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

Mechanicsville Specialty Care

104 East Fourth Street, Mechanicsville, IA 52306 · Non profit - Corporation · 39 certified beds · (563) 346-0982 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (563) 346-0982 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Resident-funds citation (F0568)
Insights

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

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)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0568)

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) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
310 Highway 1 S · (319) 895-9010 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
113 1st St NE · (319) 895-6248 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
103 N John St · (319) 551-9182 · Call to confirm hours
Park
102 N Maple St · 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 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 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 3 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 increased15.3%17.1%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight1.9%4.6%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder1.7%1.5%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.7%2.4%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms1.8%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 injury0.0%3.8%3.3%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened15.8%16.6%16.1%typical
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication11.1%20.8%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine96.6%95.3%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers5.0%4.2%4.7%typical
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control27.8%25.6%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table4.4%19.5%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%2.1%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine82.1%73.3%79.4%typical

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

0.17U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.07hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.08hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.01hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.17 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 15% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 2% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
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 SNFs0.851.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.60
RN hours/ resident / day
0.41
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.06
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.07
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.55
RN hoursweekends
38.2%
Total nursing turnover
33.3%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 39 beds and averages 37.4 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 2 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. 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 3.07 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.60 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.06 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 2.98 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.11 on weekdays — 4% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.62 to 0.55 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 38% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-09-04)
2
at the previous standard inspection (2024-08-08)

Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.

  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-04 · 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

    Based on observations, clinical record review, staff interviews, and facility policy review the facility failed to provide dignity with cares for 1 out of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #2). The facility reported a census of 29 residents. Finding include:1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS assessment for Resident #2 dated 6/8/25 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 9 out of 15, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS assessment for Resident #2 dated 8/22/25 listed diagnoses of neurogenic bladder, spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy, and urinary tract infection. The Care Plan for Resident #2 dated 4/10/25 identified a urinary catheter related to neurogenic bladder. On 9/03/25 at 9:58 AM, Resident #2 laid on his bed while the catheter drainage bag hung uncovered on the left side of his bed. The catheter bag held amber colored urine. On 9/04/25 at 9:11 AM, Resident #2 laid in his bed while his uncovered catheter bag hung on the left side of his bed. The empty dignity bag hung beside the uncovered drainage bag. On 9/04/25 at 12:57 PM, the Director of…

    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 · D2025-09-04 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
    Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, clinical record review, staff interview and facility policy review the facility failed to administer the correct amount of water flush before the administration of the tube feeding for 1 of 1 resident reviewed (Resident #2). The facility reported a census of 29 residents. Finding include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #2 dated 6/8/25 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 9 out of 15, which indicated moderate cognitive impairmentThe Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] listed diagnoses of spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy and urinary tract infection. The Care Plan for Resident #2 dated 2/24/25 directed he will remain free of side effects or complications related to tube feeding.The Physician's Orders Review History Report dated 8/4/25 directed enteral feed order every shift flush feeding tube with at least 70 milliliters (ML) of water before and after administration of feedings.The Medication Administration Record (MAR) for Resident #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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-08-08 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, staff interviews and facility policy review, the facility failed to prevent exposure for cross contamination during meal service and failed to follow safe food handling practices. The facility identified a census of 33 residents. Findings include: On 08/06/24 at 12:19 PM, observed Staff C, [NAME] leave the meal serving area to go to the dining room. The cook left the serving scoops in the potatoes, corn, rice casserole and the tongs in the chicken and did not cover any of food items on the steam table before leaving. At 12:23 PM Staff C returned to the kitchen, scratched her face and resumed plating resident's food without washing her hands. On 08/07/24 at 12:35 PM, The Dietary Manager advised the test tray would be the last tray on the cart with the room trays and then placed the thermometer and alcohol wipes on the test tray. The cook took the thermometer off the test tray to check the temperature of the chicken noodle soup. The thermometer was not cleaned before or after temping the soup and being placed back on the test tray. Staff D, Dietary aid then took…

    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 before2024-08-08 · 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

    Based on observations, clinical record review, resident, and staff interviews, the facility failed to treat a resident with respect and dignity for one reported interaction with a nurse for one out of one residents reviewed (Resident#7). The facility reported a census of 34 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment for Resident # 7 dated 7/5/24, included diagnoses of Parkinson's disease, and non Alzheimer's dementia. The Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) reflected a score of 13, intact cognition. The MDS identified Resident#7 independent with toileting, transfers, ambulation, and dressing. The Care Plan for Resident#7 listed an intervention dated 7/18/24, at times I can have an outburst and yell at my family or staff. Attempt to redirect me when I have an outburst or give me some alone time so I can settle down and proceed with my day. Resident #7's Nurses Behavior Progress Note dated 7/31/2024 at 11:15 PM, reflected Resident#7 wanted Staff A, Registered Nurse (RN) to send her to emergency room (ER) after Staff A found her slipping out of her recliner…

    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 · E2023-09-28 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
    Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, test tray, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide food at an appropriate temperature to ensure the food was safe and appetizing. The facility also failed to serve pureed food that was attractive in appearance. The facility reported a census of 37 residents. Findings Include: On 9/26/23 at 9:45 AM, Resident #10 reported the food on his room trays were cold most of the time. Resident #10 stated he doubted the facility would do anything about the food being cold. On 9/26/26 at 1:00 PM, Staff C, Dietary Manager served two pureed meals that consisted of fish, wax beans, and potatoes. The pureed food items were white in color, appeared bland and served together on the same plate, with the pureed food items blending into each other on the plate. On 9/26/23 at 1:29 PM, Staff C reported there was one resident (Resident #10) that complains all the time that his food was not warm enough. On 9/26/23 at 1:31 PM, a test tray was received from Staff C. The test tray consisted of crumb topped fish, oven browned potatoes, green peas and apple crisp.…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-09-28 · 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 and resident interviews and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure food was discarded after product expiration date, that leftovers were discarded after 3 days, prevent cross contamination during meal service and serve the meal on time. The facility identified a census of 37 residents. Findings include: 1. An initial kitchen tour conducted on 9/25/23 at 11:00 AM, revealed the following items were stored in the refrigerator ready for service: a. Vanilla Yogurt 32 ounces- best by date 9/18/23. b. Leftovers covered and dated: - [NAME] beans - prepped/dated 9/21. - Baked beans - prepped/dated 9/15. - Noodle for Resident's Name - prepped/dated 9/17. - Egg Salad - prepped/dated 9/20. - Spaghetti sauce - dated 9/17. On 9/25/23 at 11:45 AM, Staff C, Dietary Manager reported she had left a note for the night cook to go through the refrigerators and throw away outdated items. Staff C stated her expectation was for leftovers to be thrown away after three days. Staff C acknowledged and verified the leftovers identified needed to be discarded. On…

    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 · D2023-09-28 · tag F0568 — isolated
    Properly hold, secure, and manage each resident's personal money which is deposited with the nursing home.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, document review, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to set up resident funds over $50 in an interest bearing account and failed to provide the resident or their legal representative with quarterly balance statement for 1 of 4 residents sampled (Resident #25). The facility documented a census of 37 residents. Findings Include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] showed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 out of 15, indicating intact cognition. On 9/25/23 at 1:50 p.m., Resident #25 reported he had money locked up in the front business office that he could access whenever he wanted. Resident #25 didn't recall getting any quarterly statements detailing his balance of funds at the facility. During an interview on 9/26/23 at 9:43 a.m., the Business Office Manager (BOM) reported Resident #25's daughter leaves money in the front office for him for hair cuts and outings. He can come to the office and get money whenever he wants. She…

    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 · D2023-09-28 · tag F0625 — isolated
    Notify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, staff interviews and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide a notice of bed hold for 2 of 2 residents reviewed (Resident #32 and #139) for discharge to the hospital. The facility reported a census of 37 residents. Findings include: 1. Resident #32's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] assessment identified Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15, indicating intact cognition. Resident #32's MDS included diagnoses of cancer, coronary artery disease, end stage renal disease and malnutrition. The Clinical Census revealed Resident #139 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A Progress Note dated 8/29/23 at 4:10 PM, revealed Resident #32 was transferred to the emergency room (ER) from the cardiovascular clinic due to low blood pressure. A Progress Note dated 8/29/23 at 9:00 PM, documented Resident #32 was admitted to the hospital for hypokalemia (low potassium) and hypotension (low blood pressure). The Clinical record lacked documentation 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 Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-09-28 · 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, electronic census record, document review, Long-Term Care (LTC) Facility Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) 3.0 User's Manual, and staff interviews, the facility failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment across multiple MDS assessments for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for Hospice services (Resident #15). The facility identified a census of 37 residents. Findings Include: A Order Review History Report signed by the Provider on 9/01/23 documented a physician order for Hospice care services for pancreatic cancer effective 2/21/22. A Medicare Hospice Election form detailed Resident #15 signed himself into hospice care on 2/21/22. A review of the Electronic Census Record on 9/26/23 revealed Resident #15 resided on Hospice care at the facility since 2/21/22. A review of the Care Plan on 9/26/23 documented Resident #15 had chosen hospice care and directed to coordinate his care with hospice. The Care Plan had an initiation date of 3/09/22. A review of the Hospice…

    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 · D2023-09-28 · 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 observations, clinical record review, staff interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to develop a Care Plan to address pressure reduction interventions for a chronic left heel pressure ulcer for 1 out of 13 residents (Resident #36) reviewed for Comprehensive Care Plans. The facility reported a census of 37 residents. Findings Include: Resident #36's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15, indicating intact cognition. The MDS identified Resident #36 required extensive assistance of two persons with bed mobility, transfer and toilet use. The MDS documented Resident #36 did not walk during the assessment period. The MDS identified Resident #36 at risk for developing pressure ulcer and indicated that he had an unhealed pressure ulcer during the seven day lookback period. The MDS also identified the facility had placed a pressure reducing device in the resident's chair, provided pressure ulcer care,…

    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 · D2023-09-28 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
    Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, clinical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to have physician insulin orders that matched insulin administration and failed to follow the manufacturer's directions regarding safety for product use for administration for 1 of 2 residents observed for insulin administration (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 (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15, indicating no cognitive loss. The MDS listed a diagnosis of diabetes mellitus, hyperlipidemia and detailed Resident #15 received insulin injections seven days a week. The Care Plan revised [DATE] documented a focus problem of diabetes mellitus and directed Resident #15 had chosen to have his blood sugars assessed per medical doctors orders and receive diabetes medications for treatment for better control and comfort while on Hospice services. The Order Review History Report signed by 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
  • No harm found · B2023-09-28 · tag F0582 — pattern
    Give residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, document review and staff interview the facility failed to correctly fill out and serve the resident or the legal representative a beneficiary notice of the ending of Medicare skilled services for 3 of 3 resident reviewed (Resident #39, #40, and #90). The facility identified a census of 37 residents. Findings include: 1. An Electronic Census Record showed Resident #39 readmitted to the facility on skilled care services and discharged from the facility on 7/10/23. A Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Detailed Explanation of Non-Coverage (DENC) of Skilled Services dated 7/06/23 detailed Resident #39 had reached their maximum potential and the condition of the beneficiary was not expected to improve materially in a reasonable and predictable period. The CMS Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) documented the Resident's skilled nursing service coverage would end 7/09/23. The Social Service Coordinator documented she contacted the resident on 7/06/23 and explained 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 Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to CARE INITIATIVES — 43 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 5 of 52.9+2.1 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.5+1.5 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 53.7+0.3 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 53.7+1.3 vs chain
The other 42 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
1 of 5Avoca Specialty CareAvoca, IA 1 of 5Correctionville Specialty CareCorrectionville, IA 1 of 5Crestview Specialty CareWest Branch, IA 1 of 5Heritage Specialty CareCedar Rapids, IA 1 of 5Kingsley Specialty CareKingsley, IA 1 of 5Parkridge Specialty CarePleasant Hill, IA 1 of 5Ravenwood Specialty CareWaterloo, IA 1 of 5Westwood Specialty CareSioux City, IA 2 of 5Chariton Specialty CareChariton, IA 2 of 5Creston Specialty CareCreston, IA 2 of 5Dubuque Specialty CareDubuque, IA 2 of 5Lantern Park Specialty CareCoralville, IA 2 of 5New London Specialty CareNew London, IA 2 of 5Northcrest Specialty CareWaterloo, IA 2 of 5Northern Mahaska Specialty CareOskaloosa, IA 2 of 5Pinnacle Specialty CareCedar Falls, IA 2 of 5Southridge Specialty CareMarshalltown, IA 2 of 5Stratford Specialty CareStratford, IA 3 of 5Atlantic Specialty CareAtlantic, IA 3 of 5Centerville Specialty CareCenterville, IA 3 of 5Cherokee Specialty CareCherokee, IA 3 of 5Eldora Specialty CareEldora, IA 3 of 5Manly Specialty CareManly, IA 3 of 5Montezuma Specialty CareMontezuma, IA 3 of 5Odebolt Specialty CareOdebolt, IA 3 of 5Panora Specialty CarePanora, IA 3 of 5Ridgewood Specialty CareOttumwa, IA 3 of 5Southern Hills Specialty CareOsceola, IA 3 of 5West Ridge Specialty CareKnoxville, IA 4 of 5Bedford Specialty CareBedford, IA 4 of 5Belle Plaine Specialty CareBelle Plaine, IA 4 of 5Corning Specialty CareCorning, IA 4 of 5Corydon Specialty CareCorydon, IA 4 of 5Dunlap Specialty CareDunlap, IA 4 of 5Laporte City Specialty CareLa Porte City, IA 4 of 5Lyon Specialty CareRock Rapids, IA 4 of 5Oakwood Specialty CareAlbia, IA 5 of 5Fonda Specialty CareFonda, IA 5 of 5Lamoni Specialty CareLamoni, IA 5 of 5Sibley Specialty CareSibley, IA

Showing 40 of 42; lowest-rated first.

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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
CARE INITIATIVESOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 08/01/1989
COMPUTERSHARE CORPORATE TRUST COMPANY, NAOrganization5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/01/2025
BEAL, MICHAELIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 06/01/2020
BOWEN, LANEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2021
CAROTHERS, MARY JANEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2023
CHILDS, KEVINIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 04/01/2023
CORLESS, PETERIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2025
KREIN, KEITHIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/29/2022
RUST, ELIZABETHIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2023
STURM, DENISEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2021
UPMEYER, LINDAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/29/2022
DIXON, DAVIDIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 06/01/2016
DRAKE, EMILYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/04/2023
GILYARD, TANYAIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 05/23/2025
KUHN, JERAMYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 06/25/2008
MCDYER, JESSICAIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 02/22/2023
VOLM, JOHANNAIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2021
BAEDKE, CHARISSAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/01/2024
NGUYEN, THAIIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2024
WENDT, TINAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/14/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 24 rows in the source record cover these 20 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$3.3M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+7.4%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$281K
Related-party expense9% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 80%Medicare 3%Other / private 17%

About 80% 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 $281K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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

$241per resident / day
operating cost
$7,313per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$260per 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 165263. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-09-04, 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