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

Martin Health Center, INC

410 East 10th Street, Cedar Falls, IA 50613 · Non profit - Corporation · 50 certified beds · (319) 277-2141 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (319) 277-2141 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
1 actual-harm citation CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

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 federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
Worth asking about
  • inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed

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) 5 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
515 College St · (319) 268-3990 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
103 E 18th St · (319) 277-1829 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
220 Main St · (319) 277-1497 · Call to confirm hours
Park
598 E 9th St · (319) 273-8636 · 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 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 2 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 3 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 4 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased30.7%17.1%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight4.6%4.6%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder1.2%1.5%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%2.4%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms3.2%4.2%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury0.6%3.8%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened17.8%16.6%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication16.1%20.8%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%95.3%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers3.5%4.2%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control33.9%25.6%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table19.4%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 vaccine97.1%73.3%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission26.2%20.9%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit17.8%13.2%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.091.491.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.702.081.80worse

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

46.5% 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 46 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

46.5%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.4%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
55.9%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.23U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.07hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.10hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.06hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 55.9% 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 34 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 0.23 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 30% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 10% 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 SNF46.5%CMS range 36.9–57.151.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.4%CMS range 7.2–15.810.7%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 discharge55.9%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 discharge38.2%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 discharge41.2%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 identified65.9%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 discharge100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF 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 hospitalization6.0%CMS range 2.9–12.77.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.601.02Oct 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

0.79
RN hours/ resident / day
0.45
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.97
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.21
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.45
RN hoursweekends
39.7%
Total nursing turnover
22.2%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 50 beds and averages 45.9 residents a day — about 92% 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 4.21 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.79 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.97 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 3.86 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.35 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.93 to 0.45 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 40% 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

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-05-15)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2024-07-11)

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.

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

  • Actual harm · G2024-12-17 · 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 record review, resident and staff interviews the facility failed to provide a safe mechanical lift (Hoyer) transfer for 1 of 3 residents reviews (Resident #1). The Hoyer strap came unhooked on the right upper side of the sling and Resident #1 fell from the Hoyer. The fall resulted in a right femur fracture and left rib fractures of the 3rd, 4th and 5th ribs. The facility reported a census of 46 residents. Findings include: Resident #1's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating intact cognition. Resident #1 listed as dependent (Helper does all the effort. Resident does none of the effort to complete the activity. Or, the assistance of 2 or more helpers is required for the resident to complete the activity) for all transfers. The Care Plan Focus revised 3/27/24 indicated Resident #1 had an activities of daily living (ADL) self-care performance and transfer assistance deficit related to the need for a Hoyer transfer, gout,…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · E2025-05-15 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, clinical record review, policy review and staff interview the facility failed to properly store food according to manufacturer's directions, ensure staff contain hair in hairnets when in the kitchen, and failed to ensure hot food is held at 135 degrees Fahrenheit (F) for safety. The facility reported a census of 48 residents. Findings include: The initial kitchen observation completed on 5/12/25 at 9:48 AM on the second floor kitchen revealed the following: a. One ¾ full carton of Ready Care thickened orange juice dated 4/18/25. The Manufacturer Directions on the side of the carton directed to discard 7 days after opening. b. One ¼ full bottle of Thick It Clear Advantage Thickened Water, level 2, mildly thick, dated 4/15/25. The Manufacturer Label on the bottle directed to use within 14 days after opening. During a follow up inspection of the second floor kitchen on 5/13/25 at 10:54 AM the following observations were made: a. One ¾ full carton of Ready Care thickened orange juice dated 4/18/25. The Manufacturer Directions on the side of the carton directed 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-15 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
    Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, clinical record review, policy review and staff interview, the facility failed to check gastronomy tube (g-tube, a tube inserted through the belly that brings nutrition directly to the stomach and is sometimes referred to as a feeding-tube) placement prior to flushing water and administering medications down the g-tube for 1 of 1 resident observed (Resident #21). The facility identified a census of 48 residents. Findings include: Resident #21's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified he rarely/never understood, he had no memory recall of current season, location of room, staff names and/or faces, or that he lived in a nursing home. The MDS reflected he had severely impaired daily decision making skills. Resident #21 had upper and lower extremity impairments on both sides of the body. The MDS listed him as dependent for care (oral care, toileting, dressing, bathing, turning in bed). The MDS included diagnoses of Parkinson's, unspecified, end stage renal disease, non…

    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 · D2025-05-15 · tag F0800 — isolated
    Provide each resident with a nourishing, palatable, well-balanced diet that meets his or her daily nutritional and special dietary needs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, clinical record review, policy review and staff interview the facility failed to serve the physician ordered diet for 1 of 3 residents on a carbohydrate-controlled diet (Resident #47). The facility identified a census of 48 residents. Findings include: Resident #47's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified she had short/long term memory impairment with moderate impaired daily decision making. The MDS included a diagnosis of type two diabetes mellitus (DM) with diabetic polyneuropathy (a condition where multiple peripheral nerves in the body are damaged from high blood sugar levels). The MDS reflected Resident #47 received insulin injections seven days a week and hypoglycemic (blood sugar lowering) medications while a resident. An Order Review History Report electronically signed by the Provider on 4/29/25 documented the following physician orders: a. Toujeo Solostar (insulin) subcutaneous solution pen injector 300 Units (U)/Milliliter (ML) inject 16 units subcutaneously…

    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 · E2024-07-11 · tag F0637 — pattern
    Assess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview, and Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual the facility failed to complete Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for 4 of 4 residents (Residents #14, #32, #35, and #37) within 14 days of identifying a significant change occurred. The facility reported a census of 46 residents. Findings include: 1. Resident #14's MDS assessment dated [DATE] indicated he didn't receive hospice care while a resident. The Hospice Certification and Plan of Care dated 4/12/24 identified Resident #14 elected to receive Hospice services. The Hospice Medicare Benefit Revocation dated 4/16/24 indicated Resident #14 choose to revoke hospice services. Resident #14's Clinical - MDS record reviewed on 7/11/24 indicated the facility completed an entry MDS assessment on 4/11/24 and a quarterly MDS assessment on 5/22/24. The review lacked documentation of a significant change MDS assessment following Resident #14's election of Hospice benefits or when he revoked his Hospice benefits.…

    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 · D2024-07-11 · tag F0623 — isolated
    Provide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
    What the surveyor found here — 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 notify the state ombudsman as required for emergency transfers for 2 of 3 residents reviewed (Residents #2 and #8). The facility reported a census of 46 residents. Findings include: 1. Resident #2's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating intact cognition. The Progress Note written on 12/24/23 at 11:12 PM reflected Resident #2 transferred to the hospital. The Progress Note on 12/25/23 at 7:06 AM listed Resident #2 admitted to the hospital. Review of the December 2023 Ombudsman notification form lacked documentation of Resident #2's discharged to the hospital on [DATE]. 2. Resident #8's MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified a BIMS score of 10, indicating moderately impaired cognition. Resident #8's Census listed statuses of hospital leave on the following dates: 8/30/23, 9/15/23, 12/21/23, 4/12/24, and 7/4/24. The Progress Note on 8/29/23 at 9:05 PM…

    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 · D2024-07-11 · 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 complete a new level I Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) for Level I on 12/30/22 for 1 of 1 resident reviewed (Resident #26). The facility reported a census of 46 residents. Findings include: Resident #26's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating intact cognition. The MDS included diagnoses of anxiety, bipolar disorder, psychotic disorder, and non-Alzheimer's disease. Review Resident #26's PASRR Level 1 Screening Outcome dated 11/30/20 reflected a PASRR Level I Determination, No Level II required. Review of the clinical chart revealed this PASRR came with Resident #26 from another facility, but the current facility failed to submit a new PASRR due to new diagnosis and medication. The Progress Notes dated 6/19/24, and 7/2/24 for Resident #26 revealed follow up psychiatric visits related to bipolar. The Pre admission Screening and Resident…

    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 · D2023-06-15 · 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 observations, interview, policy review and record review, the facility failed to provide one resident (Resident (R) 4) of 15 sampled residents, out of total sample of 46 residents, respect and dignity. Specifically, R4 was allowed to sit in, urine-soaked garments for over 90 minutes, while sitting in the dining room, during an activity and in the TV room with other residents. Findings include: Review of the undated Patients' Rights Policy revealed The resident has a right to a dignified existence, . A facility must treat each resident with respect and dignity and care for each resident in a manner and in an environment that promotes maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life. The record review on 06/13/23 at 4:45 PM revealed the Care Plan dated for 05/24/23, and found under the Care Plans tab in the Electronic Medical Record (EMR), did not include concerns for ADLs (Activity of Daily Living) for frequent soaking of garments. Review of R4 quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment…

    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 · D2023-06-15 · tag F0553 — failed to let residents help plan their care — isolated
    Allow resident to participate in the development and implementation of his or her person-centered plan of care.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure two residents (Resident (R) 35 and 10) of 15 sample residents, out of a total of 46 sample residents, was afforded the opportunity to be included in all aspects of person-centered care planning. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Care Plan Interdisciplinary Team, revised on 03/2023, read in pertinent part, Each resident's care plan shall be reviewed every 3 months or PRN (as needed) with changes in health/condition. Interdisciplinary team will meet to review with resident, resident's family/representative, and others who may be involved in the resident' care. 1. Review of R35's Face Sheet, located in Electronic Medical Record (EMR) under the Profile tab, revealed an admission date of 10/21/19 with diagnoses which included pulmonary embolism without acute coronary pulmonale, cardiovascular and coagulations. Review of R35's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), located in the EMR under the MDS tab, with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 04/14/23 revealed R35's was cognitively…

    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 · D2023-06-15 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure one of one resident (Resident (R) 4) of 15 sampled residents, out of total sample of 46 residents, had a clean and homelike environment. Specifically, housekeeping staff failed to ensure R3's room did not have a strong scent of urine. Findings include: Observation on 06/13/23 at 8:45 AM, R4's room has an odor in the sitting area and bathroom, Observation on 06/13/23 at 1:05 PM, revealed R4 in his room, there was a strong odor of urine. Interview on 06/13/23 at 12:35 PM, with the Director of Nursing (DON) who stated she was aware of the strong urine odor in R4's room. She stated they have been trying different products and continue to investigate new products that can be used. Interview on 06/13/23 at 1:00 PM, with the Household Coordinator (HHC), stated she was aware of the strong urine odor in R4's room and had been trying different products. She stated she had steam cleaned the carpet at least once per month. She indicated it was difficult to remove the odor when R4 continued to urinate on the…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-06-15 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to assist residents with Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care for one of one resident (Resident (R) 3) of 15 sampled residents, out of a total sample of 46 residents reviewed for ADL's. Specifically the facility failed to ensure R3's chin hair was removed while receiving a shower. Findings include: 1. Review of R3's Face Sheet, located in the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) under the admission record tab, revealed an admission date of 02/10/23 with medical diagnoses that included Type 2 Diabetes, Acute Diastolic Heart Failure, Reduced mobility, and Muscle Weakness. Review of R3's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), located in the EMR under the MDS tab with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 05/19/23, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status score (BIMS), of 15 out of 15, indicating R3 was cognitively intact. The MDS revealed R3 required extensive physical assistance of two persons for her personal hygiene needs. Review of R3's care plan, located in the EMR under the Care Plan tab last updated 05/29/23…

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

    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 WESTERN HOME COMMUNITIES — 6 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 53.7+1.3 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 53.5+0.5 vs chain
Staffing 5 of 54.3+0.7 vs chain
Quality measures 3 of 53.3-0.3 vs chain
The other 5 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.7★, per CMS)

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
FIRST INTERSTATE BANKOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 01/01/2025
BEHN, MARLENEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 08/01/2009
BITTNER, SCOTTIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 08/01/2010
BROWN, SARAHIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2015
COIL, JOYCEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 08/01/2012
FERGUSON, KATHLEENIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2012
FIRMAN, STEVEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 08/01/2009
FOX, LARRYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 08/01/2011
HANSEN, KRISIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 03/01/2009
JENKINS, GLENNIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2011
SANNES, AARONIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/15/2025
SCHMITZ, GREGORYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2015
SCHROEDER, HEATHERIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/15/2025
SUSONG, KATHERINEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/15/2025
WINTER, FLOYDIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 08/01/2010
WITT, WILLIAMIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 08/01/2012
EVANS, ANGELAIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2022
FRANKHAUSER, RICHARDIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/01/2021
GAINES, RONALDIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2021
HARRIS, JERRYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/01/2009
MEIER, CATHERINEIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 11/06/2009
O'LEARY, PATRICKIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2022
SCHULTZ, DIANNEIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2021
AGER, WENDYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/09/2026
BENNETT, KEVINIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 09/06/1978
BILLMAN, EMILYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 08/02/2021
GARCIA, JENNYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 11/13/2023
GIBBS, STACYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 02/26/2018
MCCORMICK, DARRELLIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2022
TJADEN, TABITHAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 04/22/2019
BCG HOLDINGS INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2024
BRIGHTON CONSULTING GROUP LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2024
CATTAIL BCG LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2024
CATTAIL INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2024
CLIFTONLARSONALLEN LLPOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 08/25/2021
ECSI INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2024
HELPING HANDS HEALTHCARE SOLUTIONSOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025
IOWA HEALTH CARE ASSOCIATIONOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2024
LOTUS ABOVE & BEYOND HEALTHCARE STAFFING LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2023
RELIANT CARE PHARMACY SERVICES LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 02/28/2023
SUGAR CREEK HEALTH MANAGEMENT LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 09/30/2022
TECH OF AGES LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 52 rows in the source record cover these 42 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

13 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.

$5.8M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+1.2%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$326K
Related-party expense6% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 54%Medicare 4%Other / private 42%

This home reported $326K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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

Cost & finances

$334per resident / day
operating cost
$10,141per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$338per 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 165508. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-05-15, 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