North Crest Living Center
34 Northcrest Drive, Council Bluffs, IA 51503 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 62 certified beds · (712) 328-2333 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (34) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
| 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 held steady at 1 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.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 16.8% | 17.1% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.6% | 4.6% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.4% | 1.5% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 5.5% | 2.4% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 4.7% | 4.2% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 6.0% | 3.8% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 20.0% | 16.6% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 12.5% | 20.8% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 96.4% | 95.3% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.7% | 4.2% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 33.8% | 25.6% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 9.2% | 19.5% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 3.0% | 2.1% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 72.0% | 73.3% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 25.6% | 20.9% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 17.5% | 13.2% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.68 | 1.49 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.80 | 2.08 | 1.80 | better |
‡ 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.
53.7% 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 62 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 69.0% 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 42 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 29% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 6% 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
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 53.7%CMS range 43.0–67.8 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.1%CMS range 7.4–15.3 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no 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 discharge | 69.0% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 42.9% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 69.0% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 identified | 95.7% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 setting | not 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 discharge | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 stay | 2.1% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 2.1% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 8.3%CMS range 4.6–14.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.82 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS 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
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 62 beds and averages 57.2 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 5 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.91 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.45 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.95 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 3.20 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.19 on weekdays — 24% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.47 to 0.41 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 54% 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
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.
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.
34 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 24 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-26 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on Electronic Health Records (EHR) review, document review, Medication Administration Record - Treatment Administration Record (MAR-TAR), staff interview and policy review the facility failed to notify the primary care physician with the resident's lab results from a Urine Analysis (UA) for 1 of 3 residents (Residents #1) reviewed. The facility reported a census of 57 residents.Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 9 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS documented utilization of indwelling catheter.Review of Resident #1's EHR titled, Orders documented a physician's order started 8/11/25 to change indwelling catheter with 22 French on the 11th of the month. EHR titled, Orders also documented a physician's order to obtain UA and send out one time only for 1 day dated 6/6/25.Review of Resident #1's EHR titled, Orders documented a physician's order started 7/29/25 to change indwelling catheter with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-26 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on Electronic Health Record (EHR) review, Medication Administration Record - Treatment Administration Record (MAR-TAR) review, policy review and staff interviews the facility failed to provide appropriate interventions for the urinary catheter to provide appropriate services to prevent urinary tract infections to 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #1). The facility reported a census of 57 residents.Findings include:The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 9 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS documented utilization of an indwelling catheter.Review of Resident #1's EHR titled, Orders documented a physician's order dated 7/29/25 to flush the indwelling catheter as needed for clogging / dysfunction as needed with 30-60mL sterile water.Review of Resident #1's MAR-TAR documented a physician's order with a start date of 7/29/25 to flush the indwelling catheter as needed for clogging / dysfunction with 30-60mL sterile water.…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-26 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, policy review, and staff interview the facility failed to provide appropriate infection prevention practices when providing care to a resident with a catheter, that was on Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for 1 of 3 reviewed (Resident #3). The facility reported a census of 57 residents.Findings include:The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented Resident #3 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating no cognitive impairment. The MDS documented utilization of an indwelling catheter.Review of Resident #3's EHR titled, Orders documented a physician's order started 8/4/25 to change indwelling catheter with 16 French monthly and as needed. Review of Resident #1's EHR titled, Orders documented a physician's order started 7/29/25 to change indwelling catheter with 16 French monthly and as needed. Observation on 8/25/25 at 3:10 PM of catheter care completed on Resident #3 by Staff H, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) and Staff I, CNA with EBP signage posted in…
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.
- Potential for harm · F2025-07-24 · tag F0865 — failed to run a quality-improvement (QAPI) program — widespreadHave a plan that describes the process for conducting QAPI and QAA activities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on document review, staff interviews, and facility plan review the facility failed to demonstrate good faith attempts to correct quality deficiencies based on issues that were identified with repeat deficiencies in 3 areas and corrections developed in a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) that remained incomplete in a reasonable time frame. The facility reported a census of 61 residents. Findings include:Review of document titled, Provider History Report documented previous recertification survey on 9/18/24 with deficiencies F0625 notice of bed hold policy before/upon transfer with a correction date of 10/19/24, F0656 Develop/implement Comprehensive care plan with correction date of 10/19/24, and F0658 services provided meet professional standards with correction date of 10/19/24.Review of document dated 7/7/25 titled, Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) documented an objective and goal to meet and maintain compliance with F880. Also documented actions steps to ensure noted catheters have appropriate orders and care plans with a target completion date of 7/25/25.On 7/24/25 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-07-24 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to follow infection control standards of practice. Laundry staff failed to wear Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) while sorting laundry, and the facility failed to ensure that they had consistent implementation of the responsibilities of the Infection Preventionist (IP). The facility reported a census of 61 residents. Findings include:On 7/24/25 at 6:48 AM, observed Staff L, Environmental Aide in the laundry room sorting dirty laundry items without a gown or gloves. She quickly went to get a gown but was unsure how to put it on. She first put it on backwards, with the ties in the front, then she took it off and put it on the correct way with the ties in the back. She went back to sorting the laundry but failed to apply disposable gloves. On 7/24/25 at 8:15 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) explained that she was taking over the responsibilities as Infection Preventionist as they discovered that the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) was…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-07-24 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on Electronic Health Record (EHR) review, document review, policy review and staff interviews the facility failed to provide a comprehensive care plan that included goals or interventions for residents with a catheter, depression and anxiety for 6 of 10 residents reviewed (Resident #1, #3 and #5, #6, #7 and #34). The facility reported a census of 61 residents. Finding include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] for Resident #1 documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 8 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #1's MDS dated [DATE] documented utilization of an indwelling catheter. Review of Resident #1's EHR titled, Care Plan revealed no focus, goal or intervention developed for utilization of a catheter. 2. The MDS dated [DATE] for Resident #3 documented a BIMS of 15 indicating no cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #3's MDS dated [DATE] documented utilization of an indwelling catheter. Review of Resident #3’s EHR titled, Care Plan revealed no focus,…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2025-07-24 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, resident interviews, staff interviews, document and policy review the facility failed to provide food at an appetizing temperature to 4 of 24 residents reviewed (Resident #1, #11, #20 and #27). The facility reported a census of 61 residents.Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] for Resident #11 documented a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating no cognitive impairment. On 7/21/25 at 10:57 AM Resident #11 stated she ate all of her meals in her room. Resident #11 explained that at least twice a week the food is brought to her room cold. Resident #11 stated the staff leave before she eats and she does not turn the light on to have them reheat the food. Resident #11 stated no specific meal is cold but all have been. Resident #11 stated the meals have been brought to her room cold a couple times in the last week. 2. The MDS dated [DATE] for Resident #20 documented a BIMS of 9 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. On 7/21/2025 at 10:44 AM…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2025-07-24 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — patternImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview, record review and policy review the facility failed to ensure they followed through with antibiotic stewardship practices. The facility reported a census of 61 residents. Findings include:On 7/24/25 at 8:15 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) explained that she took over the responsibilities as Infection Preventionist (IP) early in June as she discovered that the previous IP was not completing the tasks as directed. She displayed a spreadsheet that she recently developed to use for antibiotic tracking. The spreadsheet lacked any resident information. When asked how any residents were on an antibiotic, she looked through the electronic chart and said there was just one resident. She was not aware of any tools that the nurses were using, such as the McGeer (criteria for infection surveillance) that could help them determine the resident's need for antibiotics. According to the Department of Health and Human Services Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Resident Matrix, provided at the start of the recertification, the facility had 6 residents that were on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-24 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
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 policy review, the facility failed to inform residents of their options and costs when services were no longer covered by Medicare Part A for 3 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #50, #43 and #5). The facility reported a census of 61 residents. Findings include:1) According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], Resident #50 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 (intact cognitive ability). The resident was totally dependent on staff for dressing, toileting, and hygiene. The Care Plan for Resident #50, last updated on 6/13/25, showed that staff would provide a restorative program 3-6 times a week due to parkinsonism. The diagnoses include intestinal obstruction, history of falling, anxiety disorder, and osteoporosis. The census tab in the electronic record indicated that Medicare Part A services ended on 4/10/25 for Resident #50, and on 6/12/25 the resident was private pay. A Beneficiary Protection Notification Review (BPNR) for Resident #50…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-24 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on Electronic Health Records (EHR) review, observations, resident interview, and staff interview the facility failed to provide the residents with a comfortable / clean homelike environment. Resident rooms found with various debris on the floor and application of bed linen not completed in a timely manner for 3 of 24 residents reviewed (Resident #15, #22 and #24). The facility reported a census of 61 residents. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] for Resident #22 documented a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating no cognitive impairment. An observation on 7/21/25 at 11:52 AM of room [ROOM NUMBER]-B revealed a pile of sheets in the center of the bed. No sheets present in place on the bed. Review of document dated 7/24/25 titled, All Resident List documented Resident #22 resided in room [ROOM NUMBER] bed B. On 7/21/25 at 11:52 AM Resident #22 stated he got himself ready that morning. Resident #22 stated the staff usually get him ready but they did not that…
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.
Show the remaining 24 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-24 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolatedPrevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
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 identify non-pharmacological interventions and targeted behaviors on the care plan related to high risk medications in 3 out of 5 sampled residents reviewed (Resident #2, #13 and #37). The facility reported a census of 61 residents. Findings include: 1.The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #13 documented diagnoses of anxiety, dementia and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). The MDS showed the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3, which indicated severe cognitive impairment. The Clinical Physician Orders for Resident #13 showed the following orders:a. Morphine (opioid medication) every two as needed for pain or shortness of breath with a start date of 3/25/25.b. Lorazepam (antipsychotic medication) every four hours for restlessness/anxiety as needed with a start date of 5/29/25. The Care Plan identified Resident #13 was prescribed high risk medications for anxiety and pain. The Care Plan…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-24 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on Electronic Health Record (EHR) review, staff interview, and facility policy, the facility failed to ensure bed hold notice was sent to the resident and or the resident's responsible person when the resident transferred out of the facility for 1 of 1 residents reviewed (Residents #60). The facility reported a census of 61 residents. Findings include:1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] for Resident #60 documented a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 indicating no cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #60's EHR documented no bed hold Review of Resident #60's EHR dated 5/14/25 at 9:27 PM titled, Progress Notes documented Resident #60 was transferred to the hospital with shortness of breath and chest pain with pain to the jaw and neck. Progress Note documented Resident #60 could not speak related to discomfort and Resident #60 requested to be transferred to the hospital. Resident #60's EHR titled, Progress Notes documented the resident remained at the hospital 5/15/25 or 5/16/25.…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-24 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident interview, staff interviews, record review and policy review the facility failed to obtain and follow physicians' orders for 2 of 21 of residents (Resident #36 and #6). Staff chose to hold insulin for Resident #36 without obtaining doctor-specified parameters on when to hold the insulin and failed to notify the doctor when the insulin hadn't been given. Resident #6 had an indwelling urinary catheter, staff failed to obtain an order for the device. The facility reported a census of 61 residents. Findings include: 1) According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], Resident #36 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 (intact cognitive ability). He was independent with hygiene, toileting, dressing, transferring and walking. His diagnoses included: diabetes mellitus, renal insufficiency, schizophrenia, anxiety disorder and adult failure to thrive. The Care Plan updated on 5/1/25, showed that Resident #36 needed a therapeutic diet related to diagnosis of diabetes…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-24 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, electronic medical record (EMR) reviews, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to provide respiratory care and services in accordance with professional standards of practice for 1 of 1 residents reviewed, requiring the use of oxygen (Resident #47). The facility reported a census of 61 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #47 dated 7/17/25 identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12/15 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS documented diagnoses that included: heart failure, hypertension, anxiety disorder, obstructive sleep apnea, and pulmonary hypertension. The document provided the resident utilized oxygen upon admission and while a resident, and that oxygen was continuous on admission.Resident #32's Care Plan dated 7/23/25 identified a focus area of oxygen therapy related to ineffective gas exchange. Interventions for staff included oxygen at 3-5 liters (L). The 7/25 Medication Administration Record (MAR)-Treatment Administration Order (TAR) did not provide orders or…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-24 · tag F0744 — failed to care for residents with dementia — isolatedProvide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with dementia.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, Electronic Medical Record (EMR) review, and policy review, the facility failed to provide appropriate treatment and services to meet a resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for a resident diagnosed with dementia for 1 of 1 residents reviewed (Resident #37). The facility had a census of 61. Findings include:The Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #37 dated 6/25/25 identified a BIMS score of 3/15 indicating severe cognitive impairment. The MDS included diagnoses of Alzheimer's, Non-Alzheimer's Dementia, anxiety, and depression. The document identified mood feelings of feeling down, depressed, or hopeless in 2-6 days in the last 2 weeks of the reporting period. The MDS identified Resident #37 took antipsychotic, antianxiety and antidepressant medications during the last 7 days of the assessment period.The 7/25 Medication/Treatment Administration Record (MAR-TAR) identified an order dated 10/14/24 for nursing to monitor every shift for target behaviors: (refusal of cares, yelling out, physical aggression…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-24 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
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 ensure that staff obtained signed consents and were educated on the influenza immunization before it was administered. The facility reported a census of 61 residents.Findings include:1) According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], Resident #11 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 (intact cognitive ability). His diagnoses included arthritis, non-Alzheimer's Dementia, anxiety disorder and cerebrovascular disease. The Care Plan for Resident #11, updated on 11/12/24, showed that her immune system had aged and staff were to encourage the resident to follow current guidelines for influenza and pneumonia vaccines. The tab titled: Vaccines, showed that Resident #11 received the Influenza vaccine on 10/3/24. The chart lacked a consent and documentation that education had been provided. 2) The MDS dated [DATE], indicated that Resident #7 had a BIMS score of 13 (moderate cognitive deficits). She was…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-24 · tag F0887 — isolatedEducate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
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 staff interview, clinical record review and policy review the facility failed to ensure that staff obtained signed consents and were educated on the COVID-19 immunization before it was administered. The facility reported a census of 61 residents.Findings include:1) According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], Resident #11 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 (intact cognitive ability). His diagnoses included arthritis, non-Alzheimer's Dementia, anxiety disorder and cerebrovascular disease. The Care Plan for Resident #11, updated on 11/12/24, showed that her immune system had aged and staff were to encourage the resident to follow current guidelines for COVID-19 vaccines. The tab titled: Vaccines, showed that Resident #11 received the COVID-19 vaccine on 10/3/24. The chart lacked a consent and documentation that education had been provided. 2) The MDS dated [DATE], indicated that Resident #7 had a BIMS score of 13 (moderate cognitive deficits). She was totally dependent on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-09-19 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — widespreadProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staffing reviews, interviews, and Facility Assessment review the facility failed to provide adequate nursing staff to assure residents safety and well-being. The facility reported a census of 56 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #7 dated 7/23/24 identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 which indicated normal cognition. Resident #7 on 9/16/24 at 1:09 PM stated call lights can take longer than 15 minutes to answer. The resident stated he would watch the clock to determine the length of time for answering. Staff C, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA), on 9/18/24 at 1:05 PM stated working on the weekends was more difficult as there were less staff. Staff C stated due to the lower staffing on the weekends, and occasionally during the week, the staff could not answer the call lights as efficiently and resident cares could be affected. Review of Quarter 3 2024 (April, May, June) Scheduled Hours and Per Patient Date (PPD) data revealed 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.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-09-19 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to follow standard precautions while separating laundry, and following enhanced barrier precautions (EBP). The facility further failed to establish a facility wide written infection prevention control policy. The facility reported a census of 56 residents. Findings include: 1. Observation 9/17/24 at 11:17 AM Staff E revealed laundry is being separated without gloves and gowns. Staff E further revealed that laundry is separated, and then hand sanitizer is utilized. Gloves were noted around the corner from the washing machines on a shelf at this time. During this observation it was also noted there were no gowns in the laundry room. Interview 9/17/24 at 11:21 AM Staff E revealed that staff should be wearing gloves and gowns while separating laundry with the positive Covid-19 cases in the building. Interview 9/17/24 at 11:40 AM with the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed that gloves should be worn when separating…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-19 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, staff interviews and policy review, the facility failed to obtain complete resident records to honor the resident wishes as stated on the Iowa Physician Order for Scope and Treatment. The facility failed to obtain a physician order for DNR for 1 of 14 residents (Resident #32) reviewed. The facility reported a census of 56 residents. Findings include: According to the documents, Code Status Form and and the Iowa Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment (IPOST), signed by Resident #32 on [DATE] and physician on [DATE], the resident indicated a do not resuscitate (DNR) with limited interventions, no artificial nutrition by tube, and transfer to the hospital. Review of Resident #32's Clinical Physician Orders in the electronic medical records, signed physician orders for 7/24 and 8/24, the facility failed to obtain a signed order for a DNR status. On [DATE] at 8:30 AM Staff A, Social Worker, confirmed Resident #32 had a DNR status and there was not a physician order in the electronic…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-19 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, policy review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to notify the physician immediately after a sudden change in the resident's condition, and failed to notify the physician immediately after transferring a resident to the emergency department (ED) with chest pain and shortness of breath for of 1 of 16 resident reviewed (Resident #28). The facility reported a census of 56 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] for Resident #28 revealed diagnoses of heart failure, pulmonary hypertension, respiratory failure and stroke. The same MDS documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, which indicated no cognitive impairment. In an interview on 9/16/24 at 10:34 AM, Resident #28 reported on 6/16/24 she transferred to the ED for a cough, sharp chest pain and shortness of breath. The Progress Note dated 6/16/2024 at 2:46 PM documented Resident #28 called the nurse into the room with complaints of sharp chest pain, shortness of breath,…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-19 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on clinical document review, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to notify a resident 48 hours in advance when the end of a medicare part A stay or when all of part B therapies were ending to 1 of 3 residents (Resident #146) reviewed. The facility reported a census of 56 residents. Findings include: Review of Resident #146's Advanced Beneficiary Notice (ABN) revealed there was no ABN to review. Interview 9/18/24 at 2:34 PM with the Administrator revealed that he could not provide a ABN form for Resident #164, as the facility could not locate a copy of the form. The Administrator further revealed that ABN's should be given with proper notice to the resident. Follow up interview 9/19/24 at 10:41 AM with the Administrator revealed the facility does not have a policy, but does follow the federal regulations.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-19 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
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 obtain bed hold notifications for 2 of 3 residents (Resident #1, #60) reviewed. The facility reported a census of 56 residents. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #1's Electronic Health Record (EHR) page title progress notes revealed an entry dated 9/14/24 at 10:22 AM documenting that Resident #1 was sent to the emergency room for treatment of a laceration to the forehead after a fall. Review of bed hold notification for Residents #1 revealed there was no bed hold form to review. 2. Review of Resident #60's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed a most recent admit date from an acute hospital stay dated 9/7/24. Review of Resident #60's Electronic Health Record (EHR) revealed hospitalization for Resident #60 from 8/31/24 through 9/3/24. On 9/18/24 at 12:55 PM the Administrator acknowledged the facility did not have a signed bed hold for the resident for the hospitalization. The Administrator stated the facility…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-19 · tag F0640 — isolatedEncode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on electronic health record review (EHR) and staff interviews the facility failed to submit a comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) as directed by the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services (CMS) Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Version 3.0 Manual assessment within the required timeframe for 1 out of 16 residents reviewed (Residents #216 ) reviewed. The facility census was 56. Findings include: The review of Resident #216's MDS assessment data indicated assessments dated 8/26/24 Entry, 8/29/24 Medicare - 5 Day, and 9/5/24 Entry lacked transmission dates and acceptance. MDS document 9/5/24 indicated the most recent admission date of 9/5/24. The review of the assessment data did not include a Discharge with Return Anticipated Assessment. On 9/18/24 at 12:45 PM Staff B, MDS Coordinator, acknowledged she was still fairly new in the position and was not sure if everything had to be submitted. The staff stated if the MDS page indicated completion of an assessment, that indicated the assessment was done, and if it indicated accepted that meant the assessment had been completed…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-19 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
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 represent an accurate picture of the resident's status during the observation period of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) by not accurately recording medication use for 2 of 5 residents reviewed (Residents #7, and #31). The facility reported a census of 56 residents. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #7's MDS dated [DATE] revealed diagnosis of cancer, and stroke. The MDS further revealed Resident #7 received anticoagulant medications 7 out of the 7 days during the look back period. Review of Resident #7's Electronic Health Record (EHR) page titled Physician's Orders revealed that Resident #7 did not have any order for anticoagulant medications. 2. Review of Resident #31's MDS dated [DATE] revealed diagnosis of traumatic brain dysfunction, non-Alzheimer's dementia, anxiety disorder, and psychotic disorder. The MDS further revealed Resident #31 received hypnotic medication, and antianxiety medications 7 out of the 7 days…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-19 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical document review, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to provide a comprehensive care plan related to high risk medications for residents with an order for anticoagulants for 2 of 5 residents (Residents #17, and #31) reviewed. The facility reported a census of 56 residents. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #17's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed anticoagulant medication usage for 7 of the 7 day look back period. Review of Resident #17's Electronic Health Record (EHR) page titled Physician's orders revealed an order for Eliquis 5mg tab take 1 tablet by mouth twice daily. Review of Resident #17's Care Plan with a review date of 8/23/24 revealed no documentation of anticoagulant medication use or interventions to direct staff on bleeding and/or bruising. 2. Review of Resident #31's MDS dated [DATE] revealed anticoagulant medication usage for 7 of the 7 day look back period. Review of Resident #31's EHR page titled Physician's orders revealed an order for Eliquis…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-19 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and staff interviews the facility failed to provide professional standards of care by not obtaining daily weights per physician orders for 1 of 16 residents reviewed (Resident #56). The facility reported a census of 56 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #56 revealed diagnoses of atrial fibrillation, coronary artery disease, heart failure, and renal insufficiency. The same MDS documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #56's Care Plan revealed the resident at risk for weight variations related to history of diuretic use. Diagnosis of heart failure and elevated cardiac labs. Review of Resident #56's written Physician Orders dated 7/25/24 revealed an order for daily weights. Review of Resident #56's written Physician Orders dated 7/30/24 revealed an order for daily weights. The Weight and Vital Report for Resident #56 showed the facility…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2024-08-02 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure 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 observations, clinical record review, facility document review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure implemented interventions to reduce hazards and protect residents were followed for 3 of 3 residents (#1, #2 #3) reviewed. The facility reported a census of 54 residents. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment of Resident #1 dated 7/5/24 reflected the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 9/15, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The resident required extensive assistance for bed mobility/transfers, dressing, hygiene, and toileting. The resident used a walker and wheelchair. Resident #1 hand an indwelling catheter and had occasional bowel incontinence. Resident #1's Care Plan revealed an intervention dated 7/1/24 directing staff the resident transferred with assistance of 2 staff with a gait belt and walker. Fall interventions for staff to use dated 7/1/24 the resident required the call light within reach, use the call light and prompt response for all…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-02 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — isolatedProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on resident interview, family interview, clinical record review, facility document review and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide nursing staff to meet the needs of the residents by not responding to call lights in a timely manner for 2 of 3 residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2) reviewed. The facility reported a census of 54. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment of Resident #1 dated 7/5/24 reflected the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 9/15, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The resident required extensive assistance for bed mobility/transfers, dressing, hygiene, and toileting. The resident used a walker and wheelchair. Resident #1 had an indwelling catheter and had occasional bowel incontinence. On 8/5/24 at 1:40 PM a family member indicated the resident would have call lights that could range from 25-35 minutes in length before being answered. The family member stated a staff member said on one occurrence it had taken a while to answer 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-02 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide 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, clinical record review, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility staff failed to maintain infection control practices by failed to wash hands during personal care for 1 of 2 residents reviewed (Resident #3). The facility reported a census of 54 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment of Resident #3 dated 6/11/24 reflected the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3, indicating severe cognitive impairment. The resident was dependent on staff for toileting hygiene and clothing management. The resident was always incontinent of bladder and bowel. The Care Plan provided staff with interventions for toileting, bed mobility, hygiene and transfers. Resident #3 required 1-2 staff for toileting, bed mobility, and hygiene. Transfers were completed with the use of 2 staff and a full body lift (Hoyer Lift). Continuous observation on 8/2/24 at 12:12 PM revealed Staff B, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA), and Staff C, CNA, complete personal hygiene and transfer with Resident #3. Upon entry into Resident #3's bedroom…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-28 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review, staff interviews, family interviews and facility policy the facility failed to notify 2 of 3 resident's (Resident #1 and #2) family when they sustained a fall. The facility reported a census of 53 residents. Findings include: 1) The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment tool with a reference date of 6/26/23, documented Resident #1 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (MDS) score of 15. A BIMS score of 15 suggested no cognitive impairment. The MDS documented he required limited assistance of one staff for bed mobility, transfers, locomotion on the unit, dressing and personal hygiene. The MDS documented the following diagnoses: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), anemia, obstructive uropathy, malnutrition, depression and urine retention. The care plan focus area with an initiated date of 8/8/2023 documented the resident at increased risk for falls because of his limited mobility. On 8/3/2023 the care plan directed staff to use his wheelchair while assisting him to the bathroom. The following Progress Note documented: a) On 8/3/23 at 5:38…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-28 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
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 complete an assessment prior to hospitalization and upon return fromt the hospital for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #5) reviewed. The facility reported a census 53 residents. Findings included: The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment tool with a reference date of 3/1/24 documented Resident #5 had a Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15. A BIMS score of 15 suggested no cognitive impairment. The MDS documented the following diagnoses: stroke, atrial fibrillation, heart failure, renal failure, pneumonia, thyroid disease, depression, obesity, and fibromyalgia. The following Progress Notes documented: a) On 3/12/24 at 11:45 AM respiratory wheezing to bilateral lungs, a nebulizer treatment given as ordered with some improvement in lung sounds. Resident #5's physician notified and received an order for a chest x-ray, to be done stat (as soon as possible). b) On 3/13/24 at 1:02 AM Resident #5 remains on monitoring due to upper respiratory infection. Resident has harsh, loose cough, oxygen…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-06-08 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide 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, clinical record review, staff interviews and policy review the facility failed to complete routine hand hygiene and failed to use a sanitized oral syringe for medication administration for 1 out of 1 residents reviewed (Resident #9). The facility also failed to complete hand hygiene after administration of eye drops for 5 of 5 residents reviewed (Resident #14, #41, #22, and #17). The facility reported a census of 57 residents. Findings include: On 6/7/23 at 9:29 AM observations revealed the following: a. Staff B, Certified Medical Assistant (CMA), prepared to administer liquid Morphine to Resident #9 by retrieving an oral syringe from the Morphine storage box. Staff B then placed the oral syringe directly on top of the medication cart without placing the oral syringe on top of a sanitized area to prevent the possible spread of infection. Staff B opened the bottle of liquid Morphine, placed the unsanitized oral syringe down into the liquid medication, and withdrew 0.5 ML of liquid Morphine. Staff B entered Resident #9's room, administered the Morphine, then…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-06-08 · tag F0637 — isolatedAssess 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 clinical record review and staff interviews the facility failed to complete and submit a comprehensive assessment related to a significant change for 1 of 5 residents reviewed (Resident #29). The facility reported a census of 57 residents. Findings include: The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] for Resident #29 documented a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) of 10 out of 15 possible points indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS documented the resident required supervision with transfers, walking, locomotion and toileting and was independent with eating. The hospital Discharge Instructions dated 3/15/23 revealed diagnoses to include closed intertrochanter fracture of left hip. The Instructions documented orders for Resident #29 to return to a skilled level of care and receive physical and occupational therapy. The 5-day scheduled MDS assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #29 documented a BIMS of 15 out of 15 possible points indicating no cognitive impairment. The MDS revealed 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.
“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.
- 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.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GORACKE, DOUGLAS | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR | 20% | since 10/01/2009 |
| LARISON, AUDRA | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | 20% | since 02/01/2019 |
| BANK IOWA | Organization | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST | — | since 04/05/2010 |
| CHAMLEY, STEVEN | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 10/01/2009 |
| GOODMAN, JENNY | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 07/29/2019 |
| HUNT, BRENDA | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 08/07/2019 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 10 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $102K 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
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
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.
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 165290. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-24, 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.