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

Rehabilitation Center of Belmond

1107 Seventh Street NE, Belmond, IA 50421 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 44 certified beds · (641) 444-3915 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (641) 444-3915 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 11 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
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
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
  • about 18% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies

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.

5/5
CMS overall
5 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
106 N Main St · (641) 762-3696 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
443 Main St E · (641) 444-3451 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
512 River Ave N · (641) 444-3034 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Belmond City Park · 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 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 5 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 5 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 increased8.8%17.1%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight6.0%4.6%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.9%1.5%0.9%typical
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%2.4%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.8%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 worsened5.5%16.6%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication13.7%20.8%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine96.8%95.3%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers5.6%4.2%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control28.0%25.6%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table27.3%19.5%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%2.1%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine95.2%73.3%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission5.7%20.9%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit5.0%13.2%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.211.491.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.562.081.80worse

* 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.

43.4% 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 43 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

43.4%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.1%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
60.9%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.17U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.05hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.08hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.03hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 60.9% 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 23 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 0.17 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 15% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 29% 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 SNF43.4%CMS range 31.8–53.251.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.1%CMS range 6.8–15.310.7%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 discharge60.9%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 discharge34.8%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 discharge34.8%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 identified57.1%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 stay0.0%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 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 SNFs0.731.02Oct 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

0.39
RN hours/ resident / day
0.79
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.19
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.37
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.30
RN hoursweekends
47.2%
Total nursing turnover
80.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 44 beds and averages 39.8 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 4 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.37 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.39 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.19 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.98 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.52 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.43 to 0.30 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 47% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

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

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-04-23)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2025-04-17)

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 · Dcited before2026-04-23 · 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 record review, policy review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 1 resident (Resident #7) reviewed for pressure ulcers received the necessary care and services to promote the healing of an existing pressure ulcer and prevent the development of new ulcers. Specifically, the facility failed to clean and apply medication to Resident #7's wounds on four separate shifts, failed to document weekly pressure ulcer measurements including depth, and failed to identify the wounds as pressure ulcers on the appropriate clinical record. The facility reported a census of 42 residents.Findings include:The MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment identifies the definition of pressure ulcers: NOTE:Regardless of the staging system or wound definitions used by the facility, the facility isresponsible for completing the MDS utilizing the staging guidelines found in the RAI (Resident Assessment Instrument) Manual.Stage 1 Pressure Injury (PI): Non blanchable erythema of intact skin Intact skin with a localized area…

    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 · D2026-04-23 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — isolated
    Have a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on review of the nursing schedules and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide a Registered Nurse (RN) in the facility for eight (8) hours per day on 4/5/26 and 4/12/26. The facility reported a census of 42 residents. Findings include:Review of the facility's nursing schedules for April 2026 lacked 8 hours of RN coverage on 4/5/26 and 4/12/26. In E-mail communication dated 4/21/26 at 12:49 PM, the facility Administrator reported the facility didn't have 8 consecutive hours of RN coverage on 4/5/26 and 4/12/26. In E-mail communication dated 4/22/26 at 1:08 PM, the Nurse Consultant explained the facility didn't have a policy for RN coverage as they just follow the regulation. During an interview on 4/22/26 at 2:15 PM the Administrator acknowledged the facility didn't have 8 hours of continuous RN coverage on 4/5/26 and 4/12/26. The Administrator added they had a plan in place moving forward for coverage.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-04-17 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — pattern
    Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinic record review, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to administer medications per physician orders for 2 out of 2 residents reviewed (Resident #10 and #133) for significant medication errors. Resident #10 didn't receive his insulin medications the morning of 12/15/24. In addition, Resident #10 received short acting insulin with a blood sugar (BS) below 200 mg/dl (milligrams per deciliter) when the physician order directed staff to hold the insulin with a BS below 200 mg/dl. In addition, a nurse gave Resident #133 (a noninsulin treated diabetic) insulin instead of Resident #10 using Resident #10's insulin pen. The facility reported a census of 30 residents. Findings include: 1. Resident #10's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMs) score of 5, indicating severe cognitive impairment. The MDS listed Resident #10 as independent with bed mobility and transfers. Resident #10 used a walker for ambulation. The MDS included…

    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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-17 · 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 clinical record review, observations, staff interviews, and policy review the facility failed to assure a resident with a pressure ulcer received treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing of an unstageable pressure ulcer for 1 of 2 residents reviewed (Resident #24). The facility reported a census of 30 residents. Finding include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment identifies the following definition of pressure ulcers: Stage I is an intact skin with non blanchable redness of a localized area usually over a bony prominence. Darkly pigmented skin may not have a visible blanching; in dark skin tones only, it may appear with persistent blue or purple hues. Stage II is a partial thickness loss of dermis presenting as a shallow open ulcer with a red or pink wound bed, with slough (dead tissue, usually cream or yellow in color). May also present as an intact or open/ruptured blister. Stage III is full thickness tissue loss. Subcutaneous fat may be visible…

    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 · D2025-04-17 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
    Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to assess, provide interventions, or notify the physician, the Registered Dietitian (RD), and the family about a resident with a significant weight loss (over 5% in month) for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #14) reviewed. In 1 months, timeframe, Resident #14 lost greater than 5% of their body weight (considered significant weight loss). The facility failed to notify the RD and physician for interventions to prevent further weight loss. The facility reported a census of 30 residents. Findings include: Resident #14's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS included diagnoses of cancer and heart disease. On 4/14/25 at 12:04 PM, observed Resident #14 in the dining room eating lunch. Resident #14's Weight Summary reviewed 4/15/25 identified the following weights: a. 3/9/25: 205.3 pounds (lbs.) b. 4/6/25:…

    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 · D2025-04-17 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and staff interview the facility failed to ensure each resident received necessary respiratory care and services in accordance with professional standards of practice by not changing oxygen (O2) tubing for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #8) reviewed. Facility reported a census of 30 residents. Findings include: A Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE]for Resident #8, included diagnoses of obstructive sleep apnea (frequent episodes of obstructed breathing while sleeping) and heart failure and received O2. A Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicated no cognitive impairment. Therapy. Observation on 4/15/25 at 9:50AM, in Resident #8's room was an O2 concentrator (machine that supplies O2) with tubing attached to a bipap machine (medical device that provides airway pressure to assist with maintaining breathing). The tubing supplying O2 from the concentrator to the bipap machine was not dated. Interview on 4/15/25 at 3:38 PM, Resident #8 stated she uses her bipap…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-04-17 · 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 clinical record review, staff interviews, CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) recommendations and policy review, the facility failed to provide a safe and sanitary environment to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 2 of 2 residents reviewed (Residents #10 and #133). After Resident #133 received Resident #10's insulin via an insulin pen, the facility failed to discard the insulin pens after the cross contamination occurred. The nurse put the insulin pens back into the medication cart after the medication error occurred and the nursing staff continued to use the insulin pens when administering Resident #10's insulin. The facility reported a census of 30 residents. Citation considered past noncompliance as the facility completed the following interventions prior to surveyor entering the building on 4/14/25: a. Staff B, LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse), received verbal education on 1/3/25. b. The facility provided the nurses education on…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · D2024-04-25 · 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 submit a Level 2 Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) evaluation for 1 of 1 residents reviewed with a new mental health diagnosis and start of new psychotropic medications (Resident #15). The facility reported a census of 30 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], documented Resident #15 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 9 indicating moderately impaired cognition. The MDS revealed Resident #15 had diagnoses of psychotic disorder, adjustment disorder with depressed mood and visual hallucinations. The Care Plan for Resident #15 with a target date of 7/11/24 included a focus area for mood/behavior revealed exhibited visual hallucinations. The Care Plan further documented Resident #15 received psychotropic medications for the hallucinations and depression. The Clinical record revealed Resident #15 had the following diagnoses with effective dates: 1. Adjustment disorder with…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-04-25 · 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 clinical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to follow a physician's order for 1 of 1 residents reviewed receiving diabetic medication (Resident #14). The facility reported a census of 30 residents. Findings Include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented Resident #14 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 4, indicating severe cognitive impairment. The MDS further documented the resident had diagnoses to include medically complex conditions, renal insufficiency, and diabetes mellitus (DM). The Care Plan for Resident #14, with a target date of 6/25/24, documented under the focus section the resident had diabetes mellitus, with interventions to take routine insulin and a weekly injection to help control blood sugars. Review of records for Resident #14 revealed a Progress Note entry on 2/9/24 at 10:26 AM titled Physician Visit note, documented new orders received and noted from physician visit note to increase resident's Ozempic (Diabetic medication) to 1mg…

    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 · D2024-04-25 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — isolated
    Provide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on resident interviews, staff interviews, and facility records review the facility failed to provide sufficient staff to meet the needs of residents who resided in the facility (Residents #4 and #19). The facility reported a census of 30 residents. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #4 dated 4/3/24 assessment identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating intact cognition. The Census tab in the clinical record revealed Resident #4 resided in room [ROOM NUMBER]. On 4/23/23 at 10:30 AM, the Administrator provided Resident #4's call light report from 3/23/24 to 4/23/24. The Administrator verified the column on the report titled In Room Elapsed Time was the duration the call light was on. On 4/23/24 at 1:05 PM, Resident #4 reported her call light can be long at times on all shifts. She stated she tried to be patient with the staff as she knew they were working with other residents. She stated she used the clock on the wall to time the call lights. In 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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-04-25 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolated
    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, staff interviews and policy review, the facility failed to prepare food under sanitary conditions, in order to reduce the risk of contamination and foodborne illness. The facility reported a census of 30 residents. Findings include: During an observation on 4/24/24 at 10:50 AM, Staff A, Cook, began the puree process for residents on a pureed diet. Wearing gloves, Staff A tore chicken off the bone and placed on a scale, took the gloves off, did not wash hands, and poured the chicken into the robot coupe (machine used to puree food) container. Using bare hands, Staff A touched the handle on a gallon of milk, the lid on the container, the button on the robot coupe, a drawer handle to get a spatula, a spatula, the robot coupe container, a box of tin foil, a marker from her pocket, and the warming oven. Staff A also touched the table top surface. Without washing or sanitizing hands, Staff A obtained a new container and touched tongs and a spatula to place the second food item to be pureed into the robot coupe container, placing the container onto the robot coupe…

    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

“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

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to LEGACY HEALTHCARE — 89 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 5 of 52.9+2.1 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.8+1.2 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 52.5-0.5 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 53.3+1.7 vs chain
The other 88 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
1 of 5Avantara ArrowheadRapid City, SD 1 of 5Avantara Evergreen ParkEvergreen Park, IL 1 of 5Avantara MilbankMilbank, SD 1 of 5Avantara Saint CloudRapid City, SD 1 of 5Avantara WatertownWatertown, SD 1 of 5Emmetsburg Care CenterEmmetsburg, IA 1 of 5Grove Of Elmhurst, TheElmhurst, IL 1 of 5Harmony Cedar RapidsCedar Rapids, IA 1 of 5Harmony House Health Care CenterWaterloo, IA 1 of 5Harmony MarshalltownMarshalltown, IA 1 of 5Harmony WaterlooWaterloo, IA 1 of 5Harmony West Des MoinesWest Des Moines, IA 1 of 5Nexus at BerwynBerwyn, IL 1 of 5Northgate Care CenterWaukon, IA 1 of 5Park View Rehabilitation CenterSac City, IA 1 of 5Southfield Wellness CommunityWebster City, IA 1 of 5Warren Barr South LoopChicago, IL 2 of 5Avantara GrotonGroton, SD 2 of 5Avantara HuronHuron, SD 2 of 5Avantara Lincoln ParkChicago, IL 2 of 5Avantara Mountain ViewRapid City, SD 2 of 5Avantara Palos HeightsPalos Heights, IL 2 of 5Avantara PierrePierre, SD 2 of 5Avantara RedfieldRedfield, SD 2 of 5Bella Terra BloomingdaleBloomingdale, IL 2 of 5Bella Terra Morton GroveMorton Grove, IL 2 of 5Carlton At The Lake, TheChicago, IL 2 of 5Chalet Living & RehabChicago, IL 2 of 5Colonial Manor of ElmaElma, IA 2 of 5Hallmark Care CenterMount Vernon, IA 2 of 5Harmony DavenportDavenport, IA 2 of 5Harmony DubuqueDubuque, IA 2 of 5Harmony PalosPalos Heights, IL 2 of 5Harmony Utica RidgeDavenport, IA 2 of 5Heritage Care And Rehabilitation CenterMason City, IA 2 of 5Manor House Care CenterSigourney, IA 2 of 5Peterson Park Health Care CtrChicago, IL 3 of 5Avantara LibertyvilleLibertyville, IL 3 of 5Avantara NorthRapid City, SD 3 of 5Bloomfield Care CenterBloomfield, IA

Showing 40 of 88; lowest-rated first.

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 / managerTypeRoleSince
DOROS GENERATION TRUST U/A/D 1/3/12OrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 08/15/2024
OAKWAY OPERATIONS LLCOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 08/15/2024
SHABAT, MENACHEMIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
LEGACY HEALTHCARE FINANCIAL SERVICES LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
BAKER, JOSHUAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
BEASLEY, KARLAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
BEHOUNEK, LINSEYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
BOELMAN, SHERIIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
BORCHERDING, JENNYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
BURKEN, SHERIIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
FREERKS, MONICAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
FRIEDENBERG, LAURAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
HEDBERG, JENNIFERIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
HENNAGER, CHRISTINAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
HEYING, LARINAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
HOUSTON, MINDYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
JAEGER, KRYSTLEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
KNUTSON, MICHELEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
LARSON, MELISSAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
MCCLURE, DOROTHYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
OTTERBECK, PATRICIAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
RAJCHENBACH, CHAIMIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
SCOTT, KATHLEENIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
SEU, JOSHUAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
SHEAR, KILEYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
STAUDT, SANDRAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
VAN VEGHEL, ELIZABETHIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
WIERSCHEM, BOBBIEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
WOOD, ROSEMARYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
WRIGHT, AMYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
FRIEDMAN, BRIANIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/08/2025
RAJCHENBACH, AVRUMIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/11/2025
RAJCHENBACH, RIVKAIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/08/2025
SHABAT, AHUVAIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/08/2025
BELMOND IA PROPERTY HOLDINGS, LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
CASCADE CAPITAL HOLDINGS LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
CASCADE CAPITAL PARTNERS LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
CCG GORGONA LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
GORGONA HOLDCO LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
GORGONA PROPCO HOLDINGS LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
GORGONA SUB HOLDCO LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024
MN8 RH HOLDCO LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 08/15/2024

CMS files one row per role, so the 71 rows in the source record cover these 42 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.

11 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$3.3M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-2.3%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$617K
Related-party expense18% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 36%Medicare 5%Other / private 59%

This home reported $617K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 18% 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

$281per resident / day
operating cost
$8,536per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$274per 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 165380. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-23, 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