Grandview Healthcare Center
508 2nd Street NE, Dayton, IA 50530 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 40 certified beds · (515) 547-2288 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- the CMS record shows $33,598 in federal fines (most recent 2023-09-06)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)
- CMS ownership filings flag it as owned by a private-equity firm or REIT — a category that performs worse on staffing on average, though that average says nothing certain about this home, and CMS filings undercount these ties, so other homes here may have them unflagged (what the research actually shows →)
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 | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 1 of 5 |
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 | 1 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 1 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 2 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 | 25.0% | 17.1% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.7% | 4.6% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 3.4% | 1.5% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.7% | 2.4% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 4.2% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| 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 | 7.6% | 3.8% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 18.5% | 16.6% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 27.4% | 20.8% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 95.3% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 6.5% | 4.2% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 27.3% | 25.6% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 15.8% | 19.5% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 2.1% | 1.4% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.98 | 1.49 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.45 | 2.08 | 1.80 | better |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.07 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 4% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 2% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 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 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 | not 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 stay | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.87 | 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 40 beds and averages 34.0 residents a day — about 85% occupied, or roughly 6 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 2.84 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.95 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.62 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.33 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.05 on weekdays — 24% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.11 to 0.55 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 52% 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.
12 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2023-09-06 · tag F0741 — failed to have staff trained for behavioral health — isolatedEnsure that the facility has sufficient staff members who possess the competencies and skills to meet the behavioral health needs of residents.
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 and physician interviews, the facility failed to protect residents with a previous history of suicidal ideation from possible self harm for of 1 of 1 residents reviewed (Resident #5). The facility reported a census of 30 residents. The State Agency informed the facility of the Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) that began on August 17, 2023 at 5:09 PM. The Facility Staff removed the IJ on [DATE] through the following actions: F741 Sufficient/Competent Staff-Behavior Health Needs Resident's Care Plan was updated to include specifically suicidal ideations. All staff currently working were audited for completed education relating to supervision requirements for residents with active suicidal ideations. Audits of all residents with a history of suicidal ideations were completed to make sure their Care Plans had suicidal ideation in place. Nursing staff were educated on supervision requirements for all residents with active suicidal ideation. Any nurses that have not received this…
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 before2025-12-11 · 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, staff interviews, pharmacy interview and policy review, the facility failed to provide care and services according to accepted standards of clinical practice for 1 of 16 residents reviewed (Resident #23) for Physician orders. The facility reported a census of 35 residents. Findings includes: Resident #23's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 6, indicating severely impaired cognition. The MDS included diagnoses of cancer, anemia, arthritis, seizure disorder, and secondary malignant neoplasm of the brain (metastatic brain tumor).The Care Plan revised 11/3/25 revealed Resident #23 had chronic pain and had a risk for adverse (unwanted) effects due to the use of anticonvulsants medication to aid in the treatment of seizures/convulsions. The Care Plan directed staff to anticonvulsant and pain medications as ordered. The November and December 2025 Medication Administration Record (MAR) directed staff to administer…
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 · D2025-12-11 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to change oxygen tubing and water humidifier for 1 of 2 residents reviewed (Resident #4) for respiratory services. The facility reported a census of 35 residents. Findings Include: Resident #4's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3, which indicated severe impaired cognition. The MDS included diagnoses of hypertension (high blood pressure), pulmonary fibrosis (a condition in which the lungs become scarred over time), respiratory failure and other disorders of the lung. The MDS documented Resident #3 received oxygen while a resident within the last 14 days. A Physician order dated 7/7/25 directed Resident #4 to wear oxygen at 2 liters per minute per nasal cannula to keep oxygen saturation above 88% every shift for hypoxia (low levels of oxygen in body tissue) related to chronic respiratory failure.A Physician order dated 11/8/22 directed staff to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-11 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
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 have a complete and accurately documented medical record for 1 of 16 residents reviewed (Resident #2). The facility reported a census of 35 residents.Findings include: Resident #2's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13, indicating intact cognition. The MDS identified Resident #2 as dependent on staff for transfers and toileting hygiene. The MDS documented Resident #2 as always incontinent of bowel. Resident #2's MDS included diagnoses of anemia (low blood iron level), heart failure (heart does not pump enough blood), hypertension (high blood pressure), and seizure disorder. The Care Plan revised 10/6/25 directed the staff to observe for side effects of narcotic analgesic medication which included constipation and decreased bowel sounds. Review of the bowel elimination records for October 2025 revealed Resident #2 had a large bowel movement (BM) on 10/12/25 and…
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 · D2025-12-11 · 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 observations, clinical record review, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to provide a safe and sanitary environment to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 of 2 residents reviewed (Resident #2) for pressure ulcer care. The facility reported a census of 35 residents.Findings include: Resident #2's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] assessment identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12, indicating moderately impaired cognition. The MDS identified Resident #2 required substantial/maximal assistance for transfers and toileting. Resident #2's MDS included diagnoses of a pressure ulcer to the right buttocks, stage 4 (full thickness tissue loss where skin, fat, muscle, tendon or bone can be exposed). On 12/9/25 at 1:20 PM, observed Staff A, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), complete wound care to Resident #2's pressure ulcer to the right buttocks. Staff A gathered supplies at the medication cart outside of 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 · E2024-12-05 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interviews, the facility failed to date items in the refrigerator, freezer and dry food storage after opening. The facility reported a census of 24 residents. Findings include: During the initial tour of the kitchen on 12/2/24 at 8:45 AM observed the following items opened without a date: a. 30 plus frozen rolls b. 3/4 bag of frozen peas c. 30 plus slices of frozen garlic bread d. 30 plus frozen sausage patties e. 30 plus frozen pieces of fish f. 20 plus frozen chicken strips g. 1/2 bag Lays potato chips h. 3/4 bag bread crumbs i. 2/3 bag of shredded cheese j. 1/2 bag of lettuce During an observation on 12/2/24 at 8:55 AM, observed Staff A, Cook, dating items the open items listed above. Staff B revealed she dated the open items based on when the facility most recently used the items to her knowledge based on recent meals. During an interview 12/3/24 at 10:45 AM, the Certified Dietary Manager revealed they expected the staff to date food items after they open them. Review of facility policy dated June 2015, titled Nutritional Services Manual:…
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 · D2023-09-06 · tag F0636 — isolatedAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to complete an accurate comprehensive assessment by not completing the pain assessment interview for a resident receiving scheduled pain medication daily and as needed (PRN) for 1 of 12 residents reviewed (Resident #25). Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #25 dated 6/26/23, included diagnoses of migraines and pain in left shoulder. The MDS documented the resident received a schedule pain medication regimen and received PRN pain medication. The MDS lacked documentation of the pain assessment interview completed, with the MDS instructions to attempt to conduct the interview with all residents. Observation on 8/27/23 at 3:07 PM, Resident #25 in their room and complaining of left ankle pain to Social Services Director (SSD), and SSD encouraged the resident to lay down. Facility policy Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI)/MDS documented the RAI/MDS is an assessment tool that assists skilled nursing facility staff to accurately and routinely compile information regarding…
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 · D2023-09-06 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to document all diagnoses identified as relevant to the appropriate state-designated authority for Level II Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) evaluation and determination for 2 out of 3 residents reviewed for PASRR requirements (Residents #5 & #19). The facility reported a census of 30 residents. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #5, dated 6/30/23, included diagnoses of anxiety disorder, depression, psychotic disorder, intermittent explosive disorder, and non-Alzheimer's dementia. The MDS documented that the resident received antipsychotic, antianxiety, and antidepressant medications daily. Review of PASRR Level 1 Screen form dated 8/6/21, documented only major depression and anxiety disorder as Mental Health diagnoses for Resident #5. 2. The MDS assessment for Resident #19, dated 7/24/23, included diagnoses of anxiety disorder, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder. The MDS documented the resident received antipsychotic, antianxiety, and…
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 before2023-09-06 · 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 record review and staff interview, the facility failed to meet professional standards by failing to notify the physician of out of parameter blood glucose levels for 1 out of 2 residents reviewed (Resident #4). The facility reported a census of 30 residents. Findings include: Resident #4's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 11, indicating moderately impaired cognition. The MDS indicated that Resident #4 required limited assistance of one staff for transfers, locomotion, dressing, and toilet use. The MDS included diagnoses of diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease, anemia, asthma, and hypoglycemia (low blood sugar). The current Medication Administration Record (MAR) showed the resident had orders for Levemir insulin 10 units daily, and sliding scale Aspart insulin three times daily with meals as needed and to report to (Medical Doctor) MD if blood sugar is <60 and >350 (less than 60 or greater than 350). Facility record review…
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 · D2023-09-06 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
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 and staff interview, the facility failed to consistently obtain post dialysis vitals and follow fluid restriction orders for 1 of 1 resident reviewed (Resident #4). The facility reported a census of 30 residents. Findings include: Resident #4's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 11, indicating moderately impaired cognition. The MDS indicated that Resident #4 required limited assistance of one staff for transfers, locomotion, dressing, and toilet use. The MDS included diagnoses of diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease, high blood pressure, renal failure, and asthma. The Care Plan for Resident #4, revised 8/25/23 identified that the resident went to dialysis three times a week, Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. The Care Plan also documented that Resident #4 was on a fluid restriction of 240 cubic centimeters (cc) four times daily and and 340 cc three times daily with meals. Review of clinical record vitals revealed…
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 · D2023-09-06 · tag F0740 — failed to provide behavioral / mental-health care — isolatedEnsure each resident must receive and the facility must provide necessary behavioral health care and services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review, staff and physician interviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a Care Plan that include and support the behavioral health care needs for 1 out 1 residents reviewed (Resident #5). The facility reported a census of 30 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #5, dated 6/30/23, included diagnoses of anxiety disorder, depression, psychotic disorder, intermittent explosive disorder, and non-Alzheimer's dementia. The MDS documented that the resident received antipsychotic, antianxiety, and antidepressant medications daily. The resident's Care Plan with a revision date of 8/27/23, revealed that on 10/8/19 the Care Plan initiated an intervention that staff were to monitor/record/report to Medical Doctor (MD) risk for harm to self, such as suicidal plan, past attempt at suicide, risky actions, intentionally harmed or tried to harm self, refusing med or therapies, sense of hopelessness or helplessness, impaired judgment or safety awareness. The resident's Care Plan lacked documentation of previous suicidal or self harm…
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.
- No harm found · C2023-09-06 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — widespreadEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interviews, and policy review the facility failed to follow the menu, did not serve the dinner roll/bread and margarine at lunch for 30 of 30 residents. During an observation of the lunch meal on 8/29/23 starting at 11:30 AM, a meal of chicken, potatoes, peas, and a cookie was served to all 30 residents. The 30 residents were not provided or offered the dinner roll/ bread and margarine as scheduled. Review of facility Week-At-A-Glance menu documented the lunch meal of marinated chicken thigh, sugar snap peas, oven browned potatoes, dinner roll/bread with margarine, and chocolate chip cookie. Facility policy, Menus revised 9/2017 documented menus will be planned to meet the nutritional needs of the residents in accordance with established national guidelines and menus will be served as written, unless a substitution is provided in response to preference, unavailability of an item, or a special meal. Interview on 8/29/23 at 1:00 PM, the Dietary Manager confirmed the lunch menu for today included roll/bread/margarine, was not provided to any of 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.
“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
$33,598 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $33,598 — penalty dated 2023-09-06
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Who owns this facility
CMS ownership filings flag an owner of this facility as a private-equity firm. That’s a fact worth knowing: peer-reviewed research links private-equity and REIT ownership to lower staffing and more citations on average — though any individual home can run well or poorly regardless. Read the inspection and staffing record above on its own merits.
- ARBORETA HEALTHCARE, INC — private equity · 100.00% share · 5% Or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest
- ARBORETA HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTERS, LLC — investment firm · 100.00% share · 5% Or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest
Source: CMS SNF ownership filings (PECOS). These flags are self-reported and undercount — federal auditors (GAO) and researchers find CMS captures only a fraction of true private-equity and REIT ties, so the absence of a flag on other homes is not proof they lack investor owners. How investor ownership affects care →
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership Data Not Available |
The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
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.
About 74% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $125K 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
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 165196. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-11, 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.