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

Kahl Home for the Aged & Infirmed

6701 Jersey Ridge Road, Davenport, IA 52807 · Non profit - Corporation · 135 certified beds · (563) 324-1621 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (563) 324-1621 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
1 actual-harm citation1 actual-harm citation CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
Worth asking about
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation
  • inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (15) — 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 (2/5)

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.

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 2 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 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

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1820 E 54th St · (563) 224-2212 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
5811 Elmore Ave · (563) 359-4874 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
5811 Elmore Ave · (563) 726-9509 · Call to confirm hours
Park
5600 Eastern Ave · (563) 328-7275 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
5520 Eastern Ave

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 4 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 4 to 3 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 rating3★
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 increased10.2%17.1%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight9.3%4.6%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%1.5%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection2.2%2.4%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.3%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 injury2.4%3.8%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened17.6%16.6%16.1%typical
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication2.7%20.8%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine96.4%95.3%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.0%4.2%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control28.9%25.6%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table16.5%19.5%17.1%typical
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.8%2.1%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine93.4%73.3%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission23.8%20.9%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit19.7%13.2%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days0.671.491.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.812.081.80better

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.

61.2% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 344 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

61.2%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.9%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
60.3%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.42U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.18hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.21hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.04hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 60.3% 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 199 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 0.42 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 72% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 21% 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 SNF61.2%CMS range 56.2–64.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.9%CMS range 9.3–14.810.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge60.3%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 discharge56.8%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 discharge58.3%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 identified98.1%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting98.6%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this 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 stay0.4%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 worsened2.7%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 hospitalization5.4%CMS range 3.6–9.07.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.761.02Oct 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

0.76
RN hours/ resident / day
0.76
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.44
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.96
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.47
RN hoursweekends
37.2%
Total nursing turnover
20.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 135 beds and averages 104.6 residents a day — about 77% occupied, or roughly 30 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.96 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.76 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.44 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.68 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.08 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.87 to 0.47 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 37% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

Inspection trend

4
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-03-16)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2025-02-13)

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.

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

  • Actual harm · G2025-07-03 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, facility policy review and staff interviews, the facility failed to intervene and inform the provider a pressure ulcer worsened which resulted in a hospitalization for treatment for 1 of 3 (Resident #1) residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility reported census was 106. Findings include: The MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment definition of pressure ulcers included the following: Stage I is an intact skin with non-blanchable redness of a localized area usually over a bony prominence. Darkly pigmented skin may not have a visible blanching; in dark skin tones only it may appear with persistent blue or purple hues. Stage II is partial thickness loss of dermis presenting as a shallow open ulcer with a red or pink wound bed, without slough (dead tissue, usually cream or yellow in color). May also present as an intact or open/ruptured blister. Stage III Full thickness tissue loss. Subcutaneous fat may be visible but bone, tendon or muscle is not exposed. Slough may be present…

    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
  • Actual harm · Gcited before2025-07-03 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, facility policy review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure two staff transferred a resident with a mechanical lift and positioned the resident appropriately in a Broda chair resulting in an injury for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for safety. The facility reported census was 106. Findings include: Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], revealed Resident #2 had a Brief Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15, which indicated intact cognition. The MDS indicated Resident #2 required maximal to dependent assistance with transfers and mobility. The MDS list of diagnoses included Non-Alzheimer's dementia, congestive heart failure, and arthritis. During an interview on 7/1/25 at 4:50 PM Staff J, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA), queried regarding a transfer of Resident #2 on 5/13/25, stated they were busy because the day shift did not get their showers completed. At around 5:00 PM he and his partner, Staff N, Registered Nurse (RN) were getting…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2026-03-16 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, facility policy review, cleaning schedules, and staff interviews, the facility failed to label and date opened food items, clean equipment in the kitchen, and clean flooring in kitchen and dining areas to help prevent contamination and foodborne illness. The facility reported a census of 105 residents. Findings include:1. The following revealed during a continuous observation on 03/9/2026 from 9:45 AM to 10:30 AM: a. Walk-in refrigerator: 1. Open 5 oz (ounce) container of blue cheese crumbles2. Open bag of parmesan cheese.3. Open, undated green 5-gallon bucket of pickles. b. Stand-alone Freezer1. Open, undated bag of chicken tenders2. Open, undated bag of tater tots.c. The inside of a Victory stand-alone freezer had area of residue build up, and spilled items on the bottom shelf. Spilled items included a chicken tender, French fries and tater tots. d. Three large trays of breadsticks sat uncovered on a kitchen table.e. The outside of the fryer noted to have a buildup of a sticky grease-like substance. f. The outside of the microwave had a build up of dirt/food…

    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 · E2026-03-16 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — pattern
    Develop 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, policy review, and staff interview, the facility failed to offer updated pneumococcal vaccinations (given to protect against infections which can cause pneumonia, a serious lung infection) for 4 of 5 residents reviewed for immunizations (Residents #3, #10, #12, and #32). The facility reported a census of 105 residents.Findings:1. Resident #3's admission Record listed an admission date of 5/22/22. The record listed her age as 94.The resident's Immunization Report documented she received the Pneumovax 23 (a type of pneumococcal vaccine) on 11/3/14 and the Prevnar 13 (a type of pneumococcal vaccine) on 11/10/15. A 5/2/22 Information/Permission form asked if the resident wished to receive the Pneumovax vaccine if there was no record of previous immunizations of Prevnar 13 and Pneumovax 23. The form indicated the resident previously received Prevnar 13 and Pneumovax 23. The form did not include information regarding updating the resident's pneumococcal vaccinations per current Centers…

    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 · D2026-03-16 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
    Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, clinical record review, facility policy review and staff interviews, the facility failed to follow dietician recommendations and weigh a resident at least monthly for 1 of 11 reviewed for nutrition (Resident #112). The facility reported a census of 106 residents.Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #112 did not have a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) exam completed due to resident rarely or never understood. The MDS indicated resident required set up or clean up assistance with eating. The list of diagnoses included non-Alzheimer's dementia and depression. The MDS indicated no known weight loss of more than 5% in a month and the need for a mechanically altered diet. The Care Plan revealed a Focus area, revised on 10/20/25, to address at risk for malnutrition due to weight loss related to energy needs greater than energy intake related to difficulty chewing, holding food in mouth, possibly being a vegetarian diet for 5 months,…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-16 · 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, clinical record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to cover clean laundry during transport to resident rooms during 2 out of 2 observations, failed to keep a urinary drainage bag off the floor and failed to keep the graduated cylinder used to empty urine form a catheter collection bag off the floor for 1 out of 1 resident reviewed (Resident#35). The facility reported a census of 105 residents.Finding include:1. During an observation on 03/09/2026 at 1:09 PM, Staff I, Laundry Aide pushed an uncovered laundry cart, which contained hung clean laundry, from North 210 to North 203. 2. During an observation on 03/11/2026 at 11:42 AM, Staff J, Laundry Aide pushed an open hanging cart, half full of clean clothes on hangers, past three residents in the lounge on the South 3rd floor. Staff J left the cart open while she delivered clothing to five resident rooms. 3. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #35, dated 2/11/26, list of diagnoses included of stoke, obstructive uropathy ( blockage in the urinary system that prevents urine…

    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 · Dcited before2025-12-30 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
    Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, clinical record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to implement a physician order given after a low lab result for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) in the sample. The facility reported a census of 104 residents. Findings include: Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 as cognitively intact with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13 out of 15. The MDS list of diagnoses included malignant neoplasm of the colon (colon cancer), arthritis and aphasia (difficulty speaking). The MDS indicated Resident #1 required substantial/maximal staff assistance with toileting, partial/moderate assistance with showers, dressing, putting on and removing footwear and repositioning.Review of the electronic health record (EMR) revealed an admission Record which indicated Resident #1 admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 12/19/25.Review of a 12/8/25 Progress note -routine written by a Nurse Practitioner (NP) revealed a 12/5/25 lab result…

    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 before2025-12-30 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, clinical record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to utilize isolation gowns when providing resident care that require the use of Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #3) in the sample. The facility reported a census of 104 residents.Findings include:Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE] identified Resident #3 as cognitively intact with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15. The MDS list of diagnoses included pressure ulcer to the sacral region. The MDS indicated Resident #3 dependent on staff for assistance with toileting and transfers in and out of bed/chair, and required substantial/maximal assistance with showers.Review of Resident #3 Care Plan, dated 2/12/25, the Care Plan revealed a Problem to address The resident requires enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) to reduce the spread or potential spread of multi-drug resistant organisms R/T (related to) a pressure injury. Interventions included, in part: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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-02-13 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, facility policy review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure the disposal of expired food items, and food items in a resident refrigerator were labeled with the name of the food item, date placed in refrigerator and the date item needed to be disposed in an effort to prevent the potential for foodborne illness. The facility reported a census of 104 residents. Findings include: 1. During the initial tour of the kitchen and dry storage room on 12/10/25 at 9:58 AM, the following food times were found to be expired: a. 1- Chocolate Cake Mix expired 11/16/21. b. 12- Apricot Nectar cans expired 9/1/22. c. 1 - Baking Powder container expired 1/6/23 and 2 additional cans expired 6/15/23. d. 1 - Poultry Seasoning canister expired 9/6/23. e. 2 - Ground Mustard canisters - 1 expired 10/27/23, the other expired 9/8/24. f. 11 - Cornbread Mix boxes - 4 expired 12/4/23, 7 expired 12/18/24. g. 1 - Whole Sesame Seeds canister expired 2/9/24. h. 1 - Nutmeg canister expired 6/5/24. i. 8 - Lemon Juice bottle- 1 expired 6/12/24 and 7 expired 1/19/25. j. 1 - Ground…

    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 before2025-02-13 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to utilize Enhanced Barrier Precautions for 4 of 6 residents observed (Residents #12, #41, #68 and #89) and failed to keep the tubing of indwelling catheter tubing off the floor for one of two residents observed (Resident #68). The facility reported a census of 104 residents. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] identified Resident #12 as cognitively intact with a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 15 and had the following diagnoses: fractures/multiple trauma, pneumonia and a urinary tract infection. The MDS indicated the resident dependent on staff for toileting and showers, repositioning and required substantial/maximal staff assist with transfers, lower body dressing and putting on footwear. The MDS also identified Resident #12 had an unhealed Stage IV pressure ulcer, A review of the Physician Orders revealed the following orders: a. 10/29/24 Enhanced Barrier Precautions b. 11/12/24 for Sacral…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-02-13 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — isolated
    Provide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, clinical record review, facility policy review, staff, family and resident interviews, the facility failed to answer call lights within 15 minutes to meet resident needs for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Residents #5). The facility reported a census of 104 residents. Findings include: Resident #5's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] showed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10/15 which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS documented the resident admitted [DATE] and needed substantial to maximal assistance with toileting hygiene, toilet transfers, and lower body dressing. The Care Plan, initiated 1/8/25 documented the resident required 1:1 staff for toileting. During an interview on 02/10/25 at 12:56 PM Resident #5 shared that some call lights took a longer time to answer, maybe 15-20 minutes. He stated he knew staff were busy but he needed help to go to the bathroom. On 2/11/25 at 8:58 AM during a hallway observation the resident's call light was noted…

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

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-30 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, family and staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to safely transfer one of three residents reviewed with a mechanical lift (Resident #1). The facility reported a census of 99 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 as cognitively intact with a BIMS of 13 out of 15, and had the following diagnoses: Heart Failure, Peripheral Vascular Disease and Renal Insufficiency (Kidney Failure). The MDS also identified Resident #1 was totally dependent on staff for assistance with toileting hygiene, upper and lower body dressing, help with footwear, and transfers. On 4/6/18, the Care Plan identified Resident #1 with the problem of having an ADL (Activities of Daily Living) self-care performance deficit related to Parkinson's with dementia and directed staff to have two staff assist with toileting with the Hoyer Lift to the Shower Chair. A review of the incident report dated 3/29/24 at 11:12 AM had documentation of the following:…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-03-28 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
    Honor 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 interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure consistent documentation of code status for 1 of 8 resident reviewed for advanced directives (Resident #232). Documentation for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) found in the electronic record, a form in the chart directed Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) and another form in the chart directed CPR both signed by the provider on the same day. The facility reported a census of 83 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #232 scored 15 out of 15 on a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) exam, indicating cognition intact. Diagnoses for Resident #232 included debility, cardio-respiratory conditions, heart failure, renal disease, pneumonia, diabetes, and pulmonary disease. The Care Plan focus initiated [DATE] documented Resident #232 had chosen specific advance directives, noted as Full Code. A document titled, Full Code Form, located in the chart for Resident #232 check…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-28 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
    Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, staff interview, and facility policy review the facility failed to follow physician orders to provide notification of elevated blood sugars for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for medications (Resident #72). The facility reported a census of 83 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 12/14/23, listed diagnoses for Resident #72 that included diabetes mellitus, heart disease, renal disease, anxiety, and depression. The Care Plan initiated 10/20/23 stated the resident would not have any complications related to diabetes. Staff to give medication as ordered by the doctor and to monitor, document for side effects and effectiveness. Review of the March 2024 Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed the following: 1. 3/5/24 at 12:00 PM blood sugar result of 394 mg/dl 2. 3/14/24 at 12:00 PM blood sugar result of 384 mg/dl The Medication Administration Record (MAR) for March 2024 reflected a physician order (PO) started 3/6/24 that directed staff to administer extra units of Humalog insulin based on blood sugar, it directed if blood…

    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
  • No harm found · C2024-05-30 · tag F0625 — widespread
    Notify 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 record review, resident and staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to document the review of the bed hold policy prior to residents being transferred to the hospital for three of four residents reviewed (Residents #1, #4, and #5). The facility reported a census of 99 residents. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 as cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 13 out of 15, and had the following diagnoses: Heart Failure, Peripheral Vascular Disease, and Renal Insufficiency (Kidney Failure). The MDS also identified Resident #1 was totally dependent on staff for assistance with toileting hygiene, upper and lower body dressing, help with footwear, and transfers. A review of the Progress Notes revealed the following: 3/29/24 at 11:33 AM This nurse was summoned to the Resident #1's room by the assigned aide. Resident #1 was laying on her back on the floor of the restroom with her head being held by the aide. The aide reported they were transferring…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“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 CARMELITE SISTERS FOR THE AGED & INFIRM — 9 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 3 of 52.8+0.2 vs chain
Health inspection 2 of 52.1-0.1 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 53.8+0.2 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 53.9+1.1 vs chain
The other 8 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.8★, 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
ANDERSON, JOHNIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 05/01/2025
BROWN, ANNIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 10/09/2009
DIMARIA, LILLIANIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2021
HALEY, MARGARETIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2021
MCCABE, ROBERTIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2013
MCCARTHY, MICHAELIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 10/08/2009
PRANGER, JUDITHIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2013
REHMANN, MARYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 10/09/2009
SULLIVAN, MAUREENIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2025
VEILLEUX, DORISIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 10/09/2009
WEBSTER, ALICEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 11/19/2015
HUFSEY, KIMBERLYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/28/2017
STALEY, THOMASIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/10/2025
THE CARMELITE SISTERS FOR THE AGED AND INFIRMOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 03/29/2013
THE CARMELITE SYSTEM INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 03/29/2013

CMS files one row per role, so the 22 rows in the source record cover these 15 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.

$11.0M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-34.9%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$505K
Related-party expense3% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 43%Medicare 13%Other / private 44%

This home reported $505K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

$488per resident / day
operating cost
$14,837per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$362per 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 165146. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-16, 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