provide adequate nursing supervision when a resident left the facility from a Chronic Confusion or Dementia Illness (CCDI) unit and walked outside into the back yard of a neighboring resident unknown to the staff for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed. The facility reported a census of 42. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3 indicating severe cognitive impairment. The MDS documented utilization of a wander guard and wandering behavior had occurred 1-3 days reviewed for the MDS.Review of Resident #1's EHR dated 8/4/25 at 7:15 PM by Staff A, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) titled, Progress Notes documented that Resident #1 was found outside across the back parking lot on 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-08-01 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — pattern
    Develop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on personnel document review, facility document review, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to implement the abuse and neglect policy by not completing background checks prior to staff employment. The facility reported a census of 40 residents. Findings include: Review of background check for Staff E revealed the background check was completed 2/13/24. Review of an untitled document with staff phone number and hire dates provided by the facility revealed a hire date for Staff E of 11/30/23. During an interview 7/30/24 at 11:46 AM with the Administrator revealed that Staff E had worked at the facility prior to her being rehired 11/30/23. The Administrator further revealed she thinks that the background check got missed upon rehire and was completed again 2/13/24. The Administrator then revealed that her expectation would be for background checks to be completed prior to working at the facility. Review of a facility provided policy with a subject of background checks dated 1/29/21 documented: a. Background checks will be completed on all new hires per state…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-08-01 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — pattern
    Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility document review, observations, staff interview and policy review the facility failed to ensure that residents were served the food as listed on the menu, and failed to accurately measure the pureed food items for 3 of 3 residents reviewed. The facility reported a census of 40 residents. Findings include: According to the Week at a Glance Menu for Week 5; the lunch meal on 7/30/24 included ham loaf with pineapple sauce, potato, broccoli, bread/margarine, ice cream and milk. The pureed meal would include pureed bread with margarine. On 7/30/24 at 10:00 AM Staff A, Dietary Aide/Cook, prepared the broccoli for 3 residents that required pureed foods. She used a small hand-held mixer and said that she had added water earlier to aide in the pureeing process. After getting the vegetable to the desired consistency, she put it in the dish, covered it with tin foil and put it in the oven. Staff A then got the ham loaf out of the oven and said she had 6 mechanical soft and 3 pureed to prepare. She dished…

    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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-08-01 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, staff interviews and policy review the facility failed to ensure that open containers of food had been dated. Staff failed to provide safe hand hygiene procedures during meal service. The facility reported a census of 40 residents. Findings include: In an observation of the walk-in refrigerator with the Dietary Manager (DM) on 7/29/24 at 9:45 AM, it was discovered that there were three large bags of shredded cheese and a bag of shredded lettuce that had been opened and half-used. The bags did not have a date written on them to indicate when they were opened. At the front of the walk-in, there was a tray cart on wheels that contained a tray of individual cups of pudding, uncovered and undated. On the top shelf, there was an opened bag of cubed cheese that had been opened, with no open date. As the DM lifted the bag, it was revealed to have some mold spots on a couple cheese cubes at on the bottom of the bag. The DM said that she expected staff to enter the open date on the bags and to pay attention to outdates. In the freezer, an open bag of what looked to be…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-01 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
    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 document review, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to have the correct documentation of residents choice related to advanced directives for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #27) reviewed. The facility reported a census of 40 residents. Findings include: Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #27 dated [DATE] revealed Resident #27 was admitted to the facility [DATE]. Review of a document titled, Iowa Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment (IPOST) dated [DATE] revealed there was a selection for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR). This document further revealed the IPOST was signed by the Physician and Resident #27 ' s representative. Review of the Electronic Health Records (EHR) on [DATE] revealed a document titled, Clinical Physician Orders that revealed an order for Full Code status with a start date of [DATE]. Review of Resident #27 ' s Care Plan with a revision date of [DATE] revealed that Resident 27 ' s family requested DNR status. During an interview [DATE] at…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-11-09 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
    Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to provide food served by a method to maintain a safe and appetizing temperature. The facility reported a census of 43. Findings include: During a continuous observation on 11/7/23 beginning at 11:15 AM, Staff A, Dietary [NAME] (DC), obtained the temperatures of 10 menu items prior to serving residents lunch. The temperature of the pureed coleslaw measured 50.2° degrees Fahrenheit (deg F). Staff A covered the pureed coleslaw and placed it in the refrigerator. All other menu items' temperatures were within required range. At 11:30 AM, Staff A removed the pureed coleslaw from the refrigerator and check the temperature which measured 49.2° deg F. She stated it would just have to be written up. It was served to the resident at that temperature. At 11:55 AM, Staff A took the temperatures of the remaining menu items. Observed 3 menu items outside of the acceptable holding temperature: a. French Fries - post-serving temperature of 131.1° deg F b. Carrots - post-serving temperature of 107.4° deg F c. Coleslaw -…

    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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-11-09 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure 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, document review, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to store food and follow proper sanitation to prevent cross contamination and the spread of illness in accordance with professional standards. The facility reported a census of 43 residents. Findings include: 1. An initial kitchen tour on 11/6/23 at 10:15 AM - 10:45 AM revealed: a. Walk in refrigerator had items open without open dates that included a bag of toffee bites, a bag of sliced American cheese, a bag of shredded parmesan cheese, a bag of cheddar cheese, a bag of mixed vegetables, a bag of carrots, a bag of lettuce, and a 20 oz. bottle of soda pop. b. Dry storage had items open without open dates that included a 25 lbs. bag of rice, 1 gallon of syrup, a bag of croutons, a bag of crispy onions, 2 bags of dry noodles, a bag of spaghetti noodles, and a bag of crushed crackers. c. Walk in freezer had items open without open dates that included a bag of frozen noodles, a bag of mixed vegetables, a bag of corn, a bag of raspberries, a bag of diced green peppers, a bag of carrots, and 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-11-09 · tag F0836 — isolated
    Ensure the facility is licensed under applicable State and local law and operates and provides services in compliance with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws, regulations, and codes, and with accepted professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY THE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCIES RELATE TO THE IOWA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE (IAC) CHAPTER 58. VA State Rule 58.12(1)l Within 30 days of a resident's admission to a health care facility receiving reimbursement through the medical assistance program under Iowa Code chapter 249 A, the facility shall ask the resident or the resident's personal representative whether the resident is a veteran and shall document the response. If the facility determines that the resident is a veteran, the facility shall report the resident's name along with the names of the resident's spouse and any dependent children, as well as the name of the contact person for this information, to the Iowa department of veteran's affairs. Where appropriate, the facility first shall seek reimbursement from the identified payor source before seeking reimbursement from the medical assistance program established under Iowa Code chapter 249A. This REQUIREMENT is not met as evidenced by: Based on document review, and staff interview, the facility failed to inquire…

    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.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-11-09 · tag F0868 — isolated
    Have the Quality Assessment and Assurance group have the required members and meet at least quarterly
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the required members attended the Quality Assessment and Assurance committee (QAA). The required members included: 1. The Nursing Home Administer (NHA) or representative; 2. Director of Nursing (DON); 3. The Medical Director (MD) or representative; 4. The Infection Preventionist; and 5. two other members of the facility's staff present on a minimum of a quarterly basis. The facility reported a census of 43. Findings include: A facility document titled QAA Committee Minutes, dated 12/6/22 for the 4th quarter lacked attendance signatures for the Infection Preventionist. A facility document titled QAA Committee Minutes, dated 3/2/23 for the quarter December 2022 - February 2023 lacked attendance signatures for the Infection Preventionist. A facility document titled QAA Committee Minutes, dated 5/18/23 for quarter March 2023 - May 18, 2023 lacked attendance signatures for the Infection Preventionist and two (2) other staff members. A facility document titled QAA Committee Minutes, dated 8/10/23 for quarter 5/18/23…

    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.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-11-09 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, policy review, and staff interview the facility failed to provide appropriate infection prevention practices when providing suprapubic catheter cares for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #26). Findings include: Resident #26's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. Resident #26 had an indwelling catheter. The MDS included diagnoses of obstructive uropathy, diabetes mellitus, and benign prostatic hyperplasia with lower urinary tract symptoms. During a continuous observation 11/8/23 at 7:15 AM observed Staff D, Certified Nurse's Aide (CNA), and Staff E, CNA, perform catheter care on Resident #26. During Resident #26's catheter care, Staff D got a new unpackaged catheter drainage bag, placed it on the bed sheet without a barrier, immediately picked it up, and asked Staff E to obtain a new barrier. Staff E then placed a new barrier down and they placed the previously new…

    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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$11,536 in federal fines across 4 penalties.

  • $2,797 — penalty dated 2023-11-06
  • $2,447 — penalty dated 2023-10-30
  • $2,098 — penalty dated 2023-10-23
  • $4,194 — penalty dated 2023-10-02

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
ANDERSEN, JESSICAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 08/24/2018
ALT, MELINDAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 08/01/2021
ANDERSEN, TIMOTHYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 03/01/2015
DEIST, GENELLEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 06/01/2018
EDWARDS, JEFFREYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 03/01/2016
FROLICH, PATTIEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 08/01/2020
JONES, MARKIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 08/01/2021
NELSEN, KARENIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2022
WEDE, SUSANIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 03/01/2010

CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 9 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.

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.

$4.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-19.7%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 48%Medicare 2%Other / private 50%

A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$351per resident / day
operating cost
$10,671per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$293per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in IA

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in Iowa
$9,277/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$10,038/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,381/mo
Assisted living

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 165232. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-06-19, 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.

What to do next