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

Buchanan County Health Center

1600 First Street East, Independence, IA 50644 · Government - County · 39 certified beds · (319) 334-6071 Medicaid only — no Medicare

Call the home — (319) 334-6071 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0741)1 immediate-jeopardy citation CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)$4,011 in federal fines
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (26% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
  • the CMS record shows $4,011 in federal fines (most recent 2024-11-26)

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1094 220th St · (319) 827-3000 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1600 1st St E · (319) 334-7171 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
119 1st St E · (319) 332-1599 · Call to confirm hours
Park
2041 Three Elms Park Rd · (319) 636-2617 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 4 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased15.5%17.1%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight3.6%4.6%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%1.5%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection9.7%2.4%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%4.2%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury8.1%3.8%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened17.2%16.6%16.1%typical
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication21.8%20.8%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%95.3%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.6%4.2%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control13.6%25.6%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table16.0%19.5%17.1%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.061.491.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.182.081.80better

* 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.

Staffing

1.22
RN hours/ resident / day
0.35
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.62
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.19
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.86
RN hoursweekends
26.3%
Total nursing turnover
12.5%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 39 beds and averages 34.5 residents a day — about 88% occupied, or roughly 4 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 4.19 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.22 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.62 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 3.38 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.52 on weekdays — 25% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.37 to 0.86 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 26% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

1
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-03-19)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2025-03-20)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

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

  • Immediate jeopardy · J2024-11-26 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, staff interviews, and policy review the facility failed to ensure 1 of 5 mobility independent residents that were reviewed with severe cognitive impairment were kept in a safe location on the facilities premises at all times (Resident #1). On 10/30/2024 at 1:38 PM Resident #1 exited the facility by using an unlocked door and entered the attached Independent Living facility without an alarm sounding resulting in staff unaware of her exiting the building, however was in a safe place on the facilities premises. At 1:44 PM Resident #1 then exited the facilities Independent Living and went into the parking lot of an unsafe location off premises where she attempted multiple times to open an unknown person's vehicle car door until approximately 2:15 PM (31 minutes). A serious adverse outcome did not occur, however, was seriously likely to occur because staff were unaware she left the building and was outside in the Independent Living parking lot without staff supervision. The facility reported a census of 35 residents. The State Agency informed 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · E2026-03-19 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, clinical record review, manufacturer's use guide, policy review and staff interview the facility failed to use one blood glucose meter per resident (a device used to monitor blood sugar levels) and properly disinfect shared blood glucose meters according to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidelines for 5 of 5 residents reviewed (Resident #8, #9, #11, #14 and #34). The facility identified a census of 35 residents.Findings include:1.Observation on 3/17/26 during the morning medication pass from 7:30 AM to 9:00 AM revealed Staff A, Registered Nurse (RN) performed a blood sugar for Resident #34. Staff A returned to the medication cart, wiped the blood glucose machine with an alcohol prep pad, and placed in the medication cart. Staff A was observed on the 400-hallway medication cart. 2.During an interview on 3/18/26 at 8:04 AM, Staff B, RN reported she was a newer nurse to the facility. The nurses had one blood glucose meter in each medication cart that they used for multiple residents. They used an alcohol…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-03-20 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, policy review, and staff interviews the facility failed to ensure the commercial dishwasher reached hot water sanitizing levels. The facility reported a census of 34 residents. Findings include: During a follow up walk through of the kitchen on 3/18/25 at 12:45 PM, the [NAME] model CL44E hot water sanitizing commercial dishwasher had been operating. The dishwasher had a digital display at the top center displaying temperatures for wash and final rinse cycles. The placard on the left side of the dishwasher revealed the following for hot water sanitizing: * Wash temperature 160º Fahrenheit (F) (71º Celsius(C)) minimum * Final rinse temperature 180º F (82º C) minimum, 194º F (90º C) maximum Below the dishwasher to the left a booster heater with a gauge that measures the water temperature from the booster heater to the dishwasher. A line in black permanent marker had been drawn at the 180º F reading. During an interview on 3/18/25 at 1:15 PM with Staff C (Nutritional Services…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-03-20 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
    Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, policy review, staff interview, and review of Kwik Pen Instructions for Use document, the facility failed to prime the needle of an insulin pen prior to the intent to deliver insulin to the resident (Resident #17). The facility reported a census of 34 residents. Findings include: Physician orders for Resident #17 include Humalog (Insulin Lispro) 5 units. During an observation of the morning medication pass on 3/20/25 at 8:34 AM, Staff H, Registered Nurse (RN) removed a KwikPen (Insulin Lispro) from the mediation cart. She removed the cap, cleansed the hub with alcohol and attached the needle. She turned the knob the prescribed dose of 5 units, showed the dose to the surveyor and started to apply gloves. When asked if she was committed to giving that dose, she confirmed she was. The surveyor stopped the dose from being given as the needle had not been primed. Staff H acknowledged she should have primed the needle. During an interview on 3/20/25 at 9:38 AM Staff B, RN, Nurse Manager explained she would expect the needle to be primed prior to administration.…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-11-26 · tag F0741 — failed to have staff trained for behavioral health — isolated
    Ensure 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

    Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to implement a comprehensive care plan with resident specific interventions to assist with identified exit seeking behaviors for 1 of 4 residents reviewed (Resident #1). The facility reported a census of 35 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #1 dated 8/8/2024 documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status of 3 out of 15 indicating severe cognitive impairment. The MDS also documented she was independent without assistive devices for walking, transferring, and toileting and had no impairment in her upper or lower extremities. The MDS also revealed she had Alzheimer's disease and anxiety disorder. Record review of Resident #1 Care Plan on 11/21/24 lacked resident specific approaches and interventions of what to do when exit seeking. During an interview on 11/26/24 at 12:26 PM Staff G, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) informed Resident #1 needed a lot of supervision because she could get upset at times and informed the facility recommended to Resident #1 family she needed to be place in 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2024-06-06 · tag F0801 — widespread
    Employ sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on document review, employee file review, and staff interview the facility failed to employ a certified nutrition professional and/or director who met the required qualifications in the time frame allowed. The facility reported a census of 37 residents. Findings include: During an interview on 6/03/24 at 9:15 AM the Nutrition Manager reported she is not a Certified Dietary Manager (CDM). She is enrolled in the class but due to staffing issues she had to ask for an extension on the class so she has not completed the class at this time. A 6/05/24 9:15 AM review of the Nutrition Manager's employee file lacked documentation of a Certified Dietary Manager certificate. During an interview on 6/05/24 at 2:08 PM the Clinical Registered Dietician reported she only works part time for the hospital and they allow her 8 hours a week in the long-term care. She spends most of her time doing the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessments. The Nutrition Manager is the main one that would do anything kitchen related. She has done some training with the dietary staff in the long-term care but that was…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-06-06 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, policy review, document review, and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain a sanitary kitchen, date food when opened, promote safe food storage, prevent touching of food with dirty gloves, and ensure the proper use of hair restraints when in the kitchen. The facility reported a census of 37 residents. Finding include: During an initial kitchen tour on 6/03/24 at 8:37 AM the following observations were made: a. The microwave had yellow stuck down splatters all along the back wall of the microwave. b. The standing mixer had a yellow crusty substance 1.5 inches long stuck down to the back of the mixer which was not in use. c. The milk cooler had a 10 inch high by approximately 36 inch long by 1 inch in depth build up of frost on each side of the cooler and a 10 inch high by 1 inch high frost build up along the entire back of the milk cooler. d. The bulk rice, flour, and bread crumb bins all 1/4 full were undated. e. The Continental refrigerator contained the following undated items: 1. 1 carton of orange juice 1/4 full 2. 1 tub of chopped garlic in oil…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-06 · tag F0637 — isolated
    Assess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on clinical record review, Long Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) review, and staff interview the facility failed to complete a significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) within 14 days of determining a significant change for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for significant change (Resident #5). The facility reported a census of 37 residents. Findings include: The Progress Note dated 4/17/24 written at 2:00 PM documented during the completion of the quarterly MDS it was noted the resident had a decline in multiple areas. The note explained the overall decline was a significant change and an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) was set as 4/29/24. The significant change MDS with an ARD of 4/29/24 was signed as complete on 5/13/24 (26 days after determining a significant change). The RAI 3.0, version 1.17.1 dated October 2019, directs the significant change MDS be completed no later than the 14th calendar day after determining a significant change in resident status has occurred. During an interview on 6/6/24 at 8:57 AM, the MDS coordinator explained she had 14 days from…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-06-06 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on physician order review, care plan review, and staff interview the facility failed to have anticoagulant, antibiotic, opioid, insulin, and diuretic medications and potential side effects to be monitored on the resident care plan for 4 of 7 residents reviewed (Residents #5, #6, #13, and #15). The facility reported a census of 37 residents. Findings include: 1. Resident #5's Order Review History Report electronically signed by the Advance Registered Nurse Practitioner (ARNP) on 4/26/24 listed medication orders including: Azithromycin (antibiotic) 250 milligrams (mg) by mouth Monday, Wednesday, and Friday Lasix (diuretic medication fluid pill) 20 mg by mouth daily Lorazepam (anxiety medication) 0.5 mg by mouth daily Resident #5's Care Plan lacked signs, symptoms, or side effects of the medications to be monitored for any of the medications listed. 2. Resident #13's Order Summary Report signed by the Medial Doctor (MD) on 5/6/24 listed medication orders including: Amoxicillin (antibiotic) 250 mg by mouth…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-06-06 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
    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, observation, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident with limited range of motion received the appropriate assistance to prevent decline or maintain mobility for 1 of 2 residents sampled (Resident #15). The facility identified a census of 37 residents. Findings include: Resident #15 Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] showed a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 11 indicating moderate cognitive loss. The MDS documented Resident #15 utilized a walker and a wheelchair and had a functional impairment in upper body range of motion on one side with diagnoses of neurologic neglect syndrome, foot drop of the right foot, effusion of the left ankle, pain in the left foot and ankle joint, and generalized muscle weakness. The MDS lacked documentation of a nursing restorative program. The Resident's electronic diagnosis list included a diagnosis of personal history of other diseases of the circulatory system. A Restorative Program Note dated 12/5/2023…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · Bcited before2025-03-20 · tag F0637 — pattern
    Assess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on clinical record review, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Long term Care (LTC) Facility Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) 3.0 User's Manual, and staff interview, the facility failed to complete a Significant Change Status Assessment (SCSA) Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment upon hospice election for 1 of 1 residents (Resident #27) reviewed on hospice services. The facility reported a census of 34 residents. Findings include: The Electronic Healthcare Record (EHR) census detail page documented hospice as the primary payer for Resident #27 effective 2/10/25. An EHR Progress Note dated 2/14/25 at 10:36 AM documented Resident #27 had been admitted to hospice care services. The MDS 3.0 Summary page in Resident #27 EHR revealed the facility failed to complete the SCSA MDS when hospice services had been elected. A review of the hospice clinical record revealed the following: * A Medicare Hospice Election Statement signed by Resident #27's family member documented the start of service date as 2/10/25. * The hospice Initial Nursing Assessment created 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · B2025-03-20 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — pattern
    Develop 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and staff interview the facility failed to revise and implement interventions on the comprehensive Care Plan to include hospice services for 1 of 1 residents (Resident #27) reviewed. The facility reported a census of 34 residents. Findings include: Resident #27 Minimum Data set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12 out of 15, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS documented diagnoses of progressive neurological conditions, coronary artery disease, and depression. A Medicare Hospice Election Statement signed by Resident #27's family member documented the start of service date as 2/10/25. The Care Plan initiated on 6/24/24 for Resident #27 failed to include a focus area for a terminal prognosis with election of hospice services to include interventions directing staff on cares to be provided. During an interview on 3/19/2025 at 9:13 AM, Staff A, MDS Coordinator acknowledged the Care Plan should have been updated…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$4,011 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $4,011 — penalty dated 2024-11-26

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

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
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.

What families pay in IA

Paying with Medicaid

CMS lists this home as Medicaid-certified only — it can accept Medicaid for long-term care, but it is not Medicare-certified, so Medicare will not pay for a short rehabilitation (“skilled nursing”) stay here. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Iowa Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Iowa
$9,277/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$10,038/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,381/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 16E050. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-19, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next