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

Accura Healthcare of Aurelia, LLC

401 West Fifth Street, Aurelia, IA 51005 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 41 certified beds · (712) 434-2294 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (712) 434-2294 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0600) — cited Oct 20251 actual-harm citation
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Oct 2025
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation

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.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★ 2/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
115 E Maple St · (712) 225-9003 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
218 E Main St · (712) 225-5783 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
205 W Bluff St · (712) 225-3965 · Call to confirm hours
Park
304 W 4th St · (712) 434-2025 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 3 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 improved from 3 to 4 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 rating4★
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 increased15.7%17.1%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight4.6%4.6%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.8%1.5%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection6.7%2.4%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms3.4%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 injury0.0%3.8%3.3%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened23.5%16.6%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication9.9%20.8%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine96.7%95.3%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers6.7%4.2%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control25.7%25.6%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table13.7%19.5%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.4%2.1%1.4%typical
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine59.5%73.3%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission8.5%20.9%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit15.1%13.2%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days0.601.491.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.962.081.80typical

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

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.

52.3% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 59 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

52.3%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.8%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
75.0%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.12U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.08hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.03hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
<0.01hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 75.0% 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 28 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: this home’s payroll records show 0.12 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 8% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 7% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF52.3%CMS range 40.9–60.151.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.8%CMS range 6.8–15.210.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge75.0%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge57.1%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge71.4%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 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 stay6.2%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.7%CMS range 3.7–12.97.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.931.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

0.53
RN hours/ resident / day
0.60
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.65
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.79
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.43
RN hoursweekends
37.8%
Total nursing turnover
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 41 beds and averages 34.4 residents a day — about 84% occupied, or roughly 7 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 3.79 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.53 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.65 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 3.37 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.96 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.57 to 0.43 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 38% is about the same as 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

4
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-01-29)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2025-03-06)

Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.

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

  • Actual harm · G2025-03-06 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide 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 observation, interviews and record review the facility failed to monitor and treat skin breakdown to prevent worsening of ulcers for 2 of 3 resident reviewed, (Resident #3 and #21). Resident #3 had an ulcer on his toe, staff failed to contact the doctor when treatment was ineffective. The toe was eventually amputated. Resident #21 had chronic pressure areas on her bottom and found to not have treatment in place. The facility reported a census of 32 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 pigmented skin may not have a visible blanching; in dark skin tones only it may appear with persistent blue or purple hues. Stage II is partial thickness loss of dermis presenting as a shallow open ulcer with a red or pink wound bed, without slough (dead tissue, usually cream or yellow in color). May also present as an intact or…

    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 · D2026-01-29 · 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 a review of the clinical record, facility policy, and staff interviews, the facility failed to notify the physician when a resident with a history of cardiac and pulmonary conditions and oxygen dependence stopped using a Bilevel Positive Airway Pressure (BiPAP) machine at night for 1 of 12 residents reviewed. The facility reported a census of 35 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #2 documented diagnoses of congestive heart failure (CHF), Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and centrilobular emphysema. The MDS showed the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated no cognitive impairment. The Clinical Physician Orders dated 9/3/25 for Resident #2 showed the following:BiPAP on at bed time and off in the morningOxygen 3 liter per nasal cannula COPD and centrilobular emphysemaDuo Neb breathing treatments twice a day for COPDFluticase-Salmeterol inhaler twice a day for COPDPrednisone tablet daily for COPDTorsmide…

    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 · D2026-01-29 · tag F0644 — isolated
    Coordinate 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 and staff interview, the facility failed to refer 1 resident with a negative Level I result for the Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR), who was later identified with newly evident or possible serious mental disorder, intellectual disability, or other related condition, to the appropriate state-designated authority for Level II PASRR evaluation and determination for 1 out of 2 residents (Resident #27) reviewed for PASRR requirements. The facility reported a census of 35 residents.Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #27 documented diagnoses of dementia, Anxiety Disorder, adjustment disorder with depressed mood, depression and suicidal ideations. The MDS included a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13, which indicated intact cognition. The Medical Diagnosis list for Resident #27 revealed the following diagnoses:General Anxiety Disorder, dated 5/27/25Major depressive disorder, dated 6/12/2Suicidal ideation,…

    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 Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-01-29 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
    Safeguard 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 record review, staff interviews and facility policy review the facility failed to accurately document Bilevel Positive Airway Pressure (BiPAP) machine usage for 1 of 12 residents (Residents #2). The facility reported a census of 34 residents.Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #2 documented diagnoses of congestive heart failure (CHF), Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and centrilobular emphysema. The MDS showed the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated no cognitive impairment. The Clinical Physician Orders dated 9/3/25 for Resident #2 showed an order for a BiPAP on at bedtime and off in the morning. During an interview on 1/27/26 at 2:25 PM, Resident #2 reported the pulmonologist ordered her to wear a BiPAP at night related to CHF, COPD, and emphysema. When asked about the BiPAP location, the resident reported placing the device on a shelf due to personal preference not to use the machine because the mask fit…

    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 Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-01-29 · 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

    Based on observations, record review, staff interviews and policy reviews, the facility failed to provide proper hand hygiene before and after catheter care for 1 of 2 residents reviewed (Resident #31). The facility reported a census of 34 residents.Findings include:During an observation on 1/28/26 at 1:08 PM, Staff A, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA), failed to perform hand hygiene prior to donning personal protective equipment (PPE) and emptying urine from the catheter bag, per policy. Staff A then doffed PPE, failed to perform hand hygiene, and proceeded to arrange the catheter bag, privacy bag, and the resident's blanket before exiting the room.The Hand Hygiene Policy last updated on 11/13/24 identified hand hygiene is required immediately before donning and doffing gloves. During an interview on 1/27/26 at 2:47 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON), reported she expected staff to perform hand hygiene immediately before applying gloves and when staff removed gloves. During an interview on 1/27/26 at 3:31 PM, the Infection Preventionist indicated staff are expected to perform hand…

    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
  • Potential for harm · D2025-10-21 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    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, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that all residents were free from verbal abuse for 1 of 5 residents reviewed (Resident #2.) Staff reported that on several occasions, a Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) addressed Resident #2 in a disrespectful and derogatory manner. The facility reported a census of 34 residents. Findings include: According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], Resident #2 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3 (severe cognitive deficits.) The resident was totally dependent on staff for toileting, dressing, rolling and transfers. She was always incontinent of urine and bowel, and was impaired on both sides of her upper and lower extremities. Diagnoses for Resident #2 included: heart failure, renal insufficiency and quadriplegia.The Care Plan for Resident #2, dated 4/15/25, showed that she was dependent on staff for activities of daily living related to unspecified intellectual disabilities. Staff were to converse while providing…

    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 · D2025-10-21 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    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 interview and policy review the facility failed to report allegations of abuse in a timely manner for 1 of 1 residents reviewed. On 5/1/25, several staff members reported that Staff F was rude and verbally abusive to Resident #2. They did not have dates and times as to when these incidences occurred. The facility reported a census of 34 residents. Findings include: According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], Resident #2 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3 (severe cognitive deficits.) The resident was totally dependent on staff for toileting, dressing, rolling and transfers. She was always incontinent of urine and bowel, and was impaired on both sides of her upper and lower extremities. Diagnoses for Resident #2 included: heart failure, renal insufficiency and quadriplegia.The Care Plan for Resident #2 dated 4/15/25, showed that she was dependent on staff for activities of daily living related to unspecified intellectual disabilities. Staff were to converse while providing…

    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 · D2025-03-06 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor 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 observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that staff interacted with residents with dignity and respect for 1 of 13 residents reviewed, (Resident#9). The facility reported a census of 32 residents. Findings include: According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], Resident #9 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 (intact cognitive ability.) She was dependent on staff for toileting, showering and lower body dressing and required substantial assistance with toilet and sit to stand transferring. Diagnoses for Resident #9 included; anemia, hypertension, peripheral vascular disease, diabetes mellitus, osteoporosis, bipolar disorder, and fracture of the right pubis A Care Plan revised on 2/12/25, showed that Resident #9 was occasionally dependent on staff and others for meeting her emotional, intellectual, physical and social needs, and staff were to converse with the resident while providing care. Staff were to provide resident with cues, reorientation,…

    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 · D2025-03-06 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
    Ensure 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 observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure staff followed physicians' orders for 2 of 13 residents reviewed, (Resident #17 and #9). Resident #17 had an order for International Normalized Ratio (INR) blood test to be conducted on 2/13/25, staff failed to complete the blood draw. Staff were directed to report to the doctor if/when the Blood Glucose (BG) levels were out of parameters for Resident #9. The facility failed to follow through according to physician's orders. The facility reported a census of 32 residents. Findings include: 1) According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], Resident #17 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 (intact cognitive ability.) He required partial assistance with toileting hygiene, showering, dressing and transfers. Resident #17 was using anticoagulant medications and his diagnoses included: atrial fibrillation, heart failure, anxiety and depression. The Care Plan updated on 2/23/25, showed that Resident #17 was 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 Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-03-06 · 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 observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure safe transfer techniques with the use of a Gait Belt (GB) for 1 of 3 residents reviewed, (Resident #17). The facility reported a census of 32 residents. Findings include: According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], Resident #17 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 (intake cognitive ability). He required partial assistance with toileting hygiene, showering, dressing and transfers. Resident #17 had diagnoses that included: atrial fibrillation, heart failure, anxiety and depression. The Care Plan updated on 2/23/25 showed that Resident #17 was at risk for falls and staff were to have the Gait Belt in place for all transfers and to ensure the resident was wearing the appropriate footwear. Limited physical mobility related to morbid obesity. On 3/3/25 at 1:01 PM, Resident #17 was sitting in a wheel chair that did not fit well and he seemed to be sliding down. The resident said that he could stand and pivot…

    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 · E2024-02-08 · 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, facility policy, 2022 Food Code, and staff interview, the facility failed to store kitchenware and utensils in a manner to prevent contamination; failed to store a measuring scoop in a clean manner; bulk foods did not have an open date labeled; provide covered trash cans; cover food stored in a freezer. The facility reported a census of 36 residents. Findings include: Observation on 2/05/24 at 9:13 AM of dry storage room revealed: 1. Two muffin baking pans turned right side up. 2. A powdered drink mix canister with scoop inside. Observation on 2/05/24 at 9:13 AM of main area of kitchen revealed: 1. Two boxes of disposable silverware not closed. 2. Two containers of silverware without eating end of the utensil covered. 3. Shelf storing cutting boards not laying vertically. 4. Reusable and disposable dishware stored right side up and not covered. 5. Two uncovered trash cans. 6. No open date on bulk storage of sugar, flour, and breadcrumbs. 7. Utensils for food preparation and serving stored uncovered on hooks on the wall. Observation on 2/05/24 at 9:16 AM of 2…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-02-08 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record, facility policy, and staff interview, the facility failed to develop care plans to reflect side effects of high risk medications insulin and melatonin or an Urinary Tract Infection (UTI) for 2 of 12 residents reviewed (Residents #23 and #32). The facility reported a census of 36 residents. Findings include: 1. The MDS dated [DATE] for Resident #23 revealed a BIMS of 14 which indicated intact cognition. The MDS revealed the resident had diagnoses of diabetes mellitus, insomnia, and generalized muscle weakness. The Order Summary Report signed by a physician on 1/16/24 revealed an order for melatonin, 3 milligrams (mg) given one time per day. In a Nurses Note on 1/11/24 at 8:00 PM, Staff E, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) reported, in pertinent part, new order for ATB (antibiotic) for UTI. The Doctor's Orders and Progress Notes signed by an Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (ARNP on 1/11/24 revealed an order for nitrofurantoin (antibiotic) 100 mg BID (twice per day) for 5 days. The 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-02-08 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop 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 observation, staff interview and record review, the facility failed to update the resident's care plan to accurately reflect interventions ordered by the physician and accurately list residents current assistance level for 2 of 12 residents reviewed (Residents #23 and #32). The facility reported a census of 36 residents. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #32 documented diagnoses of myositis (a group of rare conditions that can cause muscles to become weak, tired and painful), generalized muscle weakness and radiculopathy (pinched nerve or injury or damage to nerve roots in the area where they leave the spine). The MDS showed the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating no cognitive impairment. The MDS revealed Resident #32 has a pressure ulcer or injury and has one or more unhealed pressure ulcers or injuries. The MDS revealed resident was dependent on staff for bed mobility and transfers to and from bed to chair, and chair 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-02-08 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record, facility policy, and staff interview, the facility failed to provide a restorative exercise program for 1 of 1 resident reviewed (Resident #20). The facility reported a census of 36 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] for Resident #20 revealed a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 which indicated intact cognition. The MDS revealed the resident had diagnoses of osteoarthritis to his left knee, osteoporosis (loss of bone strength), and muscle weakness. In an interview on 2/05/24 at 10:40 AM, the resident reported that his physical therapy (PT) ended last week and that he was waiting for someone to come to his room this week to show him the exercises he is supposed to do on his own. The resident reported that he goes to a group exercise held in the facility, but that he would like individual assistance with an exercise program to maintain the progress he made in PT. The PT Discharge Summary signed by a PT on 2/1/24 directed, in pertinent…

    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
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

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to ACCURA HEALTHCARE — 41 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 3 of 52.5+0.5 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 52.6+0.4 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 53.1+0.9 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 52.8+1.2 vs chain
The other 40 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.5★, per CMS)
1 of 5Aberdeen Health And RehabAberdeen, SD 1 of 5Accura HealthCare of TekamahTekamah, NE 1 of 5Accura Healthcare of CarrollCarroll, IA 1 of 5Accura Healthcare of MarshalltownMarshalltown, IA 1 of 5Accura Healthcare of Newton East, LLCNewton, IA 1 of 5Accura Healthcare of O'NeillO' Neill, NE 1 of 5Accura Healthcare of Pleasantville, LLCPleasantville, IA 1 of 5Accura Healthcare of ShenandoahShenandoah, IA 1 of 5Green Lea Senior LivingMabel, MN 1 of 5Lake Andes Senior LivingLake Andes, SD 1 of 5Shell Rock Senior LivingShell Rock, IA 2 of 5Accura Healthcare of Cascade LLCCascade, IA 2 of 5Accura Healthcare of CrestonCreston, IA 2 of 5Accura Healthcare of FranklinFranklin, NE 2 of 5Accura Healthcare of Knoxville, LLCKnoxville, IA 2 of 5Accura Healthcare of Lake City, LLCLake City, IA 2 of 5Accura Healthcare of MuscatineMuscatine, IA 2 of 5Accura Healthcare of OnawaOnawa, IA 2 of 5Accura Healthcare of Spirit LakeSpirit Lake, IA 2 of 5Sterling Park Health Care CenterWaite Park, MN 2 of 5Woodlyn Heights Healthcare CenterInver Grove Heights, MN 3 of 5Accura Healthcare of Ames, LLCAmes, IA 3 of 5Accura Healthcare of Cherokee, LLCCherokee, IA 3 of 5Accura Healthcare of FullertonFullerton, NE 3 of 5Accura Healthcare of Pomeroy, LLCPomeroy, IA 3 of 5Accura Healthcare of StantonStanton, IA 3 of 5Accura Healthcare of ToledoToledo, IA 3 of 5Meadow ManorGrand Meadow, MN 3 of 5Prairie View Senior LivingTracy, MN 3 of 5Traditions Memory Care of NewtonNewton, IA 4 of 5Accura HealthCare of North PlatteNorth Platte, NE 4 of 5Accura Healthcare of Le MarsLe Mars, IA 4 of 5Accura Healthcare of MilfordMilford, IA 4 of 5Accura Healthcare of New HamptonNew Hampton, IA 4 of 5Accura Healthcare of Ogden, LLCOgden, IA 4 of 5Accura Healthcare of Sioux City, LLCSioux City, IA 4 of 5Faulkton Senior LivingFaulkton, SD 5 of 5Accura HealthCare of HartingtonHartington, NE 5 of 5Accura Healthcare of BancroftBancroft, IA 5 of 5Karlstad Healthcare Center INCKarlstad, MN

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

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
LENEAVE, THOMASIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER30%since 06/01/2019
GLIENKE, KYLEIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 04/01/2024
GREENE, JESSICAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 01/01/2024
TOTI, LISAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2020
LENEAVE, TEDIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 06/01/2019
AMERICAN HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT SERVICES LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 06/01/2019

CMS files one row per role, so the 10 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

1 organizational owner 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.

$3.3M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+14.4%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$292K
Related-party expense10% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 45%Medicare 9%Other / private 46%

This home reported $292K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 10% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

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

$245per resident / day
operating cost
$7,453per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$286per 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 165535. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-29, 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