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

Walnut Ridge

1703 Campus Drive, Clive, IA 50325 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 60 certified beds · (515) 222-4000 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (515) 222-4000 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0609) — cited Jan 2024
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 harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (24% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed

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
Urgent care / clinic
1601 NW 114th St Ste 142 · (515) 222-3151 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1601 NW 114th St · (515) 222-7979 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
11925 University Ave · (515) 695-3043 · Call to confirm hours
Park
308 1st Ave NW · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
1370 NW 114th St · (515) 222-3185

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 3 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased18.8%17.1%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight6.0%4.6%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.5%1.5%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection7.8%2.4%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms2.4%4.2%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury3.8%3.8%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened23.7%16.6%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication12.0%20.8%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine93.8%95.3%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers5.2%4.2%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control22.5%25.6%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table29.2%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 vaccine67.9%73.3%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission22.1%20.9%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit8.3%13.2%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.461.491.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.202.081.80better

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.

31.7% 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 33 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

31.7%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.8%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
46.0%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.46U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.31hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.11hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 46.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 37 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 0.46 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 77% 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 SNF31.7%CMS range 20.0–51.051.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.8%CMS range 6.7–14.310.7%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 discharge46.0%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge37.8%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 discharge18.9%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 identified95.3%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 hospitalization7.3%CMS range 2.9–13.37.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.641.02Oct 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

0.96
RN hours/ resident / day
0.13
LPN hours/ resident / day
3.80
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.89
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.71
RN hoursweekends
24.4%
Total nursing turnover
12.5%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 60 beds and averages 45.5 residents a day — about 76% occupied, or roughly 14 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.89 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.96 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.80 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 4.49 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.05 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.06 to 0.71 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 24% is below the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

4
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-07-09)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2024-08-08)

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. 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.

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

  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-07-09 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure appropriate kitchen sanitation practices were followed (hand hygiene, cleanliness, and equipment sanitizing). The facility reported a census of 32. Findings include: 1. During the initial Care Center kitchen observation on 7/7/25 at 10:15 AM, the floor drain located near the beverage table was noted with a black, sludge-like build up all around. The floor underneath the beverage table, especially where the floor meets the wall, a moderate amount of debris and small trash items were noted. This included whole food items and chemical spray bottle. 2. During the initial Care Center kitchen observation on 7/7/25, the dish machine was not currently in use but had been used earlier. July ' s dish machine temperature log reviewed and several missing entries noted, including a temperature for the current day. During the initial Main kitchen observation on 7/7/25 at 10:30 AM, July ' s dish machine temperature log reviewed. The log had only 2 temperatures recorded for the month thus far.Review of the Care…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-07-09 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Resident #25Bladder and Bowel Incontinence Based on clinical record review, observations, staff interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to reposition/toilet a resident per her Care Plan for one of twelve residents reviewed. The facility reported a census of 32 residents. Findings include:The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) of Resident #25 dated 5/8/25 recorded a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3 which indicated severe cognitive impairment. The MDS documented the resident was dependent on staff for toilet transfer and toilet hygiene. The MDS coded the resident to require substantial/maximal assistance for bed mobility. The MDS coded the resident to be frequently incontinent of both bowel and bladder. The Care Plan of Resident #25 identified a Focus Area of Risk of Impaired Skin Integrity, initiated 2/5/25. The Care Plan directed staff to provide assistance for repositioning and toileting upon rise, before and after meals, before bedtime and to use a bedpan on the overnight shift. The Care Plan identified an additional Focus Area of Resident #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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-07-09 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolated
    Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on clinical record review, observation, staff interview and review of the facility Medication Administration Procedure, the facility failed to prime an insulin flexpen prior to administering the insulin dose to ensure the proper amount of insulin administered for one of one residents observed who received insulin during medication pass (Resident #88). The facility reported a census of 32 residents. Findings include: The Electronic Health Record (EHR) Medical Diagnosis list revealed Resident #88 had a diagnoses of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. The Order Summary for Resident #88 dated 7/8/25 included a physician's order for Glargine (insulin) 4 units subcutaneously (SQ) every morning for diabetes started on 7/8/25. The Medication Administration Record (MAR) dated 7/1/25 - 7/31/25 revealed an order for Glargine insulin 4 units SQ. The MAR revealed Staff D, Registered Nurse (RN), documented Glargine insulin 4 units SQ administered on 7/8/25 AM. During observation on 7/8/25 at 8:34 AM, Staff D, RN, reported Resident #88's blood sugar was 168. Staff D checked the medication order 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-09 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolated
    Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure appropriate serving sizes for residents on an altered textured diet for 3 for 4 residents observed during lunch service. The facility reported a census of 32. Findings include: The lunch menu on 7/8/25 for the Soft and Bite Sized diet (SB6) consisted of Minced and Moist (MM5) beef (#6 scoop), orzo pasta (1/2c), fork-mash able California vegetables (1/2c), and ripe bananas cut into <1/2 pieces. The alternative hot entree was scrambled eggs (#8 scoop) along with a serving of puree bread. Puree Clam Chowder (#6 scoop) was the soup of the day. Puree cookies were offered for dessert. A total of 2 residents prescribed a SB6 diet. The lunch menu on 7/8/25 for the Easy-to-Chew diet (EC7) consisted of MM5 beef (#6 scoop), buttered pasta (1/2c), fork-mash able California vegetables, and a soft/ripe banana. Assorted cookies (2) were offered for dessert. A total of 2 residents prescribed a EC7 diet. During an observation on 7/8/25 at 11:30 AM, Staff E, Cook, obtained clean equipment and placed several…

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

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

    Based on observations, staff interviews, the 2022 Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Food Code, and facility policy review, the facility failed to maintain sanitary practices by improperly storing food and failed to follow guidelines for checking the sanitizer parts per million (ppm) for 2 of 2 meals observed. The facility reported a census of 35 residents. Findings include: 1. On 8/5/24 at 10:36 AM, Dietary Manager (DM), during initial walk through, the following was observed: In the Refrigerator #4, the following items did not have open date label: Prune juice, gallon of skim milk, gallon of 2% milk. A clear container with red lid had light red creamy liquid contents did not have a label for identification or date. The following items were not fully covered, cottage cheese and coleslaw. In the Refrigerator #3, the following item were not fully covered or dated, American cheese. In the Freezer, the following items were not covered, has brown and loaf of gluten bread. 2. On 8/07/24 12:25 PM DM revealed they have not been checking the sanitizer concentration for ppm. The staff member…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-08 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
    Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
    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, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to clarify the Doctor's order resulting in the medication error for 1 of 7 residents reviewed for medication administration (Resident #22). The facility reported a census of 35 residents. Findings include: On 8/7/24 at 8:30 AM Staff E, LPN reviewed the Electronic Medication Administration Record (EMAR) as she prepared the scheduled AM medication, including Senna S 50mg-8.6mg two tablets. The staff member placed the tablets in the medication cup looked over the tablets, reviewed the EMAR, then administered the tablets to the resident, including Senna S 50mg-8.6mg two tablets. The staff reviewed the EMAR and signed the administered medication, Senna S 50mg-8.6mg two tablets was administered. The EMAR dated 8/7/24 revealed Senna 8.6mg give two tablet by mouth two times a day for constipation, order date 1/25/23. On 8/7/24 at 2:40 PM Staff C, RN removed medication card from medication cart, verified 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-08 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, staff interviews, record reviews, and policy review, the facility failed to implement the Infection Prevention and Control Program (IPCP) by staff not discarding Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) immediately after use. The facility reported a census of 35 residents. Findings include: On 8/07/24 at 9:30 AM, two (2) Person Protective Equipment (PPE) gowns were observed hanging on a hook rack in a resident's room with Enhanced Barrier Precautions in place. At 9:31 AM, Staff A, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) stated the PPE gowns were required due to the resident's sacral wound. She stated the gowns were hung on the hook rack so they would be closer to the door. She stated when staff were finished using the PPE gowns, they hung them back up or got new one. She stated there was no way to know who used which gown but identified the gown on the right hook was the one she used. At 9:41 AM, Staff B, Health Information Manager (Medical Records) provided the PPE gown product number which indicated the manufacturer identified the PPE gowns as single-use gowns. At 1:22 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-01-18 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, document review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide appropriate infection prevention practices for disinfecting the reusable medical equipment. The facility reported a census of 32 residents. Findings include: During an interview with Staff C, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) on 1/17/24 at 9:00 AM, it was reported the facility sanitized transfer lifts that are used between residents with Clorox wipes at the end of each day, including if a resident was on Transmission-Based Precautions (TBP). During an interview with Staff A, Registered Nurse (RN) on 1/17/24 at 10:00 AM, showed where the disinfecting wipes are stored in the facility and pointed at the shelf with boxes of Clorox wipes. During an interview with the facility's Infection Preventionist on 1/17/24 at 10:00 AM, she acknowledged the facility did not use EPA-registered disinfectant for healthcare settings on reusable medical equipment. Facility provided policy titled Infection Control undated, documented equipment or items in the resident environment likely to have been contaminated…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-01-18 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, facility investigation file review, resident, family, and staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to report an allegation of abuse to the Iowa Department of Inspections, Appeals and Licensing (DIAL) timely for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for abuse (Resident #26). The facility reported a census of 32 residents. Findings include: A facility self-report to DIAL on 10/9/23 at 9:38 AM revealed an allegation of abuse occurred 10/7/23 at approximately 2:30 PM. Resident #26 expressed anxiety and concerns about an interaction with a specific staff member. Staff member placed on administrative leave on 10/9/23 during the investigation. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment form dated 9/5/23 revealed Resident #26 had diagnoses of vertebral fracture and osteoporosis. The resident admitted to the facility 8/30/23. The assessment revealed the resident required extensive assistance of one person for ambulation, transfers, dressing, and toileting. The MDS documented the 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-01-18 · 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, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to refer one of two residents who had a change in mental health diagnoses and psychotropic medications to the appropriate state-designated authority for a Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) re-evaluation and determination (Resident #5). The facility reported a census of 32 residents. Findings include: The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #5 had diagnoses of non-Alzheimer's dementia, anxiety disorder, depression, and psychotic disorder. The MDS revealed resident had no serious mental illness and had not met criteria for a Level II Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR). The resident had no physical or verbal behaviors. The MDS assessment recorded the resident took antipsychotic (AP), antianxiety (AA), and antidepressant (AD) medications, and had no psychological therapy during the look-back period. The Care Plan revised 6/13/23 revealed the resident had…

    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 · Dcited before2024-01-18 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolated
    Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, clinical record review, and staff interviews the facility failed to follow the menu and provide the residents with the correct diet of a soft and bite sized diet as ordered by the physician for 2 of 32 residents reviewed (Resident # 13, and Resident #14) . The facility reported a census of 32 residents. Findings include: 1.The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #13 dated 11/15/23, included diagnoses of Non-Alzheimer's Dementia and heart failure. The MDS documented the resident on a mechanically altered diet (require change in texture of food or liquids). The MDS indicated the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 9, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. On 1/17/24 during lunch service starting at 11:45 AM, Staff C, [NAME] placed 2 deep-fried chicken tenders and ranch dressing in the food processor and processed to a ground meat texture, which was then served to Resident #13, along with pureed oranges, and soft small cut green beans. Resident #13's clinical Physician Order Summary report documented an order for a…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-18 · 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, policy review, and staff interview, staff failed to serve food under sanitary conditions, in order to reduce the risk of contamination and foodborne illness. The facility reported a census of 32 residents. Findings include: On 1/17/24, during a continuous observation in the dining room starting at 11:45 AM, the Dietary Manager (DM) served a resident's plate, applied a clothing protector to the resident touching the resident's clothing and hair, and cut up food for the resident. The DM did not complete hand hygiene and proceeded to pass another resident's plate, touch the resident's drinking glasses, applied the resident's clothing protector, touching the resident's clothing and hair, and cut up the resident's food using the resident's silverware. Without completing any hand hygiene between residents, the DM continued to serve 3 more residents, touching their plates, cups and glasses, applying each resident's clothing protector, touching each resident's clothing and hair and 1 resident's arm, and then cutting food for each resident using their silverware. The DM…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-09-14 · 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

    Based on clinical record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision for 1 of 4 residents reviewed who were at risk for falls. (Resident #2) The facility reported census was 28. Findings include: According to a Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an assessment reference date of 3/13/23, Resident #2 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 8 indicating a moderately impaired cognitive status. Resident #2 required extensive assistance with transfers, mobility, dressing, toilet use, and personal hygiene needs. Resident #2's diagnoses included congestive heart failure. In an interview on 9/12/23 at 9:16 a.m. Staff A, certified nurse aide, stated on the morning of 5/20/23, she was getting Resident #2 up for a shower. Staff A stated she placed a gait belt on Resident #2 and ambulated to the bathroom using her wheel walker. Staff A stated Resident #2 was upright with her walker when she turned and grabbed the shower chair and placed it over the toilet. Staff A stated she then turned and grabbed the gait belt as she was positioned in front and 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.

    Quality of Life and Care 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 PRESBYTERIAN HOMES & SERVICES — 21 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 54.3+0.7 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 53.4+0.6 vs chain
Staffing 5 of 54.9≈ chain avg
Quality measures 3 of 52.8+0.2 vs chain
The other 20 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.3★, 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 / managerTypeRoleSince
BREMER BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATIONOrganization5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; 5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTERESTsince 08/30/2018
BASS, ALLISONIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 11/01/2016
LARSON, DUANEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 12/10/2019
LINDH, DANIELIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 06/08/2012
MEYER, MARKIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 06/08/2012
PHS MANAGEMENT, LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 08/10/2018

CMS files one row per role, so the 11 rows in the source record cover these 6 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.

2 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.

$2.8M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$626K
Related-party expense5% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 3%Medicare 7%Other / private 90%

This home reported $626K 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

$1,551per resident / day
operating cost
$47,153per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$364per 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 165791. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-09, 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