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

Accura Healthcare of Knoxville, LLC

606 North Seventh Street, Knoxville, IA 50138 · For profit - Corporation · 60 certified beds · (641) 842-2187 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (641) 842-2187 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0600) — cited Feb 20251 immediate-jeopardy citation CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)$16,153 in federal fines
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Feb 2025
  • inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (15) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $16,153 in federal fines (most recent 2025-10-13)
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)

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

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

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★ 2/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1208 N Lincoln St · (641) 828-3832 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
901 W Pleasant St · (641) 828-7312 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Hy-Vee0.9 mi
809 W Rock Island St · (641) 842-4717 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Auld Park0.3 mi
305 3rd St Pl · (641) 828-0580 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
209 N 3rd St · (641) 205-8009

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 3 of 5

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.

Overall rating2★
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 increased21.9%17.1%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight8.8%4.6%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%1.5%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection2.4%2.4%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms2.0%4.2%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury9.5%3.8%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened26.8%16.6%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication33.5%20.8%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.1%95.3%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers0.8%4.2%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control16.4%25.6%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table16.1%19.5%17.1%typical
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication6.1%2.1%1.4%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.

0.13U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.09hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.03hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
<0.01hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.13 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 9% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 12% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNFnot 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 SNFnot 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 dischargenot 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 dischargenot 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 dischargenot 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 identifiednot 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 settingnot 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 dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF staynot 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 worsenednot 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 hospitalizationnot 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 SNFsnot 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

0.49
RN hours/ resident / day
0.87
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.12
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.47
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.35
RN hoursweekends
53.2%
Total nursing turnover
71.4%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 60 beds and averages 48.0 residents a day — about 80% occupied, or roughly 12 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.47 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.49 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.12 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 2.82 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.74 on weekdays — 25% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.54 to 0.35 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 53% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

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

5
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-02-19)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2025-02-03)

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

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

  • Immediate jeopardy · J2025-10-13 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolated
    Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, staff interview, family interview, provider interview, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure 1 of 4 residents reviewed received only their prescribed medications. Resident #1 (R#1) became unresponsive and required emergency medical interventions. R#1 transferred to the hospital and admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) due to a multi-drug interaction with diagnoses of cardiogenic shock and toxic encephalopathy. The facility reported census was 41.The State Agency informed the facility of the Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) on 10/8/25 at 1:55 PM. The IJ began on 10/3/25, following the administration of Resident #3's (R#3) medications to R#1. The State Agency confirmed removal of immediacy on 10/9/25, The facility staff removed the Immediate Jeopardy on 10/3/25 by implementing the following actions:a. On 10/3/2025, the Director of Nursing initiated staff education to ensure all nurses and certified medication aides are aware of the medication administration 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2026-02-19 · 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 staff interview, personnel file review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to designate a person to serve as the director of food and nutrition services who met the minimum qualifications to carry out the food and nutrition services. Findings include: During an interview on 2/16/26 at 9:15 a.m. with the Dining Services Manager, she revealed she had been promoted from cook to Dining Services Manager last month, January 2026. Further interview on 2/17/26 at 10:30 a.m. with the Dining Services Manager revealed she had been hired 9/8/23 as a housekeeper and soon after her hire, she then accepted a position in the facility's kitchen as dietary aide. She then accepted a position as [NAME] in January 2024. She stated another dietary aide and her had managed the dietary department during the month of December 2025, after the previous Dining Services Manager had abruptly quit. During that time she had accepted the role as Director of Dining Services and on January 1, 2026 she was fully in her role as the Dining Services Manager. She stated she was currently completing…

    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 · D2026-02-19 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, staff interview, and Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument 3.0 User's Manual review, the facility failed to complete a significant change in status assessment for one (1) of two sampled residents who had been admitted to hospice care (Resident#1). Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] identified Resident #1 without any memory problems and independent with his cognitive skills for daily decision making, which indicated intact cognition. The MDS listed diagnoses included: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (a progressive, incurable, yet treatable lung disease that obstructs airflow and makes breathing difficult), congestive heart failure (CHF), diabetes mellitus, and peripheral vascular disease (a progressive condition where plaque buildup reduces blood flow to the legs and feet). The MDS documented the resident had one fall with major injury and two falls with no injury since his prior MDS assessment on 8/26/25. The MDS assessed the Resident…

    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 · D2026-02-19 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, staff interviews, and resident interview the facility failed to accurately complete a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment correctly for 2 of 10 resident's reviewed in the sample (Resident #4 and Resident #6). The facility reported a census of 45 residents.Findings include:1. Resident #4, Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed scored 15 out of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) exam, which indicated intact cognition. Diagnosis included malignant bladder cancer. Resident #4 was not coded for receiving hospice care. The Care Plan for Resident # 4 initiated 11/20/25 documented the resident received hospice services.The Clinical Census record for Resident #4 documented the resident entered the facility on 11/19/25 under hospice care.The Hospice Plan of Care report for Resident #4 revealed hospice were initiated on 11/14/25. On 2/18/26 at 1:18 PM Resident #4 reported participation of hospice visits three to five times a week, and expressed…

    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 · D2026-02-19 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    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 resident interview, clinical record review, staff interview, the facility failed to provide the opportunity for the resident to participate in the development, review and revision of his care plan for 1 of 1 (Resident #3 ) reviewed for care conferences and failed to update a care plan for 1 of 2 reviewed for hospice (Resident #1 ). The facility reported a census of 45 residents. Findings include: 1. Resident #3 Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented Resident #3 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 11 out of 15 indicating moderately impaired cognition. The MDS further documented the resident had a diagnosis of diabetes and stroke. The Care Plan focus revised on 11/18/25 for Resident #3 revealed the resident would remain in long term care. Care Plan interventions included the following; staff to assist the resident to be independent as possible, resident would participate in activities of choice, staff to invite encourage and remind daily the resident to attend…

    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 · D2026-02-19 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
    Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on clinical record review, policy review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to carry out a system to receive controlled substances for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for a missing narcotic(Resident #54). The facility reported a census of 45 residents. Findings included: The Minimum Data Set(MDS) assessment tool, dated 8/17/25, listed diagnoses for Resident #54 which included chronic pain syndrome, seizure disorder, and depression. The MDS listed the resident's Brief Interview for Mental Status(BIMS) score as 15 out of 15, indicating intact cognition. The facility policy Controlled Substances, updated 11/18/25, stated the facility would ensure staff handled, stored, and disposed of controlled drugs properly and carried out proper record keeping. Resident #54's October 2025 Medication Administration Record(MAR) listed a 9/27/25 order for fentanyl(a powerful synthetic pain medication) transdermal(delivered through the skin) patch 72 hour 25 micrograms(mcg)/hour(hr), apply every 72 hours for chronic pain. A Packing Slip Proof of Delivery document, stated the facility received 1…

    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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-06 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, resident interview, and clinical record review, the facility failed to treat residents with dignity and respect throughout cares provided for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #1).The facility reported a census of 46 residents.Findings include:Record Review of Resident #1 Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) of 09 indicating moderate cognitive impairment The MDS reflected Resident #1 diagnosis of Paranoid Schizophrenia, Delusional Disorders, Anxiety Disorder, and Major Depressive Disorder. The MDS further documented Resident #1 dependence on staff for performing activities of daily living (ADLs). A facility reported incident review dated 6/15/25 documented Staff A, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), with almost 30 years of experience as an LPN, attempted to assist Resident #1 during ADLs along with two other staff, Staff B, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA), and Staff C, CNA. Resident #1 was agitated and in distress, and was refusing…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · E2025-04-22 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — pattern
    Make sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
    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 and staff interviews, the facility failed to maintain an environment in a clean, orderly condition, in good repair and with all odors kept under control through cleanliness and proper ventilation. The facility reported census was 49. Findings include: 1. During an observation on 4/16/25 at 11:00 a.m. several rooms with cosmetic and baseboard guards detached were detected: room [ROOM NUMBER] bathroom, baseboard guard split open exposing boiler pipe. room [ROOM NUMBER] bathroom had baseboard pulled away from the wall with peeling paint. The 500 hallway baseboard was removed from the wall leaving a jagged unfinished wall. In an interview on 4/16/25 at 2:05 p.m. Staff C, Maintenance, stated he relies on staff, aides and housekeeping to alert him to maintenance needs within the facility. When staff see an issue, they are to input the concern into the Tells app which then goes directly to his phone. From there he will make plans to repair the concern depending on the priority of the need. Staff C…

    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.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-02-03 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, policy review, and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to make choices about aspects of their lives which were significant to the resident by denying smoke breaks for 5 of 5 smokers reviewed (Residents #6, #7, #17, #27, and #30) and by not allowing a resident to lie down upon request for 1 of 6 residents reviewed for dignity (Resident #28). The facility reported a census of 50 residents. Findings include: 1. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set(MDS) assessment tool, dated 1/12/25, listed diagnoses for Resident #7 which included anxiety, depression, and unspecified intellectual disability. The MDS listed the resident's Brief Interview for Mental Status(BIMS) score as 15 out of 15, indicating intact cognition. A 4/7/22 Care Plan entry stated she loved to participate in smoking breaks. A 1/6/25 Smoking Evaluation stated the resident smoked mornings, evenings, and afternoons supervised. On 1/30/25 at 8:44 a.m., Resident #7 stated that…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-02-03 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — pattern
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, policy review, and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from mental abuse by denying smoke breaks based on resident behaviors for 5 of 5 smokers reviewed(Residents #6, #7, #17, #27, and #30). The facility reported a census of 50 residents. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set(MDS) assessment tool, dated 1/12/25, listed diagnoses for Resident #7 which included anxiety, depression, and unspecified intellectual disability. The MDS listed the resident's Brief Interview for Mental Status(BIMS) score as 15 out of 15, indicating intact cognition. A 4/7/22 Care Plan entry stated she loved to participate in smoking breaks. A 1/6/25 Smoking Evaluation stated the resident smoked mornings, evenings, and afternoons supervised. On 1/30/25 at 8:44 a.m., Resident #7 stated that whenever she had a disagreement with staff they took away her smoking break. She stated staff considered smoking a privilege and when this happened she felt belittled. 2.…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-02-03 · 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, clinical record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure staff followed physician pre-op orders as directed prior to a resident procedure for 1 of 1 residents reviewed (Resident #43). Resident #43 did not receive a bath/shower the day of the procedure. The facility reported a census of 50 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #43 dated 1/12/25 included diagnoses of ulcerative colitis, Alzheimer's disease, anxiety disorder, and depression. The MDS identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3 indicating severely impaired cognition. The MDS documented the resident required extensive assistance with bathing, personal hygiene, and transfers and was dependent on staff assistance for toileting. Review of pre-op orders dated 1/20/25 in preparation for a colonoscopy to be completed on 1/24/25, stated the day of surgery, Resident #43 was to receive a shower or bath the morning of the procedure. Resident #43 was noted to have powder in her groins that was wet and clumpy when she arrived for 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-02-03 · tag F0943 — isolated
    Give their staff education on dementia care, and what abuse, neglect, and exploitation are; and how to report abuse, neglect, and exploitation.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on personnel file review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to assure 1 of 5 staff reviewed met the requirements for Dependent Adult Abuse Mandatory Reporter Training (Staff B). The facility reported a census of 50 residents. Findings include: Staff B, Housekeeper, had a start date of 5/29/24. Record review revealed Staff B had not completed the 2 hour Dependent Adult Abuse Mandatory Reporter Training that was due 11/29/24. In an interview on 1/29/25 at 1:00 PM, the Administrator acknowledged Staff B had not yet completed the Dependent Adult Abuse Mandatory Reporter Training. She stated the employee was currently in the facility completing the training. She was aware new employees were to complete the training within 6 months. In an interview on 1/30/25 at 2:48 PM the Administrator stated it was the expectation the Business Office Manager use a spread sheet with all staff and the dates they are due to complete or renew their Dependent Adult Abuse Mandatory Reporter Training and the Business Office Manager was to let the Administrator know when the staff…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-03-28 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to maintain sanitary practices by improperly storing food. The facility reported a census of 51 residents. Findings include: On 3/25/24 at 10:33 AM, a kitchen observation identified the following findings: Unit #1 freezer contained: 1) An unlabeled, undated, tied bag of folded, yellow items. 2) An unlabeled bag of meat links. Unit #2 freezer contained: 1) An unlabeled bag of chopped meat. 2) An unlabeled bag of 1/8 cut dough-like slices. 3) Two unlabeled blocks of sealed meat on shelves. Unit #3 refrigerator contained: 1) An unlabeled, undated metal pan with casserole-like contents and a used ladle stored on top. 2) An unlabeled, undated plastic bag of meat links. 3) An unlabeled bag of chopped, green contents. Unit #4 refrigerator contained: 1) An unlabeled, undated bag of diced, green contents. 2) An undated, plastic tub of sour cream. A cabinet contained two (2) unlabeled, undated plastic containers with cereal-like contents. An opened, undated bag of bread crumbs stored in the dry goods…

    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 before2024-03-28 · tag F0801 — isolated
    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 and staff interview, the facility failed to employ sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service by not having a certified dietary manager. The facility reported a census of 51 residents. Findings include: On 3/25/24 at 10:33 AM, Staff A, Dining Manager stated she was not the Dietary Manager because she was not certified. On 3/26/24 at 11:07 AM, Staff A stated she had not had any formal course-work training in food safety and nutrition, but was an assistant dietary manager at another facility for 1½ years. On 3/26/24 at 11:09 AM, the Administrator stated she planned to enroll Staff A in a six-month course in April. She stated the facility had a contract dietitian who was at the facility on Tuesdays. The contract dietitian was not present. On 3/28/24 at 9:23 AM stated the Dietary Manager should be certified within six (6) months of hire. The facility did not have a policy that addressed Dietary Manager certification. The Facility Assessment with updated date of 3/6/24 documented…

    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 · E2024-01-18 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — pattern
    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

    Based on observations, clinical record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide restorative services on 1/18/24 involving 29 residents. The facility reported census was 45. Findings include: In an interview on 1/18/24 at 10:23 a.m. Staff C, Rehabilitation Director, stated when residents complete a physical or occupational program, they will typically get a restorative plan. Staff C stated she reviews the plans and the restorative aides provide the services usually 3-5 times per week. Staff C stated the ADON oversees the restorative program. In an interview on 1/18/24 at 3:00 p.m. the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) stated she oversees the restorative program and indicated there were currently 35-40 residents with a program. The ADON stated Staff D was the facilities full time restorative aide and she provides the restorative services Monday through Friday. The ADON stated Staff D also has responsibilities ordering and putting supplies away and assisting with showers Mondays, Tuesdays and Wednesdays. The ADON stated she provided Staff D with a restorative…

    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

“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

$16,153 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $16,153 — penalty dated 2025-10-13

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.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to ACCURA HEALTHCARE — 41 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 2 of 52.5-0.5 vs chain
Health inspection 2 of 52.6-0.6 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 53.1-0.1 vs chain
Quality measures 3 of 52.8+0.2 vs chain
The other 40 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.5★, per CMS)
1 of 5Aberdeen Health And RehabAberdeen, SD 1 of 5Accura HealthCare of TekamahTekamah, NE 1 of 5Accura Healthcare of CarrollCarroll, IA 1 of 5Accura Healthcare of MarshalltownMarshalltown, IA 1 of 5Accura Healthcare of Newton East, LLCNewton, IA 1 of 5Accura Healthcare of O'NeillO' Neill, NE 1 of 5Accura Healthcare of Pleasantville, LLCPleasantville, IA 1 of 5Accura Healthcare of ShenandoahShenandoah, IA 1 of 5Green Lea Senior LivingMabel, MN 1 of 5Lake Andes Senior LivingLake Andes, SD 1 of 5Shell Rock Senior LivingShell Rock, IA 2 of 5Accura Healthcare of Cascade LLCCascade, IA 2 of 5Accura Healthcare of CrestonCreston, IA 2 of 5Accura Healthcare of FranklinFranklin, NE 2 of 5Accura Healthcare of Lake City, LLCLake City, IA 2 of 5Accura Healthcare of MuscatineMuscatine, IA 2 of 5Accura Healthcare of OnawaOnawa, IA 2 of 5Accura Healthcare of Spirit LakeSpirit Lake, IA 2 of 5Sterling Park Health Care CenterWaite Park, MN 2 of 5Woodlyn Heights Healthcare CenterInver Grove Heights, MN 3 of 5Accura Healthcare of Ames, LLCAmes, IA 3 of 5Accura Healthcare of Aurelia, LLCAurelia, IA 3 of 5Accura Healthcare of Cherokee, LLCCherokee, IA 3 of 5Accura Healthcare of FullertonFullerton, NE 3 of 5Accura Healthcare of Pomeroy, LLCPomeroy, IA 3 of 5Accura Healthcare of StantonStanton, IA 3 of 5Accura Healthcare of ToledoToledo, IA 3 of 5Meadow ManorGrand Meadow, MN 3 of 5Prairie View Senior LivingTracy, MN 3 of 5Traditions Memory Care of NewtonNewton, IA 4 of 5Accura HealthCare of North PlatteNorth Platte, NE 4 of 5Accura Healthcare of Le MarsLe Mars, IA 4 of 5Accura Healthcare of MilfordMilford, IA 4 of 5Accura Healthcare of New HamptonNew Hampton, IA 4 of 5Accura Healthcare of Ogden, LLCOgden, IA 4 of 5Accura Healthcare of Sioux City, LLCSioux City, IA 4 of 5Faulkton Senior LivingFaulkton, SD 5 of 5Accura HealthCare of HartingtonHartington, NE 5 of 5Accura Healthcare of BancroftBancroft, IA 5 of 5Karlstad Healthcare Center INCKarlstad, MN

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
CONNER, ROBERTIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 01/01/2024
LEHMAN, DWALAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 01/01/2023
TOTI, LISAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2020
LENEAVE, TEDIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2016
AMERICAN HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT SERVICES LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/01/2016

CMS files one row per role, so the 6 rows in the source record cover these 5 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.

$4.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-9.8%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$228K
Related-party expense5% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 83%Medicare 1%Other / private 16%

About 83% 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 $228K 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

$287per resident / day
operating cost
$8,732per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$262per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in IA

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Iowa Medicaid page.

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

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

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 165382. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-19, 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