Sunnycrest Manor
2375 Roosevelt Street, Dubuque, IA 52001 · Government - County · 77 certified beds · (563) 583-1781 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- its facility-reported quality-measure 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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 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 | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 2 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 4 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 | 19.5% | 17.1% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.9% | 4.6% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 6.0% | 1.5% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.7% | 2.4% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 1.4% | 4.2% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 2.1% | 0.2% | 0.1% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 3.1% | 3.8% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 22.6% | 16.6% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 40.2% | 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 | 1.8% | 4.2% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 21.2% | 25.6% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 36.2% | 19.5% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 4.6% | 20.9% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 16.9% | 13.2% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.28 | 1.49 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.24 | 2.08 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ 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 0.15 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 13% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 11% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 77 beds and averages 72.1 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 5 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.34 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.59 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.13 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.87 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.53 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.64 to 0.45 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 38% 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 fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. 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.
14 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-05 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, Center for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) Long-Term Care (LTC) Facility Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) 3.0 User Manual, and staff interview the facility failed to accurately code a diagnosis for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for hospitalization (Resident #7). The facility identified a census of 72 residents.Findings include:Resident #7's Electronic Medicare Record (EMR) Census showed the resident transferred to the hospital on 1/3/26.Resident #7's 1/3/26 chest x-ray under Impression documented findings suggesting congestive heart failure exacerbation with pulmonary edema (a progressive condition where the heart muscle cannot pump blood efficiently enough to meet the body's needs, causing blood to back up and fluid to build up (congestion) in the lungs, legs, and other tissues).A 1/7/26 Hospital Medicine Discharge Summary documented Resident #7 had a diagnosis of acute heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF, congestion of the heart caused by increased stiffening 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 · D2026-03-05 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, and record review the facility failed to provide 1 of 1 resident unable to carry out activities of daily living (ADLs) with the services necessary to maintain good personal hygiene (Resident #69). The resident had a brown substance under his nails for 3 days during the survey. The facility reported a census of 72 residents.Findings include:Resident #69's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] identified they had okay short-term memory with moderately impaired decision-making skills for daily decisions. The MDS included diagnoses of mild intellectual disability, legal blindness, and altered mental status. Resident #69 required partial/moderate assistance with personal hygiene. A Care Plan (CP) intervention revised 12/16/25 listed certified nurses' aides (CNAs) and nurses as responsible for checking Resident #69's nail length. The Intervention directed them to trim and clean nails on bath day and as necessary. Resident #69's March 2026 Documentation Survey Report indicated they had 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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-05 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, document review, policy review and staff interview the facility failed to provide an updated pneumococcal vaccination per the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Immunization schedule for 1 of 5 residents sampled (Resident #7). The facility identified a census of 72 residents.Findings include:An Electronic Healthcare Record (EHR) Census documented Resident #7 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The Census Record listed Resident #7 as [AGE] years old. The Immunization Care Plan initiated 9/15/25 contained a Goal Resident would accept screening process for immunizations and directed to administer the vaccines. A review of the Pneumococcal Immunization Consent Form showed Resident #7 signed a consent to receive an updated pneumococcal vaccination on 10/3/25.The EHR Census Record documented Resident #7 discharged to the hospital on 1/3/26.A 1/3/26 Hospital Transfer Summary documented a history of pneumonia from 10/8/25. A 1/7/26 Hospital Medicine Discharge Summary…
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 · D2025-09-02 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, clinical record review, staff and resident interviews, and facility policy, the facility failed to ensure staff treated each resident with dignity and respect for one of four residents reviewed (Resident #1). The facility reported a census of 75 residents. Findings include:The MDS (Minimum Data Set) dated 7/30/2025 revealed Resident #1 had no cognitive impairment, required set up assistance with eating, required staff assistance to transfer from one surface to another, and used a wheel chair for mobility. The resident had diagnoses including legal blindness, hard of hearing, depressive disorder and anxiety.The resident's Care Plan revealed the resident had verbal aggression and outbursts related to mental illness initiated 9/11/2013. At times of increased agitation and difficulty with communication, it instructed staff to ensure the resident's cochlear processor (external component of cochlear implant) is placed with charged batteries. The resident, being blind and deaf required the cochlear implant in order to hear. The Care Plan directed staff to monitor 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 · Ecited before2025-02-27 · 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, kitchen record review, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to store foods according to professional standards and maintain effective sanitizing solution during 4 of 4 kitchen and 2nd floor dining room observations. The facility reported a census of 73 residents. Findings include: 1. On 02/24/25 between 9:56 AM and 10:27 AM the initial kitchen observation revealed the following: a. Staff B, [NAME] was observed cleaning the sink with a damp, white rag. There were no filled sanitizer buckets visible. Staff B used the same rag to wipe out the sink and 2 food prep areas. The prep counter in the center of the kitchen and the sink contained food particles and splashes of unidentified light brown and off white liquids. b. A walk in cooler, with a temperature of 22 degrees, contained a cart of milk and a cart of juice. The drinks remained in pans of ice used to keep them cold when transported through the building. 6 jugs of milk were open and undated. The milk was frozen to the sides of the container and lumpy. 6 containers of lemonade and juice did…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-02-27 · tag F0865 — failed to run a quality-improvement (QAPI) program — patternHave a plan that describes the process for conducting QAPI and QAA activities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) Statements of Deficiencies, the facility Quality Assessment and Performance Improvement (QAPI) Plan, and staff interviews the facility failed to fully implement Quality Assurance (QA) activities to ensure kitchen related deficiencies were corrected and to prevent repeat occurrences. The facility reported a census of 73 residents. Findings include: Form CMS-2567, with a correction date of 05/08/24, included tag F812 and documented in part that the facility failed to date open foods. Form CMS-2567, with a correction date of 01/12/23, included tag F812 and documented in part that the facility failed to meet professional standards of food service safety and food had not been prepared under sanitary conditions. The current survey, conducted between 2/24/25 and 2/27/25, revealed concerns in the same areas including in part undated open foods, not monitoring refrigerator and freezer temperatures, not monitoring sanitizer chemical levels, dented cans, expired food, and a dusty vent. The facility QAPI Plan titled Facility Assessment…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-27 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, interviews, and policy review the facility failed to review and revise a resident's Care Plan for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Resident #63). The resident's Care Plan did not include focus areas, goals, or interventions for the use of medications for mental health. The facility reported a census of 73 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #63, dated 01/22/25, documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 14/15 which indicated intact cognition. Diagnoses included anxiety disorder, depression, and schizophrenia. The resident's medication administration record listed the following medications: Divalproex Sodium ER Extended Release 500 MG for schizoaffective bipolar type Invega Sustenna Intramuscular Suspension 234 MG/1.5 ML for schizoaffective bipolar type Lithium Carbonate ER Extended Release 300 MG for schizoaffective bipolar type Quetiapine Fumarate 50 MG for schizoaffective disorder bipolar type Vortioxetine HBr 20 MG for depression During an interview on 02/24/25 at 11:25 AM Resident #63,…
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 · D2025-02-27 · 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
Based on observation, staff interview, and record review the facility failed to use proper technique to administer insulin for 1 out of 1 residents injected with an insulin pen (Resident #18). The facility identified a census of 73 residents. Findings include: Review of Resident #18 Medication administration record for February 2025 revealed an order for Fiasp FlexTouch Subcutaneous Solution Pen-injector 100 unit/milliliter inject 26 unit subcutaneously before meals related to type 2 diabetes mellitus. She also had an order for sliding scale insulin. If blood sugar 150-200 inject 3 units Fiasp FlexTouch Subcutaneous Solution Pen-injector. Observation on 2/25/25 at 11:01 AM Staff A, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) obtained a blood sugar of 186 for Resident # 18. Staff A dialed up 19 units of Fiasp insulin for Resident #18 and failed to waste 2 units to prime the needle. Staff A needed a second pen to administer the prescribed dose of 29 units. Staff A obtained a second insulin pen and dialed up 10 units of Fiasp insulin. Staff A entered Resident #18 room and administered both pens…
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 · D2025-02-27 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and record review the facility failed to provide proper hand washing and wound care to prevent the spread of infection in 1 out of 1 wound care observed (Resident #34). The facility identified a census of 73 residents. Findings include: Review of Resident #34 physician visit/consult form dated 11/14/24 revealed the resident had a left heel blister drained on 10/29/24 and indicated the area positive for Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteria. Review of the Care Plan for Resident #34 with a revision date of 12/17/24 revealed an open area to right great toe and left heel. The Care Plan revealed resident had an active infection to left heel and left lower extremity cellulitis. The Care Plan directed staff during active infection institute CONTACT ISOLATION: Wear gowns when changing contaminated linens and prior to entering residents room, gowns and gloves should be removed prior to exiting the room, staff should use good hand-washing before entering and prior to exiting room. Place soiled linens in bags prior to exiting room…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-04-11 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, policy review, and staff interview the facility failed to date opened foods, wear hair nets, use gloves appropriately for assembling and serving meals, and wash hands between glove use in order to serve meals under sanitary conditions. The facility reported a census of 62 residents. Findings include: During an observation of the kitchen on 4/09/24 at 9:12 AM the following items were found opened and undated: elbow macaroni, rigatoni noodles, and spiral noodles in an unlabeled plastic bag. At 9:22 AM Staff B, [NAME] failed to wear a hair net while cutting dessert bars. She was observed again at 11:51 AM without a hair net on while serving the noon meal. An observation of the puree process on 4/09/24 from 9:24 AM to 10:12 AM revealed the following: a. Staff A, [NAME] wore gloves and placed cooked riblet meat in a blender by hand. He then wiped his gloves on his apron and grabbed a recipe binder off a shelf. He used his hands to flip through the binder pages and then used a rubber spatula to scrape the ground meat into a measuring container. He again touched 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 · E2024-04-11 · tag F0800 — patternProvide each resident with a nourishing, palatable, well-balanced diet that meets his or her daily nutritional and special dietary needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, policy review, and staff interviews the facility failed to maintain appropriate food holding temperatures to prevent food-borne illness and utilize the menu-approved serving sizes to meet resident nutritional needs. The facility reported a census of 62 residents. Findings include: During an observation of the puree preparation on 4/09/24 from 9:24 AM to 10:12 AM a milk carton was observed sitting directly on the counter. The temperature of the milk at 10:09 AM was 49.6 degrees Fahrenheit (F). Staff A, [NAME] failed to dispose of the milk and placed it back in the refrigerator at 10:11 AM. During an observation of the noon meal on 4/09/24 from 11:33 AM to 1:06 PM revealed the following: A. The sliced onions, pickles, and tomatoes in containers were placed directly on a serving cart not on ice and used throughout meal service B. Staff C, Food Service Worker was observed serving residents with the following scoop sizes: a. Pureed BBQ riblets- scoop #12 (2 2/3 ounces (oz)) b. Diced BBQ riblets- scoop #12 c. Diced carrots- scoop #12 d. Mashed potatoes- scoop #12…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-11 · tag F0637 — isolatedAssess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, Center for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) Long-Term Care (LTC) Facility Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) 3.0 User's Manual review, and staff interview the facility failed to complete a Significant Change in Status Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment within the required time frame for 1 of 2 residents sampled on hospice care (Resident #2). The facility reported a census of 62 residents. Findings include: Resident #2's Hospice Plan of Care documented a hospice admission date of 7/21/23 for a primary diagnosis of malignant neoplasm of colon. Resident #2's MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 12/15 indicating a moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS lacked documentation in section O, Special Treatments, Procedures and Programs, of Resident #2 receiving hospice services. The MDS 3.0 Summary Page showed the 8/02/23 MDS with a completion date of 8/15/23. The facility failed to complete the significant change in status assessment (SCSA) MDS for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-04-11 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, Center for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) Long-Term Care (LTC) Facility Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) 3.0 User's Manual review, and staff interview the facility failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for 3 of 3 residents sampled (Resident #2, #23, and #32). The facility identified a census of 62 residents. Findings include: 1. Resident #2's Hospice Plan of Care documented a hospice admission date of 7/21/23 for a primary diagnosis of malignant neoplasm of colon. Resident #2's MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12/15 indicating a moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS lacked documentation in section O, Special Treatments, Procedures and Programs, of Resident #2 receiving hospice services. On 4/08/24 at 1:40 PM Staff D, Registered Nurse verbalized Resident #2 currently receives hospice care from a local provider. On 4/10/24 at 9:16 AM the MDS Coordinator reported she must have accidentally miscoded 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 · D2023-08-30 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, clinical record review, and staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to follow the resident's care plan for one of three residents reviewed (Resident #3). The facility reported a census of 56 residents. Findings include: The MDS (Minimum Data Set), an assessment tool, dated 3/1/2023, revealed Resident #3 had intact cognitive skills for daily decision making, and transferred from one surface to another with extensive assistance of two staff. The MDS dated [DATE] revealed the resident had moderately impaired cognitive skills for daily decision making and transferred with extensive assistance of two staff. The resident had diagnoses including Cerebral Palsy, diabetes, anxiety, and depressive disorder. The resident's Care Plan revealed the resident required assistance with activities of daily living and had a fall risk. On 11/21/2022, the revised Care Plan directed staff to transfer the resident using a mechanical stand up lift and with the assistance of two staff. The Incident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| ETTEMA, DANIELLE | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/28/2021 |
| COUNTY OF DUBUQUE | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/28/2021 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 3 rows in the source record cover these 2 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.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 94% 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. 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 2024. 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, FY2024). 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 165556. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-05, 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.