Casa De Paz Health Care Center
2121 West 19th Street, Sioux City, IA 51103 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 71 certified beds · (712) 233-3127 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (36) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (60%) runs well above the national median (45%)
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 | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
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 | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 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 | 17.5% | 17.1% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.3% | 4.6% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.5% | 1.5% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 2.0% | 2.4% | 2.0% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 2.2% | 4.2% | 6.5% | better |
| 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 | 4.3% | 3.8% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 18.9% | 16.6% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 24.6% | 20.8% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.7% | 95.3% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 1.0% | 4.2% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 27.2% | 25.6% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 24.0% | 19.5% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 2.0% | 2.1% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 17.7% | 20.9% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 8.8% | 13.2% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.63 | 1.49 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.22 | 2.08 | 1.80 | better |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.19 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 19% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 22% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 13.6%CMS range 9.4–20.7 | 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 | 96.5% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 3.5% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.6%CMS range 3.7–13.6 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.18 | 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 71 beds and averages 68.4 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 3 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 2.79 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.71 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.68 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 2.08 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.08 on weekdays — 32% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.82 to 0.44 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 60% is well above the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
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.
36 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 26 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-04-09 · 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 store food in accordance with professional standards by not labeling foods that were open with open dates. The facility reported a census of 71 residents.Findings include:During continuous observation on 4/6/26 from 10:20 AM to 10:40AM during the initial kitchen tour revealed:a. Four large plastic cereal containers with no open dates noted. b. A five gallon bucket of flour with no open date noted. c. Half eaten bowl of soup with spoon in bowl in the freezer of the fridge/freezer. Interview on 4/6/25 at 10:25 AM with Staff B dietary aide revealed that the half eaten bowl of soup with a spoon should not have been in the freezer. Interview on 4/7/26 at 10:20 AM with the Certified Dietary Manager (CDM) revealed that her expectations would be for items to be labeled and dated when they are opened. The CDM further revealed that half eaten bowls of soup should never be in the freezer. Interview on 4/7/26 at 10:37 AM with the Administrator revealed that she would like to see items in the kitchen labeled 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 · Ecited before2026-04-09 · 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 observation, infection control policy, and staff interview, the facility failed to perform proper hand hygiene and failed to adhere to infection control guidelines during wound care for 1 of 2 residents observed (Resident #2). The facility reported a total census of 71 residents.Findings include:Observation on 4/8/26 at 9:57 AM, showed Staff F, Registered Nurse (RN), donned a gown and gloves, then placed a barrier on the wound cart. With gloved hands, Staff F accessed her pocket to retrieve the wound cart key, unlocked the cart, and obtained necessary supplies (solution, ointment, kerlix, gauze, and q-tips), placing them on the barrier. While gloved, Staff F manually contacted the kerlix and gauze as she removed them from their packaging, placing the removed items back onto the potentially contaminated barrier surface. Staff F subsequently removed and discarded the gloves but failed to perform hand hygiene before donning a new pair of gloves. Staff F then removed and discarded Resident #2's right toe dressings, removed the soiled gloves, and again failed to perform hand…
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 before2026-04-09 · 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 personnel file reviews, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure all employees had an Iowa Criminal History Record Check Request SING form check completed prior to working in the facility for 1 out of 5 employees reviewed (Staff A). The facility reported a census of 71 residents.Findings include: Review of facility provided document titled Employee New Hire by Time Period dated 4/6/24 at 11:15 a.m., revealed Staff A, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) documented a hire date of 2/2/26. The personnel file for Staff A revealed documentation of a criminal background check through the Iowa Criminal History Record Check Request SING form completed 4/7/26 at 11:43 a.m The file lacked a background check prior to Staff A working in the facility. Review of facility policy titled Nursing Facility Abuse Prevention, Identification, Investigation and Reporting Policy with an updated date of 7/8/24 revealed The facility will conduct a state specific criminal record check and dependent adult/child abuse registry check on all prospective employees and other…
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 · D2026-04-09 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
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, record review, interviews, and policy reviews, the facility failed to include the necessary healthcare information within the baseline care plan regarding the presence and utilization of a Bilevel Positive Airway Pressure (BiPAP) machine to prevent decline or injury related to diagnoses of sleep apnea, lung disease, and obesity for 1 of 19 residents reviewed (Resident #46). The facility reported a census of 71 residents.Findings include:The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #46 documented diagnoses of sleep apnea, lung disease and obesity. The MDS failed to indicate Resident #46 used a non-invasive mechanical ventilator. The MDS showed the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated no cognitive impairment.Observation on 4/6/2026 at 1:37 PM showed a BiPAP on Resident #46's bedside table. Later observations showed Resident #46 also used the BiPAP for naps.The Baseline Care Plan for Resident #46 failed to show the need or usage of the BiPAP…
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 · D2026-04-09 · 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 document review, observation, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to assist residents with activities of daily living by not assisting with fingernail trimming for 1 of 1 residents (Resident #8) reviewed. The facility reported a census of 71 residents. Findings include:Review of Resident #8's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated Resident #8 required maximal assistance with personal hygiene. The MDS further indicated that Resident #8 had diagnoses of non-Alzheimer's dementia, and anxiety disorder.Review of Resident #8's Care Plan with a revision date of 2/19/26 indicated staff were to keep Resident #8's fingernails short. Observation on 4/6/26 at 2:32 PM revealed Resident #8's fingernails to be long at this time with debris under the nails. Interview on 4/7/26 at 12:10 PM with Staff C, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) revealed that the bath aid usually cuts residents fingernails, unless the resident is diabetic then the nurse is to trim the nails. Staff C then…
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 before2026-04-09 · 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 clinical record review, observation, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to provide proper transfer techniques while transferring a resident to prevent accidents for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #8) reviewed. The facility reported a census of 71 residents. Findings include:Review of Resident #8's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated Resident #8 required moderate assistance with chair/bed-to-chair transfers, toileting transfers, and walking. The MDS further indicated Resident #8 utilized a walker for a mobility device. Review of Resident #8's Care Plan with a revision date of 2/19/26 indicated Resident #8 had a self-care deficit as evidenced by requiring assistance with activities of daily living, impaired balance during transitions and requiring assistance with walking. The Care Plan further listed an intervention of Resident #8 being transferred with assistance from one staff member. Observation on 4/7/26 at 12:05 PM Staff E Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) was observed…
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 · D2026-04-09 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when 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 observations, record review, interviews and policy reviews, the facility failed to address the presence and usage of a Bilevel Positive Airway Pressure (BiPAP) machine. The facility failed to obtain a physician's order, failed to obtain proper machine settings, failed to establish or follow a routine cleaning schedule for 1 out of 19 residents reviewed (Resident # #46). The facility reported a census of 71 residents.Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #46 documented diagnoses of sleep apnea, obesity, and lung disease. The MDS failed to indicate Resident #46 used a non-invasive mechanical ventilator. The MDS showed the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated no cognitive impairment. Observation on 4/6/2026 at 1:37 PM showed a BiPAP on Resident #46's bedside table. Later observations showed Resident #46 also used the BiPAP for naps. Review of Resident #46's Clinical Physician Orders failed to show orders, settings or a cleaning…
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 before2025-10-30 · 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 interviews with staff and doctors, chart review and policy review, the facility failed to transcribe accurate medication orders for 1 of 3 residents reviewed. Resident #5 required decarboxylase inhibitor medications for treatment of Parkinson's Disease. After a clinic visit with the neurologist, the staff failed to clarify dramatic order changes. After 12 days of the resident getting the wrong dose, the correct order was received and administered. The facility reported a census of 66 residents. Findings include: According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], Resident #5 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 (intact cognitive ability.) The resident required supervision with dressing, toileting, transfers and walking. His diagnoses included; progressive neurological condition, anemia, diabetes mellitus, Parkinson's Disease, adult failure to thrive, and gastrointestinal hemorrhage. The Care Plan, updated on 5/8/25, showed that Resident #5 had communication problems related 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 · D2025-10-30 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, record and policy review the facility failed to request and implement physician's orders for monitoring and maintenance of a Gastrojejunostomy tube for 1 of 1 resident reviewed. Resident #5 had a Duapo pump installed in January, shortly thereafter the facility was unable to get the medication cartridges and the pump was not used for over 6 months. Staff failed to get clarification orders on how to maintain the tubing. The facility reported a census of 66 residents. Findings include:According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], Resident #5 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 (intact cognitive ability.) The resident required supervision with dressing, toileting, transfers and walking. His diagnoses included; progressive neurological condition, anemia, diabetes mellitus, Parkinson's Disease, adult failure to thrive, and gastrointestinal hemorrhage. The Care Plan, updated on 5/8/25, showed Resident #5 had communication problems related to Parkinson's and he spoke…
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 · E2025-08-21 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that resident received dignified and respectful care for 4 of 10 reviewed (Residents #3, #7, #9 and #10). Upon entry to the facility on 8/14/25 it was discovered that 3 residents had urinary catheter bags that did not have privacy bags and were within full view of others. On 8/20/25, Resident #9 expressed that a staff member treated her in a demeaning manner when she raised her voice and got in my face. The facility reported a census of 63 residents.Findings include:1) According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], Resident #7 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 (intact cognitive ability) She required total staff assistance with dressing, toileting, hygiene, and transfers. She had an indwelling urinary catheter and was always incontinent of bowel. Her diagnoses included anemia, coronary artery disease, heart failure, hypertension, peripheral vascular disease, renal insufficiency, neurogenic bladder,…
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 26 citations
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-08-21 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — patternEnsure 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, interview and record review the facility failed to follow physician's orders for 4 of 10 residents reviewed (Res #7, #2, #9 and #10.) Resident #7 required close monitoring related to fluid overload and frequent Urinary Tract Infections (UTI) due to catheter use. Staff failed to notify the physician with extreme weight gain, and failed to change the catheter as ordered. Residents #7, #2, #9 and #10 had treatment orders that were not completed in the months of July and August with no corresponding explanation in the chart. The facility reported a census of 63 residents.Findings include:1) According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], Resident #7 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 (intact cognitive ability) She required total staff assistance with dressing, toileting, hygiene, and transfers. She had an indwelling urinary catheter and was always incontinent of bowel. He diagnoses included anemia, coronary artery disease, heart failure, hypertension, peripheral…
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 before2025-04-03 · 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 and policy review the facility failed to ensure proper temperatures for foods served to residents. The facility reported a census of 66 residents. Finding Include: 1. Observation on 4/02/25 at 11:55 a.m., test tray was temped after the last resident on level 1 was served and temperatures were as follows: a. Ham- 103.3 degrees b. Mashed potatoes- 124.8 degrees c. Carrots- 107.1 degrees 2. Observation on 4/02/25 at 12:05 p.m., level 2 room trays were sitting on the kitchen carts ready to pass. Staff A, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) began passing meal trays. Staff A verified she was taking meal tray into Resident #59's room. Stopped CNA and had staff check the temperature of the food. The temperatures were as follows: a. Ham- 97 degrees b. Mashed potatoes- 131 degrees c. Carrots- 96 degrees. Kitchen staff removed the tray and returned to the kitchen with the tray to reheat the food to the proper temperature. Interview on 4/02/25 at 12:27 p.m., with 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 · D2025-04-03 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, resident grievances, resident interview, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure 3 of 3 residents ' personal property was protected from loss or theft (Resident #12, #39, #51) . The facility reported a census of 66 residents. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #12's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating intact cognition. The MDS further revealed an admission date of 10/15/24 to the facility from a short term hospital stay. Interview on 3/31/25 at 11:02 AM with Resident #12 revealed she had missing clothing. Resident #12 further revealed she was missing shorts, and pants. Resident #12 stated she had told staff, but did not file a grievance. Review of facility provided inventory list with Resident #12's name and date of 2/27/25 revealed no shorts on the list and 10 pairs of pants. 2. Review of Resident #39's MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 15 indicating intact cognition.…
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 · D2025-04-03 · 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 and staff interview, the facility failed to refer 1 resident with a negative Level I result for the Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR), who was later identified with newly evident or possible serious mental disorder, intellectual disability, or other related condition, to the appropriate state-designated authority for Level II PASRR evaluation and determination for 1 out of 6 residents (Resident #60) reviewed for PASRR requirements. The facility reported a census of 66 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #60 documented diagnoses psychotic disorder, aphasia and diabetes mellitus. The MDS included a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score that was not completed. The MDS revealed diagnosis of psychotic disorder. Review of the active diagnosis list in the clinical record revealed the following diagnosis of delusional disorder. The Care Plan with revision date of 3/7/25 revealed the resident takes…
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 · D2025-04-03 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and staff interview the facility failed to revise and update care plans to include and address high risk medications and side effects to watch and failed to include enhanced barrier precautions for 3 out of 20 sampled residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans (Resident #39, #48 and #66). The facility reported a census of 66 residents. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #48 documented diagnoses of depression, non-Alzheimer's Dementia and acute respiratory failure. The MDS showed the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 5, indicating severe cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #20's March Medication Administration Record revealed the following orders: a. Fluoxetine (antidepressant medication) daily with a start date of 10/6/24 b. Olanzapine (antipsychotic medication) daily with a start date of 3/20/24 c. Morphine (narcotic medication) as needed with a start date of 3/18/25 Review of the Care Plan with a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-03 · 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 clinical record review, observation, resident interview and staff interviews, the facility failed to prevent accidents and hazards by not properly using a motion detector to prevent a fall that caused the need for an emergency room (ER) visit, facial bruising, laceration to the forehead and the need for pain medication for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #3). The facility also failed to use adequate transfer techniques while using a mechanical lift for 2 of 3 residents observed (Resident #8 and #44). The facility reported a census of 66 residents. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #3 documented diagnoses of heart failure, respiratory failure and osteoarthritis. The MDS showed the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 02, which indicated severe cognitive impairment The MDS also showed Resident #3 dependent for toileting hygiene and baths.The resident also required substantial assistance for transfers. Observation on 3/31/25 at 12:20 PM…
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 before2025-04-03 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
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 identify non-pharmacological interventions and targeted behaviors related to high risk medications in 2 out of 5 sampled residents reviewed (Resident #48 and #66). The facility reported a census of 66 residents. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #48 documented diagnoses of depression, non-Alzheimer ' s Dementia and acute respiratory failure. The MDS showed the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 5, indicating severe cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #20's March Medication Administration Record revealed the following orders: a. Fluoxetine (antidepressant medication) daily with a start date of 10/6/24 b. Olanzapine (antipsychotic medication) daily with a start date of 3/20/24 Review of the Care Plan with a revision date of 3/14/25 lacked non pharmacological interventions and targeted behaviors for the antidepressant and antipsychotic medications. 2. The MDS assessment…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-03 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to provide appropriate infection prevention practices related to contact and droplet precautions for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #39) reviewed. The facility reported a census of 66 residents. Findings include: Review of Resident #39's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed an admission date to the facility of 11/29/24. The MDS further revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating intact cognition. Review of Resident #39's Electronic Healthcare Record (EHR) page titled Physicians Orders revealed an order for Capecitabine oral tablet 500mg give 4 tablets by mouth 2 times a day for chemotherapy related to malignant neoplasm of the rectum. Observation on 3/31/25 at 11:30 AM revealed a sign by Resident #39's door stating that Resident #39 was on contact and droplet precautions. Observation on 3/31/25 at 12:47 PM Staff C Certified Medication Aide (CMA) went into Resident #39's room without…
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 · E2025-01-10 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on video footage review, staff interviews, and facility policy review the facility failed to count 4 of 4 resident's (Resident #1, #2, #3, and #17) narcotics after they were signed for upon delivery from the pharmacy. The facility reported a census of 67 residents. Findings include: Review of the facility's video footage dated 12/26/24 revealed the following: -At 5:59 PM a male pharmacy staff member entered the building and Staff A Registered Nurse (RN) greeted him at the receptionist's desk, located across from the front entrance. Staff A removed pink and white slips out of the red and white bags. Staff A is seen signing the sheets and handing them to the pharmacy staff member, placing the bags to the side. -At 6:02 PM Staff A picked up a black box and left the receptionist's desk. Staff A failed to go through the medication bags to count the medications. A pink document titled Packing Slip, dated 12/26/24 document the following medications were delivered to the facility on [DATE]: -morphine sulfate…
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 · E2025-01-10 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
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 the observation, video footage review, staff interviews and facility policy review the facility failed to appropriately store the medications of 19 residents after they were signed for upon delivery from the pharmacy. The facility reported a census of 67 residents. Findings include: Review of the facility's video footage dated 12/26/24 revealed the following: -At 5:59 PM a male pharmacy staff member entered the building and Staff A greeted him at the receptionist's desk, located across from the front entrance. Staff A removed pink and white slips out of the red and white bags. Staff A is seen signing the sheets and handing them to the pharmacy staff member, placing the bags to the side. -At 6:02 PM Staff A picks up a black box and leaves the receptionist's desk. -At 6:04 PM three family members stood at the receptionist's desk, where the medication bags were left opened and unsupervised by staff. A fourth family member came to the desk and wrote in the sign in/out binder, within arm's reach 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 before2024-07-15 · 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
Based on observations, facility record review and resident and staff interviews the facility failed to ensure proper temperatures for foods served to residents. The facility reported a census of 67 residents. Finding Include: 1. Interview on 7/14/24 at 8:59 a.m., with Resident #5 revealed the food is quite often cold. Resident #5 further revealed she does not ask staff to warm it up as she knows the staff work hard and doesn't want to bother them but she really doesn't want to eat the food cold but has to because it is the meal. 2. Lunch tray requested on 7/14/24 for lunch. Staff served chicken, mashed potatoes and gravy, mixed vegetables and banana cream pie. Temperature of food was checked as follows: Chicken- 126.1 degrees Mashed potatoes and gravy- 121.1 degrees Mixed vegetables- 106.4 degrees Banana Cream Pie- 33.1 degrees 3. Interview on 7/14/24 during lunch service on the first floor revealed Resident #5 said her food was cold and the only item that was hot was her coffee. 4. Observation on 7/14/24 of lunch trays on 2nd floor being passed in the dining room. Verified with 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 before2024-07-15 · 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 observations, staff interviews, and facility policy reviews the facility failed to ensure food was stored and prepared under sanitary conditions. The facility identified a census of 67 residents. Findings include: An initial kitchen tour conducted on 7/12/24 at 10:41 a.m., revealed the following observations: The kitchen fridge revealed the following items ready for service: a. Open gallon of white milk open with no open date b. Chef salads prepared undated c. Deli sandwiches prepared on a plate undated d. Tuna salad sandwiches on a plate undated e. Tube of whip topping open laying on shelf uncovered and undated f. Thickened water, open, undated g. Thickened juice, open, undated h. Thickened dairy drink, open, undated The kitchen freezer revealed the following items ready for service: a.Ice cream scooped into styrofoam bowls stacked on top of eachother uncovered and undated The dry storage area revealed the following: a. Spilled flour on the floor b. Dead bugs appearing along the edges of the room c. Two containers of pudding packages laying on the floor under the shelving…
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 before2024-07-15 · 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 observation, staff interview and infection control policy the facility failed to pass clean linens to residents rooms.The facility reported a total census of 67 residents. Findings include: Observation on 7/13/24 at 9:13 a.m., Staff A, laundry aide pushed a laundry cart with open sides with clean clothing protectors in it. Towel laid across the top of the clean linen leaving the sides of the laundry cart open and open to contamination. Observation on 7/13/24 at 12:14 p.m., Staff A took the laundry cart upstairs with personal clothing and clothing protectors covered by a towel, arms of the personal laundry and sides of personal clothing laying over the side of the cart exposed and open to contamination. Review of the facility provided policy revealed Laundry handling of Linen dated 3/2015 revealed under transportation of linen revealed cover clean linen to protect from contamination during transport. Interview on 7/14/24 at 2:23 p.m., with the Administrator revealed she was not aware the laundry cart needed to be covered but she will make sure the laundry has what they need…
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 before2024-04-11 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — patternDevelop 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 personnel file reviews, staff interviews, and policy reviews the facility failed to complete the Iowa Criminal History, Iowa Sex Offender Registry, Iowa Central Abuse Registry and Professional License information prior to employment for 3 of 7 employees reviewed (Staff B, C, D). The facility census was 55. Findings include: On 4/10/24 Staff B, Cook's personnel file contained the Iowa Criminal History, Iowa Sex Offender Registry, Iowa Central Abuse Registry and Professional License information dated 1/24/24. Staff B was hired on 1/14/24. On 4/10/24 Staff C, Dietary Aide ' s personnel file contained the Iowa Criminal History, Iowa Sex Offender Registry, Iowa Central Abuse Registry and Professional License information dated 1/25/24. Staff C was re-hired on 1/14/24. On 4/10/24 Staff D, Cook's personnel file contained the Iowa Criminal History, Iowa Sex Offender Registry, Iowa Central Abuse Registry and Professional License information dated 1/25/24. Staff C was re-hired on 1/14/24. On 4/10/24 at 11:11 AM the Administrator stated that Staff B, C, D all began working directly 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 · E2024-04-11 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — patternProvide 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 record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure residents received restorative exercises as planned for 4 of 4 resident's reviewed (Resident #3, #16, #20 and #37). The facility reported a census of 55 residents. Findings include: 1) According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] Resident #3 scored 11 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. The resident was dependent with toileting hygiene, bathing, dressing, and personal hygiene. The resident demonstrated a functional limitation in range of motion (ROM) of both lower extremities. The resident had diagnoses including age related osteoporosis, and osteoarthritis. The Care Plan revised 11/20/21 identified the resident required assistance with all activities of daily living (ADL's) related to a lack of motivation, impaired cognition, impaired communication, pain, incontinence, limited ROM to lower extremities, and required assist with transfers. The interventions…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-04-11 · tag 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to serve residents the therapeutic menus as ordered for 5 of 5 reviewed. Residents #25, #5 and #43 had pureed diet orders and staff served them oatmeal that was not pureed. Residents #36 and #12 had mechanical soft diets, staff served them corn with the mixed vegetables. The facility reported a census of 55 residents. Findings include. 1) According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], Resident #25 did not have a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score because he was rarely/never understood. The resident was totally dependent on staff for sit to standing and toileting transfer and he was on a mechanically altered diet. The Care Plan last revised on 7/17/23, showed that he had the potential for altered nutrition, he was able to eat independently, staff were directed to serve the diet per doctors order. The resident had limited range of motion to right arm due to contracture related to stroke, but he was able to eat independently.…
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 before2024-04-11 · 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 observations, staff interviews and policy review, the facility failed to ensure food was labeled with dates after opening, staff complete hand hygiene before applying gloves and when removing, supplies and ingredients are stored in a safe and sanitary way, and ensure hair is completely covered with a hair net. The facility identified a census of 55 residents. Findings include: 1. An initial Kitchen tour conduct on 4/8/24 at 10:46 AM, of the kitchen revealed the following: a. Walk in refrigerator had multiple cups of fruit, a chunk of cheese, and more fruit on an upper shelf not dated. b. The inside door of the walk in refrigerator had white spatter on the inside. c. In the dry storage room on the bottom shelf, the large sugar canister had a cup stored in it and the large flour canister had a mug in it. 2. A follow up Kitchen tour conducted on 4/9/24 at 9:50 AM, of the kitchen revealed the following: a. In the dry storage room, the large flour canister had a mug in it. b. In the dry storage room a case of straws was sitting on the floor. c. Walk in refrigerator had a bag of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-11 · 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 and staff interviews, the facility failed to notify the ombudsman office of a facility initiated discharges for 3 of 3 residents (Residents #30, #25, #3) reviewed. The facility reported a census of 55 residents. Findings include: 1. Resident #30's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] assessment identified Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMs) score of 15, indicated intact cognition. The MDS included diagnoses of anemia, coronary artery disease, heart failure (heart doesn't pump blood as it should), end stage renal disease (kidney), diabetes mellitus and respiratory failure. Review of the Clinical Census revealed Resident #30 was on an unpaid hospital leave in January 2024 during the following dates: 1/4/24 to 1/11/24 1/22/24 to 1/29/24 Review of the facility Admission/Discharge report dated 2/1/24 used to track discharges and notify the Ombudsman office revealed Resident #30 was not listed on the report. On 4/10/24 at 12:15 PM, the Administrator acknowledged and verified…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-11 · tag F0640 — isolatedEncode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on Electronic Health Record review (EHR) and staff interviews the facility failed to submit a comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) as directed by the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services (CMS) Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Version 3.0 Manual assessment within the required timeframe for 1 out of 17 residents reviewed (Resident #49). The facility census was 55. Findings include: The review of Resident #49 ' s MDS assessment dated [DATE] lacked a transmission date. On 4/10/24 at 9:21 AM Staff F, MDS Coordinator, acknowledged the 2/6/24 MDS Assessment had not been submitted. Staff F stated a correction would be made with the submission of the 2/6/24 MDS assessment. On 4/10/24 at 10:52 AM the Administrator stated expected the MDS assessments would be completed and submitted within the required timeframes. The Administrator was not aware of other instances where the MDS assessments were not completed according to the required timeframes. On 4/10/24 at 12:45 PM the submission report for the 2/6/24…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-04-11 · tag 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 interview, record and policy review, the facility failed to ensure that residents received medications as orders for 1 of 3 residents. After a medication change, staff continued to administer the previous order to Resident #38. The facility reported a census of 55 residents. Findings include: According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], Resident #38 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 (intact cognitive ability.) The resident had frequent pain, and received scheduled, and as needed pain medication. The resident's diagnosis included; diabetes mellitus, Parkinson's Disease, malnutrition and anxiety disorder. The Care Plan updated on 11/12/23, showed that Resident #38 had a communication problem related to Parkinson's Disease, and a mental health diagnosis. He had pain related to Parkinson's, staff were directed to assess pain every shift, and evaluate the effectiveness of pain interventions. The resident was able to call for assistance when he was in pain, On 4/10/24 at 6:25…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-11 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infection for 1 resident reviewed (Resident #37). The facility reported a census of 55 residents. Findings include: According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] Resident #37 scored 11 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. The resident was dependent with toileting hygiene and had an indwelling suprapubic urinary catheter. The resident had diagnoses including non-Alzheimer's dementia and a (left femur) fracture. The Care Plan revised 3/26/24 identified the resident had an indwelling suprapubic catheter. The goal with a target date of 6/24/24 included minimizing the potential of complications through the next review with the intervention to check the tubing for kinks each shift. The Progress Notes dated 11/14/23 at 10:52 p.m. documented the resident was post antibiotic treatment for urinary tract infection (UTI).…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-04-11 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
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 and record review the facility failed to ensure that residents were free from unnecessary psychotropic medications for 1 of 5 residents reviewed. Resident #43 had an order for Haloperidol as needed (PRN), and a review of the clinical record revealed that the order continued past the 14-day limit for PRN psychotropic medication use. The facility reported a census of 55 residents. Findings include: According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], Resident #43 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 0 (severe cognitive deficits). The resident did not have physical behavioral symptoms such as hitting, kicking or grabbing, did not scream at others and did not reject cares. The resident was totally dependent on staff assistance for transfers and with eating. Diagnosis for Resident #43 included non-Alzheimer's Dementia, anxiety disorder and respiratory failure. The Care Plan for Resident #42, last revised on 2/19/24, showed that she used psychotropic medications.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-11 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure residents remained free from significant medication errors for 1 of 17 residents reviewed (Resident #40). The facility reported a census of 55 residents. Findings include: According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] Resident #40 scored 9 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. The resident was independent ambulating with a walker. The resident had diagnoses including non-Alzheimer's dementia. The resident took antidepressant and antipsychotic medications. The Care Plan revised 2/7/23 identified the resident used psychotropic medications. The goal to minimize the potential of complications while on psychotropic medication. The interventions included monitoring/recording/reporting to the NP as needed side effects and adverse reactions of psychoactive medications: unsteady gait, tardive dyskinesia, EPS (shuffling gait, rigid muscles, shaking), frequent falls, refusal 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 · D2024-04-11 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolatedEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
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, and policy review the facility failed to prepare and serve pureed food to meet the nutritional needs of 3 of 3 residents reviewed (Residents #5, #25, #43). The facility reported a census of 55 residents. Findings include: A facility form titled Diet Type Report dated 4/8/24 identified three residents (Resident #5, #25 and #43) who received a pureed texture diet. On 4/9/24 at 11:00 AM observed Staff A, [NAME] took four Rueben sandwiches and placed the sandwiches in the Robo Coupe. She then added chicken broth to the contents. After she was finished pureeing the sandwiches, she poured the contents into a sprayed pan, covered the pan with aluminum foil and placed the pan in the oven. Staff A did not measure the total volume of the food after it was pureed to determine the appropriate portion or scoop sizes. On 4/9/24 during noon meal service, observed Staff A, [NAME] serve one scoop full of the #6 scoop of pureed [NAME] sandwich to Resident #5, #25 and #43. On 4/9/24 at 12:40…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-11 · tag F0848 — isolatedProvide a neutral and fair arbitration process and agree to arbitrator and venue.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the binding arbitration agreement provided for the selection of a venue that was convenient to both parties for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for binding arbitration (Residents #107, #52, #44). The facility reported a census of 55 residents. Findings include: Review of the undated facility Voluntary Arbitration Agreement, provided by the Administrator on 4/8/24, revealed no evidence for the selection of a venue that was convenient to both parties. Review of the undated facility Voluntary Arbitration Agreement Program Guide, provided by the Administrator on 4/8/24 and attached to the arbitration agreement, documented the dispute would be decided at an arbitration hearing at a court reporter's or attorney's office, which would occur within 6 months /180 days of the request for arbitration. Review of Resident #107, #52 and #44 ' s electronically signed Voluntary Arbitration Agreements failed to include the selection of a venue that was convenient to both parties. Review of Resident #107, #52 and 44 ' s electronically…
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 · E2024-01-18 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, facility documents, pest management company documents, pest management staff interview, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to maintain pest control in the facility. Findings include: Interviews, and concurrent observations of mouse traps in resident rooms, with the following residents reporting: 1. In an interview on 1/16/24 at 2:55 PM, Resident #1 reported that she saw a mouse in her room as well as in her bed. She reported this to the Maintenance Director and told her that the pest control company was coming tomorrow but she never saw pest control staff at the facility. 2. In an interview on 1/17/24 at 3:00 PM, Resident #5 reported that he saw a mouse in his room. He reported this to both the Maintenance Director and the Administrator over 2 months ago. 3. In an interview on 1/17/24 at 11:55 AM, Resident #11 reported she had mice in her room. She reported it to one of the Certified Nurse Assistants (CNA) who said that she passed the information on to the Maintenance…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to CAMPBELL STREET SERVICES — 22 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 | 2 of 5 | 2.1 | -0.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.0 | ≈ chain avg |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 3.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
The other 21 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.1★, 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 | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| BIRCHWOOD HEALTHCARE PARTNERS LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 02/01/2025 |
| CAMPBELL STREET IA 10 LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/01/2025 |
| CAMPBELL STREET SERVICES LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/01/2025 |
| HOLDCO, IA, 10, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 02/01/2025 |
| DOLE, ISAAC | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/01/2025 |
| DUDLEY, PAUL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/01/2025 |
| EMANUEL, CAMBRIA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/01/2025 |
| TASSLER, TINA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/01/2025 |
| ACD CONSOLIDATED LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/01/2024 |
| BEAR CREEK SRAF GP HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/01/2024 |
| BEAR CREEK STRATEGIC REAL ASSETS FUND LP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/01/2024 |
| DEFRANCO INVESTMENT CO LTD | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/01/2024 |
| IAGA SNF HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/01/2024 |
| IAGA SNF PORTFOLIO LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/27/2025 |
| IAGA SNF SIOUX CITY, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/01/2025 |
| NAP HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/01/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 22 rows in the source record cover these 16 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
12 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $265K 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 165174. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-09, 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.