Accura Healthcare of Newton East, LLC
1743 South Eighth Avenue East, Newton, IA 50208 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 54 certified beds · (641) 792-5680 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (39) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $19,744 in federal fines (most recent 2025-02-19)
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 2 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 3 to 1 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 24.6% | 17.1% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 7.1% | 4.6% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 2.0% | 1.5% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 5.5% | 2.4% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 16.1% | 4.2% | 6.5% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 1.0% | 3.8% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 22.8% | 16.6% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 35.1% | 20.8% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 92.5% | 95.3% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.4% | 4.2% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 29.7% | 25.6% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 16.4% | 19.5% | 17.1% | typical |
‡ 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.
42.3% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 26 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.10 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 6% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 1% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 42.3%CMS range 27.5–57.7 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.8%CMS range 7.1–15.2 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — Newly certified nursing home with less than 12-15 months of data available or the nursing home opened less than 6 months ago, and there were no data to submit or claims for this measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — Newly certified nursing home with less than 12-15 months of data available or the nursing home opened less than 6 months ago, and there were no data to submit or claims for this measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.67 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 54 beds and averages 49.3 residents a day — about 91% occupied, or roughly 5 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.14 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.27 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 2.61 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.35 on weekdays — 22% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.32 to 0.15 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%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
39 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 28 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2025-02-19 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, clinical record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the safety of 5 residents in a designated smoking area when on 2/10/25 at 1:15 PM, Resident #32, with a portable oxygen tank, kept in a bag on the back of his wheelchair, smoked alongside other residents while staff were providing supervision. Per interview with Resident#32 he reported that since November 2024 he had been on oxygen, and sometimes he had the oxygen tank on his wheelchair during smoke breaks. The facility reported 9 residents who smoke or vape. Facility additionally failed to ensure foot pedals had been in place on a wheelchair before transporting Resident #25 from dining room to resident room. This failure resulted in Immediate Jeopardy to the health, safety, and security of the resident. The facility reported a census of 48 residents. The State Agency informed the facility of the Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) on 2/10/25 at 4:20 PM. The IJ began on 11/28/24, the day Resident #32's oxygen…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2026-02-18 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespreadHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on facility record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure daily Registered Nurse (RN) coverage for 2 separate days within a 30-day schedule review. The facility reported a census of 52.Findings include: Review of nursing schedules from 1/16/26 to 2/14/26 revealed no RN scheduled for 2/8/26 & 2/14/26. On both days, two Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs) provided the needed licensed nurse coverage. One LPN for the 12-hour day shift and another LPN for the 12-hours night shift. During an interview on 2/18/26 at 1:00 PM, the Administrator acknowledged and confirmed the lack of RN coverage for 2/8/26 and 2/14/26. This was an oversight as a result of recent staffing changes that reduced the number of floor RNs availability. The facility does not have a staffing policy which outlines the need for RN coverage at least 8 consecutive hours 7 days a week.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-02-18 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, facility document review, and facility policy reivew, the facility failed to ensure temperatures were checked regularly for food to be served, refrigerator and freezer food storage, and dishwasher sanitation when temperature logs lacked documentation during 2 of 2 kitchen observations. The facility additionally failed to regularly test chemical solution to ensure sanitation of surfaces during 2 of 2 kitchen observations. The facility further failed to prevent cross contamination when raw beef thawed on a tray placed on top of a container with ready to eat ham and cheese sandwiches during 1 of 2 kitchen observations. The facility reported a census of 52 resident. Findings include: 1. During an initial kitchen observation on 2/15/26 at 10:30 AM and during a follow up observation on 2/16/26 at 11:50 AM, 4 of 4 refrigerators and 2 of 2 freezers stored various foods and beverages for resident meals. All refrigerators and freezers observed had a temperature log taped to the front or top, all logs had multiple entries left blank. A. Review of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-02-18 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, observation, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for EBP (Residents #7, #40 and #47), failed to properly handle, transport and process linens properly for 2 residents in Transmission Based Precautions (Residents #4 and #56), and failed to change out a resident's urinal in a timely manner (Resident #10). The facility reported a census of 52.Findings include:1. The Electronic Health Record (EHR) indicated that Resident #40 had an abscess on her left knee 11/16/25 that was drained on 11/18/25 and required a dressing change including packing. The dressing order changed on 2/16/26 but still included packing. The Care Plan initiated on 3/29/24 indicated that Resident #40 was placed in EBP on 11/27/24 for wounds. During an observation on 2/16/26 at 11:31 AM Staff A, RN performed wound care to Resident #40's left knee. She did not wear a gown during the dressing change. There was an EBP…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-18 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on employee file review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the completion of dependent adult abuse training for 1 of 5 employees reviewed (Staff K, Certified Nurse's Aide [CNA]). The facility reported a census of 52. Findings include: Employee file review of Staff K, Certified Nurses Aide (CNA) revealed a hire date of 8/6/25. The file lacked documentation that Staff K completed dependent adult abuse training within six months of the hire date. During an interview on 2/18/26 at 1:00 PM, the Facility Administrator acknowledged and confirmed the lack of dependent adult abuse training for Staff K. The policy Nursing Facility Abuse Prevention, Identification, Investigation, and Reporting policy, updated 10/22/22, noted the following: a. Within six months of hire, each employee shall be required to complete an initial 2-hour training course provided by the Iowa Department of Human Services relating to the identification and reporting of dependent adult abuse training; b. All nurses' aide shall receive initial and annual resident adult abuse prevention…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-18 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on electronic heath record (EHR) review, observation, resident interview, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to consistently complete smoking assessments for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for smoking (Resident #22). The facility reported a census of 52. Findings include: The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment completed on 11/13/25 noted the use of tobacco for Resident #22. The MDS documented that the resident had a readmission date of 8/22/25 from a short-term hospital stay. The MDS documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 15 out 15, which revealed intact cognitive skillsDuring an observation on 2/16/26 at 1:15 PM, Resident #22 was observed vaping in the designated smoking area. Upon review of completed Smoking Assessments, no assessments were completed during all of 2025. The two most recent assessments were dated 10/23/24 and 2/11/26. In an interview on 2/16/26 at 3:15 PM Staff L, Certified Nurse's Aide, reported Resident #22 was vaping since they started working at the facility in September 2025. Staff L reported Resident #22 may smoke…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-18 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on electronic health record (EHR) review, observations, resident interview, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to update the Care Plans for 2 of 17 Care Plans reviewed (R#22 for vaping, and R#36 for driving). The facility reported a census of 52. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment completed on 11/13/25 noted the use of tobacco for Resident #22.During an observation on 2/16/26 at 1:15 PM, Resident #22 observed vaping in the designated smoking area. The Care Plan, with an end target date of 5/13/26, lacked a Focus Area and Interventions related to active smoking. Upon further review, smoking was addressed on previous Care Plan updates but removed on 7/28/25.In an interview on 2/16/26 at 3:50 PM, Resident #22 explained they had stopped smoking in January 2025 but then started vaping sometime between July 2025 and September 2025. Resident #22 confirmed the occasional use of cigarettes. In an interview on 2/17/26 at 2:45 PM, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON)…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-18 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review, observation, and staff interviews, the facility failed to perform wound care as the physician ordered for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #40) reviewed for wound care.Findings include: The Electronic Health Record (EHR) indicated that Resident #40 had an abscess on her left knee 11/16/25 that was drained on 11/18/25 and required a dressing change including packing. The dressing order changed on 2/16/26 but still included packing. The Physician's Orders included lidocaine external gel 2% that was discontinued on 1/16/26. The new dressing change order lacked an order for lidocaine to be placed on the wound prior to the dressing change.The Care Plan initiated on 3/29/24 indicated that Resident #40 was placed in Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) on 11/27/24 for wounds. It lacked documentation on the location of the wound. It directed staff to administer medications as ordered.During an observation on 2/16/26 at 11:31 AM Staff A, RN performed wound care to Resident #40's left knee. After removal of the old dressing and cleaning of the wound, Staff A applied…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-18 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident interview, staff interviews, and electronic health record (EHR), and policy review, the facility failed to identify, evaluate and analyze hazard(s) and risk(s) to prevent potential avoidable accidents for 1 of 1 reviewed, (Resident#36). In addition, the facility failed to assess if the Resident was safe to drive a vehicle on his own. The facility reported a census of 52. Findings include:The Electronic Health Record (EHR) indicated that Resident #36 had diagnoses including malignant neoplasm of the liver, reduced mobility and unspecified abnormalities of gait and mobility. It indicated he was receiving chemotherapy treatments through 2/6/26. He currently had a Basic Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10 from the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], which indicated difficulty with cognitive skills. (The BIMS score was down from 15 at the time of his previous MDS assessment.) The EHR lacked documentation of evaluation of his ability to drive a vehicle safely.The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-18 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, observation, and staff interview, the facility failed to initiate adequate interventions to prevent significant weight loss for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #12) reviewed for nutrition.Findings include:The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #12 identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 5 indicating severe cognitive impairment. It also indicated that the resident ate independently.The Care Plan initiated on 10/21/23 indicated that Resident #12 ate in the dining room independently with set up. It identified that Resident #12 was at risk for altered nutrition due to a history of mild protein-calorie malnutrition, irritable bowel syndrome and rheumatoid arthritis. The directives for staff included the following:Invite the resident to activities that promote additional intake. Provide and serve diet as ordered. Provide and serve supplements and fortified foods as ordered.RD to evaluate and make diet change recommendations as needed. The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-08-07 · tag F0809 — failed to serve meals on a reasonable schedule — patternEnsure meals and snacks are served at times in accordance with resident’s needs, preferences, and requests. Suitable and nourishing alternative meals and snacks must be provided for residents who want to eat at non-traditional times or outside of scheduled meal times.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, clinical record review, the facility's meal schedule, staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to serve 2 of 2 meals observed in a timely manner according to the facility dining schedule. The facility reported a census of 54 residents.Findings include:The undated facility's Dining Times listed breakfast at 8:00 AM, lunch at 12:00 PM, and dinner at 5:00 PM.On 8/5/25 at 11:54 AM, Resident #6 explained she often got her meals late and received her lunch at 2:30 PM.The observation of the delivery of the lunchroom trays on 8/5/25 revealed the Dining Services Manager delivered Resident #14's meal at 1:25 PM, Resident #15's meal at 1:27 PM, Resident #16's meal at 1:28 PM, and Resident 17's meal at 1:29 PM.On 8/5/25 at 2:33 PM, Staff A, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), stated the facility had a lot of staff turnover in the kitchen and had times the staff could serve lunch between 1:00 PM and 2:00 PM. On 8/6/25 at 8:30 AM, Resident #19 stated he didn't receive his lunch until 1:30 PM. The observation of the delivery of the breakfast trays on 8/6/25 revealed 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.
Show the remaining 28 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-07 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
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, staff, and resident interviews, the facility failed to report an allegation of missing money for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #6) for abuse. The facility reported a census of 54 residents.Findings include:Resident #6's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating intact cognition. The MDS included diagnoses of anxiety disorder, depression, and schizophrenia.On 8/5/25 at 11:54 AM, Resident #6 stated she had $10 missing her friend gave her on 8/4/25. She stated she informed the Administrator that she had missing money. She added she felt one of the Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) took it. Resident #6 reported this concern to the State Agency again on the morning of 8/6/25.On 8/5/25 at 4:02 PM, the Administrator stated Resident #6 reported the missing money to her the day before. She stated Resident #6 changed her story many times and no staff witnessed the friend visit. 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-07 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents received showers and/or baths at least once a week for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for bathing (Resident #5). The facility reported a census of 54 residents. Findings include: Resident #5's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS included diagnoses of hemiplegia (weakness or paralysis on one side of the body), heart failure, and depression. The MDS listed Resident #5 as independent with bathing. The Care Plan Focus initiated 3/25/24 indicated Resident #5 had an activities of daily living (ADLs) deficit related to a cerebral vascular accident (stroke). The Intervention initiated 6/30/24 directed Resident #5 required assistance from 1 staff for bathing. During an interview on 8/4/25 at 1:44 PM, Resident #5 reported she went 3 weeks at times without a shower. Resident #5 said the staff always…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-02-19 · tag F0801 — patternEmploy 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 interviews, employee job description and policy , the facility failed to ensure adequate, trained, dietary staff for a clean kitchen environment. The dietary manager did not meet the regulated educational qualifications, the kitchen lacked appropriate sanitary conditions (photos available). The facility reported a census of 48 residents. Findings include: During an interview on 2/10/25 at 9:25 AM Staff B, Kitchen Manager reported working at the facility only a few months, beginning, December 2024. Staff B relayed the previous kitchen manager left and had recommended Staff A, laundry/housekeeper for promotion to kitchen manager. Staff B reported dietary training in several fast food environments, which included a course in food safety for managers and had not yet completed the Certification for Dietary Manager (CDM) coursework. On 2/10/25 at 9:30 AM Staff B, Kitchen Manager (KM) reported each shift is supposed to clean the kitchen at the end of the shift and it is apparent that had not occurred over the weekend. Staff B, KM acknowledged the dirty floors, equipment and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-02-19 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide food that was palatable and at an appetizing temperature for 5 out of 5 residents reviewed (Res #8, #13, #17, #35, & #43). The facility reported a census of 48 residents. Finds include: 1. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] Resident #13 revealed the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) was 15 which indicated an intact cognition. During an interview on 2/10/25 at 12:07 PM Resident #13 stated that the lunch food that was to be served at noon came at 1:30 PM and her lettuce in the chef salad was wilted. Resident #13 stated the breakfast food was cold all of the time. 2. The MDS dated [DATE] Resident #17 revealed the BIMS was 15 which suggested an intact cognition. During an interview on 2/10/25 at 10:29 AM Resident #17 was in a wheelchair in her room with a meal tray covered with plastic on her bedside table untouched. She stated it was cold. 3. The MDS dated [DATE] Resident #35 revealed the BIMS was 15 which…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-02-19 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — patternEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, food provider documents and staff interviews, the facility failed to prepare food to meet the needs for 8 of 8 residents who required the meal to be mechanical soft (Residents #27, #32, #11, #26, #15, #9, #2, #29). The facility reported a census of 48 residents. Findings include: During an observation on 2/13/25 at 12:14 PM, Staff B, Dietary Manager prepared mechanical soft meat by placing 6 chicken pieces into the food processor then put the prepared meat into a metal pan on the steam table. Further observation revealed Staff N, [NAME] utilized a scoop and shook the prepared chicken in attempt to level it and meat fell out, less than a scoop, placed it on a plate and another plate was served with a scoop full. Staff B made a plate with mechanical soft chicken and put 2 scoops on one plate and another with a little more than a scoop full. During an interview on 2/13/25 at 1:48 PM, Staff N, [NAME] stated he did not know what size of scoop he was using to serve. Staff N stated he was new to cooking in a facility as he was working in a fast food restaurant prior…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-02-19 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to maintain a clean sanitary environment in the kitchen and failed to store food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety included food not covered. The facility reported a census of 48. Findings include: On 2/10/25 at 9:25 AM observations during initial tour of the facility kitchen revealed the following; a. the floor tiles under the sink missing with gray/ black residue on flooring b. grime and water stains evident under the sinks c. refrigerator handle and interior tray with food crumbs present d. front of the stove revealed dripping residue and traces of food e. the stainless appliances were not clean f. sand like debris on top of the dishwasher g. various items on the floor included silverware, cup, papers, food crumbs and spills h. bowls of cereal uncovered and a tub of peanut butter half empty covered loosely with a piece of plastic g. sticky pest traps in most corners (photos available). On 2/10/25 at 9:30 AM Staff B, Kitchen Manager (KM) reported each shift is supposed to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-02-19 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — patternKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview and facility assessment review the facility failed to maintain essential equipment available to be used in safe operating conditions. A washing machine noted out of order, debris behind the washers related to water backing up, a dryer did not automatically cool down or shut off. The facility had reported a census of 48. Findings include: 1. On 2/10/25 at 10:06 AM initial laundry tour observed two large industrial size washers, one with a sign on the front documented out of order, behind the washer were water stains on the piping and grayish dirty debris on the floor and the pipes. Observed two industrial size dryers, one had a sign taped that read, Keep eye on dryer, wont shut off by its self (photos available). On 2/10/25 at 10:10 AM Staff A, Laundry/Housekeeper (LH) explained only one of the large washers is working. Queried Staff A regarding the debris behind the washer, Staff A responded the pipes can back up from grease or oils and had pillow stuffing shoot out back of the washer as well. Staff A relayed the sign on the dryer reflected the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-02-19 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — patternMake sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews and commercial pest control documents, the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program so that the facility would be free of pests. The facility also failed to follow through with recommendations provided by the commercial pest control to prevent pest entry and clean and proper disposal of food waste in the kitchen. The facility reported a census of 48 residents. Findings include: During an observation on 2/10/25 at 10:06 AM the back door of the kitchen adjoins the laundry room. Multiple pest traps were noted throughout the kitchen and into the laundry room. During an interview on 2/10/25 at 10:06 AM Staff J, Laundry stated there are more pest traps in the cupboards and they are roach traps. Staff J stated that roaches have been in the laundry bins and occasionally in the clothes. Staff J stated she had killed a roach this morning. During an observation on 2/11/25 at 9:41 AM, a large kitchen trash lid was on the floor and food debris and spatters were on the wall behind the trash and on the side of the oven which was next to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-19 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, clinical record review and staff interviews the facility failed to assure services were provided to meet acceptable standard of practice during medication administration for 2 out of 5 residents (Residents #5 and #47). The facility reported a census of 48 residents. Findings include: 1. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] for Resident #5 revealed a diagnosis of dementia. The Care Plan for Resident #5 revealed an impaired cognitive function or impaired thought processes due to dementia and directed staff to administer medications as ordered, monitor and document side effects, cue, reorient and supervise as needed. On 2/11/25 at 9:32AM Resident#5 was in her room with medications in a cup, no staff were in the room to provide supervision. Staff D, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) was across the hall by the medication cart. During an interview on 2/17/25 at 1:17 PM, Staff D, LPN stated Resident #5 did not have difficulty taking medications and was aware the facility policy directed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-19 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, clinical record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to follow the rehabilitation directives and the rehabilitation staff failed to provide restorative care for a resident (#35) in need of their services. The facility reported a census of 48 residents. Finding include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] for Resident #35 revealed there were 0 days for restorative care provided. The Care Plan for Resident #35 revealed that she had activities of daily living deficit due to the left lower leg fracture and will participate in the restorative plan 3 times weekly. The document titled Restorative Therapy Program dated 10/24/24 signed by the Physical Therapist revealed: a. Identified Resident #35. b. The frequency of the program to be completed 3-5 times a week for 6 months. c. Passive/Active Range of Motion (ROM) 1. [NAME] Therabands 2-3 times for 15 repetitions, both elbow flexion, extension and shoulder extension rotation. 2. Continuous cycling for upper body for 15 minutes…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-19 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
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 interview, clinical record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure Provider notification and timely response to Pharmacy recommendations for 2 of 5 residents (Resident #29 and #36) reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility reported a census of 48 residents. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], revealed Resident #29 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15, indicating intact cognition. Diagnoses included Bipolar Disorder, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), and adjustment disorder with depressed mood. Resident #29 required anticonvulsant medication. The Care Plan, revised on 5/08/24, revealed Resident #29 had focus area for antidepressant medication related to poor nutrition and Bipolar mood disorder with interventions to administer antidepressant medications as ordered by physician, and to monitor/document side effects and effectiveness of medication every shift. The Medication Administration Record (MAR), dated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-19 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — isolatedSet up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on facility record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to have an effective Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) program in place to assist in the provision of quality care for residents. The facility identified a census of 48 residents. Findings include: Review of the Department of Inspections and Appeals web site entity search reveals this facility has repeat deficiencies the past two years for infection control, professional standards and clean environment. During an interview on 2/18/25 at 9:39 AM, the Administrator acknowledged the facility had repeat deficiencies the past two years. She stated there were attempts to assist the kitchen staff with training. She stated all of the staff in the kitchen are new. During an interview on 2/18/25 at 9:53 AM, the Regional Director of Operations stated the root cause was due to the turn over in the kitchen staff. She stated that on 2/6/25 she visited the kitchen, identified concerns and began designing a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) that will make progress and provide support for the kitchen 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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-12-11 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to maintain safe, clean, sanitary and orderly bathroom facilities for 5 of 8 resident bathroom facilities reviewed. (Resident #2, #3, #4, #6, #7) The facility reported census was 52. Findings include: 1. According to a Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with a reference date of 11/14/24, Resident #2 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating an intact cognitive status. Resident #2 required some supervision, but primarily independent with transfers, mobility, dressing, toilet use and personal hygiene needs. Resident #2's diagnoses included Non-Alzheimer's dementia, renal insufficiency, congestive heart failure, coronary artery disease and bipolar disorder. During an observation on 12/9/24 at 12:10 p.m. Resident #2 was resting quietly in bed. Bedroom floors appeared dirty and gritty. The bathroom floor had a blanket next to the toilet and wall tiles above the toilet were missing. (See photos 16B 12.9.24 and 16B 12.9.24 (2).) The following morning on 12/10/24 at 8:35 a.m. The blanket…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-12-11 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — patternMake 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
Based on observations, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to maintain an environment in good and orderly condition for for 5 of 8 resident rooms reviewed (Residents #1, #2, #3, #5, #7). The facility reported census was 52. Findings include: 1. According to a Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) with a reference date of 10/10/24, Resident #1 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13 indicating an intact cognitive status. Resident #1 required maximal to dependent assistance with transfers, mobility, dressing, toilet use and personal hygiene needs. Resident #1's diagnoses included Alzheimer's, renal insufficiency, neurogenic bladder, benign prostatic hyperplasia, atrial fibrillation, diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, respiratory failure, congestive heart failure, peripheral vascular disease. During an observation on 12/9/24 at 12:00 p.m. Resident #1 was resting quietly in bed. The room floors appeared dirty and gritty and a piece of baseboard was detached from the wall near bathroom door. (See photo 25B 12.9.24). Upon returning to the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-03-19 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — patternHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to promote care for residents in a manner and environment that maintains each resident's dignity and right to be served and provided meals in a timely manner and in accordance with the facility's dining schedule. The facility reported a census of 52 residents. Findings include: During an observation of lunch service 3/11/24 beginning at 12:10 PM, observed residents seated in the main dining room waiting for lunch to be served. One kitchen staff served meals to the residents in the dining room. At 12:45 PM, five residents still waiting to be served lunch. At 12:54 PM a resident who was in the dining room since the beginning of the observation asked where his food was. The resident served lunch at 12:55 PM, with the last residents being served in the dining room at 12:55 PM. Room trays did not start being served to residents choosing to eat in their rooms until 1:10 PM. During an observation of lunch service 3/13/24 beginning at 11:50 AM, observed residents seated in the main dining room waiting for lunch to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-03-19 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, faciliity document review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to maintain a safe, clean, and homelike environment due to holes multiple walls, uneven hallway flooring, collapsing soffits throughout the exterior of the building, and strong odor in the central family room. The facility reported a census of 52 residents. Findings include: A direct observation on 03/11/24 at 01:46 PM revealed at least one cloth recliner in the primary living had a strong odor that permeated the living area. A direct observation on 03/11/24 at 03:31 PM revealed the walls in Resident # 252's room had uncovered, large holes in the dry wall behind a recliner. Also observed numerous large chips in the paint near the base of the bed. The baseboard heaters dented, chipped, and bent out of shape. A direct observation on 03/11/24 at 03:32 PM revealed an uneven space in Hallway C that this surveyor nearly tripped over. The tile appears visibly damaged with a dip in the center. A direct observation on 03/12/24 at 09:17 AM showed the baseboard heaters in Resident # 21's room to be…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-03-19 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews and policy review, the facility failed to provide a sanitary environment to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. The facility reported a census of 52 residents. Findings include: During an observation 3/11/24 at 1:07 PM, Staff D, Certified Medication Aide (CMA) assisted a resident in the dining room during lunch service, assisting with feeding the resident and touching utensils and glassware. Staff D stood up and moved two glasses of fluid for another resident, touching the rim of both glasses. Staff D did not sanitize her hands before or after touching the rims of the glasses. Staff D sat back down and resumed assisting a resident with eating, touching the table and then picking up a piece of bread with both hands to tear apart and give to the resident to eat. Staff D did not sanitize her hands between residents, or before and after touching surfaces and food. During an observation 3/13/24 at 8:34 AM, Staff D assisted two residents eating breakfast. Staff D went back and forth between the two…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-19 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review, observations, resident interview and staff interviews, the facility failed to accommodate residents needs with assurance of accessibility to call lights within resident's reach and provision of appropriate and adaptive equipment for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #6). The facility reported a census of 52 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #6, dated 12/24/23, documented the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating the resident is cognitively intact. The MDS further documented diagnoses to include medically complex conditions, orthostatic hypotension and a neurogenic bladder. The MDS revealed the resident had impairment in range of motion on both sides of her upper extremity (shoulder, elbow, wrist and hand). The Care Plan for Resident #6, with a revision date of 5/3/21, with a focus area for activities of daily living (ADL), documented an ADL deficit related to contracture, above knee amputation (right), neurogenic bladder, anemia, depression/anxiety and rheumatoid…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-19 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
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, resident interview and staff interview, the facility failed to keep accurate advance directives per a residents wishes for 1 of 3 residents sampled (Resident #21). The facility reported a census of 52. Findings include: Record review of Resident #21's paper chart noted an Iowa Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment (IPOST) with a status of do not resuscitate dated (DNR) [DATE]. Continued record review in the electronic health record (EHR) showed an IPOST status of full code. This finding discrepant with a status of DNR. In an interview on [DATE] Staff D, CMA, stated the IPOST status of a resident can be obtained through the electronic health record (EHR). Staff D indicated that is where a staff member looks to find the IPOST status. Staff D pulled out their EHR application on their phone, looked up Resident #21, and stated Resident #21's IPOST status as full code. In an interview on [DATE] at 04:07 PM Staff C, LPN, stated they believe they are required to check the paper chart…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-19 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal 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 clinical record review, family interview and staff interview, the facility failed to notify the resident and resident representative in writing of the discharge as soon as practical for 1 of 1 residents (Resident #51) who were sampled for closed record review for facility initiated discharge. The facility also failed to notify the Long Term Care Ombudsman for 1 of 1 residents who transferred to the hospital (Resident #6). The facility reported a census of 52 residents. Findings include: 1. Review of the Progress Notes for Resident #51 revealed the resident discharged from the facility on 1/4/24 with the reason for discharge being a need for secure placement. The note documented the resident driven by her daughter and son in law in a private vehicle and discharge instructions reviewed with the daughter. Review of the electronic record and hard copy record at the facility for Resident #51 lacked documentation of the notification in writing for discharge of the resident to the resident or 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-19 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify 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 and staff interview, the facility failed to notify the resident's representative of the facility policy for bed hold, including reserve bed payment, for 1 of 1 residents (Resident #6) who were reviewed for hospitalization. The facility reported a census of 52 residents. Findings include: Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] and the facility's computer software program used for electronic medical record documentation revealed Resident #6 had discharged from the facility on 1/2/24 to the hospital and reentered the facility on 1/5/24. The clinical record lacked documentation, either in writing or verbally, of notification to the resident's representative of the facility policy for bed hold, including reserve bed payment, when Resident #6 discharged and transferred to the hospital on 1/2/24 with an anticipated return. Review of the resident's clinical record showed the resident had a Power of Attorney (POA) in place. During an interview 3/14/24 at 12:44 PM, the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-19 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, facility document review, and staff interviews the facility failed to re-submit a Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) with new psychiatric diagnosis for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #6 and #12) reviewed for PASRR requirements. The facility additionally failed to follow PASRR recommended specialized services as care planned (Resident #12) and further failed to care plan PASRR recommended services (Resident #6). The facility reported a census of 52 residents. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], revealed Resident #12 required antipsychotic, antianxiety, and antidepressant medication. Diagnoses included anxiety disorder and depression. The Care Plan focus area, initiated 08/15/23, revealed Resident#12's PASRR identified a need for specialized services due to diagnoses of major depressive disorder and anxiety disorder. The Care Plan indicated a goal that Resident #22 would have individual therapy services by a licensed therapist to address…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-19 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to fully review and revise the comprehensive care plan for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #27) who were sampled for care plan review related to catheter care. The facility reported a census of 52. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] for Resident #27 reflected the resident occasionally incontinent and did not have a catheter. The Care Plan for Resident #27, with a revision date of 2/21/24, under the focus area for incontinence, documented the resident is incontinent of urine due to impaired mobility, diuretic use, chronic kidney disease stage 3 and benign prostatic hyperplasia (enlarged prostate). The care plan directed staff to assist the resident to the bathroom throughout the day, assist with peri cares twice daily and as needed, assist with changing the adult protection pad and monitor urine. The care plan did not have a focus area or interventions/tasks for catheter care. Review of the electronic health record for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-19 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interviews, clinical record review, and facility document review, the facility failed to administer insulin as ordered and further failed to administer the correct dose of an antipsychotic medication for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #16) reviewed for medication administration. The facility reported a census of 52 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], revealed Resident #16 required insulin injections each day of the look back period and required anti-psychotic medication on a routine basis. Resident #16 diagnoses included: diabetes mellitus, schizophrenia, anxiety disorder, depression, and borderline personality disorder. The Care Plan, revised on 01/19/24, revealed focus area for diabetes mellitus diagnoses and instructed staff to administer medications as Physician ordered. The Care Plan focus area for impaired cognitive function additionally instructed staff to administer medications as ordered. The Care Plan, informed that Resident #16 is at risk for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-19 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, clinical record review, staff and family interviews, the facility failed to provide adequate oral care for 3 of 5 residents reviewed (Resident #9, #25 and #29) who needed assistance with oral hygiene as directed in their respective individual plans of care. The facility additionally failed to provide daily assistance with dressing and grooming (Resident #5) and twice weekly bathing (Resident #22) for 2 of 8 residents reviewed for activities of daily living. The facility reported a census of 52 residents. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] for Resident #9 revealed a diagnosis of dementia, pneumonia, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and required assistance of 1 for activities of daily living (ADL) to include oral care. Resident #9 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10 suggesting a moderate impairment. The Care Plan dated 3/3/24 for Resident #9 directed staff to provide the aid of 1 staff member for grooming, hygiene, bathing and oral cares. An…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-11-02 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review, staff and resident interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to report an allegation of abuse within 24 hours of the event. (Resident #1) The facility reported census was 49. Findings include: According to a Minimum Data Set (MDS) with a reference date of 8/6/23, Resident #1 had a Brief Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15 indicating an intact cognitive status. The MDS documented the resident required limited assistance with transfers, mobility, dressing, toilet use and personal hygiene needs. Resident #1's diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The Care Plan dated 8/15/23 documented Resident #1 is in need of Specialized Services due to major depressive disorder and anxiety disorder. The care plan directs staff that the resident is to receive therapy services from behavioral health. The care plan also documented the resident had a recent trauma in her life due to the death of her daughter and is at risk for post traumatic stress disorder. In an interview on 10/25/23 at 3:10 p.m. Staff C, Certified Nurse…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-02 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review, staff and resident interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to prevent further potential of abuse by not separating the alleged perpetrator from the alleged victim. (Resident #1) The facility reported census was 49. Findings include: According to a Minimum Data Set (MDS) with a reference date of 8/6/23, Resident #1 had a Brief Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15 indicating an intact cognitive status. The MDS documented the resident required limited assistance with transfers, mobility, dressing, toilet use and personal hygiene needs. Resident #1's diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The Care Plan dated 8/15/23 documented Resident #1 is in need of Specialized Services due to major depressive disorder and anxiety disorder. The care plan directs staff that the resident is to receive therapy services from behavioral health. The care plan also documented the resident had a recent trauma in her life due to the death of her daughter and is at risk for post traumatic stress disorder. In an interview on 10/25/23…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-02 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide 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 and staff interview the facility failed to properly dispense controlled medications in accordance with professional standards of practice. (Resident #2) The facility reported census was 49. Findings include: According to a Minimum Data Set (MDS) with a reference date of 1/17/23, Resident #2 had a Brief Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 out of 15 indicating an intact cognitive status. The MDS documented the resident required limited assistance with transfers, mobility, dressing, toilet use and personal hygiene needs. Resident #2's diagnosis included coronary artery disease, respiratory failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, benign prostatic hypertrophy and arthritis. The MDS documented the resident received scheduled and as needed (PRN) pain medication. In an interview on 10/24/23 at 1:40 p.m. the Director of Nursing stated on 2/9/23, she was alerted to a discrepancy with Resident #2's liquid morphine. During a shift change narcotic count on 2/9/23 at 6:00 a.m. it was noted that only 0.25 milliliters remained in the bottle when the controlled…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$19,744 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $19,744 — penalty dated 2025-02-19
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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 1 of 5 | 2.5 | -1.5 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 2.6 | -1.6 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 3.1 | -2.1 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 2 of 5 | 2.8 | -0.8 vs chain |
The other 40 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.5★, per CMS)
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 / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LENEAVE, THOMAS | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 01/01/2016 |
| CONNER, ROBERT | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 01/01/2024 |
| ELLIOTT, COREY | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 01/01/2023 |
| TOTI, LISA | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 01/01/2019 |
| LENEAVE, TED | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/01/2016 |
| AMERICAN HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT SERVICES LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 01/01/2003 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 8 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 82% 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 $253K 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
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in IA
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Iowa Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 165421. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-18, 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.