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

Holy Spirit Retirement Home

1701 West 25th Street, Sioux City, IA 51103 · Non profit - Corporation · 78 certified beds · (712) 252-2726 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (712) 252-2726 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0600) — cited Feb 2024
Insights

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

In its favor
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Feb 2024
  • 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 (30) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)

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

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

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 2 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 3 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, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★ 2/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
2827 Hamilton Blvd · (712) 222-7602 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1900 Hamilton Blvd · (712) 252-6993 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
2827 Hamilton Blvd · (712) 277-8120 · Call to confirm hours
Park
1101 W 21st St · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
2000 Military Rd · (712) 252-2938

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 5 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating3★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased10.9%17.1%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight3.5%4.6%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder10.7%1.5%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.5%2.4%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%4.2%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury5.6%3.8%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened11.8%16.6%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication12.5%20.8%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine96.4%95.3%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers1.1%4.2%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control31.3%25.6%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table13.1%19.5%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%2.1%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine67.2%73.3%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission17.1%20.9%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit9.8%13.2%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.271.491.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.072.081.80better

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

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

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

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

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.

57.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 108 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

57.4%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.8%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
48.8%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.32U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.18hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.14hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.01hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 48.8% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 86 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.32 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 53% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 7% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF57.4%CMS range 49.0–66.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.8%CMS range 6.2–13.810.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge48.8%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge38.4%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge45.4%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge98.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay1.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.0%CMS range 4.2–12.87.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.921.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

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

Staffing

0.72
RN hours/ resident / day
0.85
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.52
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.09
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.58
RN hoursweekends
44.4%
Total nursing turnover
40.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 78 beds and averages 60.9 residents a day — about 78% occupied, or roughly 17 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.09 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.72 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.52 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.66 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.27 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.78 to 0.58 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 44% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

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

Inspection trend

7
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-04-30)
9
at the previous standard inspection (2025-05-15)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

30 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 20 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Potential for harm · E2026-04-30 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
    Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    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 food at an appetizing temperature when mashed potatoes had a temperature of 125 degrees on the steam table before the lunch meal and had a temperature of 121 degrees for a room tray with 2 of 8 residents reviewed (Resident #24 and #40) that had complained about food temperatures. The facility reported a census of 56 residents.Findings include:1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #40 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 15 indicating no cognitive impairment. On 4/27/26 at 1:31 PM Resident #40 stated the food is served cool when it should be warm a couple times a week. Resident #40 stated she does not ask them to heat it up but would like the warm food to be served warm. Resident #40 stated the food should be served warm. 2. Review of Resident #24's MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 15 indicating intact cognitive functioning. Interview 4/27/26 at 3:33 PM with…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-04-30 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to store, prepare, and serve food in accordance with professional standards. The facility did not label and date open food items, follow best-by dates, discard expired food items, perform hand hygiene prior to or during food services, complete hand hygiene when assisting residents with meals, or wear appropriate hair nets during food preparation. The facility reported a census of 56 residents. Findings Include:On 4/27/26 at 11:00 AM, a continuous observation in the kitchen revealed several improperly dated items. The first stand-up refrigerator contained apple juice with an open date of 4/23/26, grape juice with an open date of 4/23/26, and prune juice with an open date of 2/26/26. The second stand-up refrigerator contained red french dressing with an open date of 2/18/26 and salsa with an open date of 2/13/26. The walk-in refrigerator contained an open bag of lettuce without an open or date of delivery. The south pod refrigerator contained a lemonade pitcher with an open date of 4/9/26, grape juice with…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-04-30 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interviews, Electronic Health Record (EHR) review, resident interviews, family interviews, and policy review the facility failed to utilize Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) during wound care for 2 of 4 residents (Residents #50, and #4). The facility further failed to use universal infection control measures (hand hygiene) during catheter care for 2 of 4 residents (Resident #1, and #2). The facility reported a census of 56 residents.Findings Include:1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented Resident #1 had a Brief interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 15 that indicated cognitive mental status. Review of Resident #1's EHR page titled, Order Summary Report revealed an order for a Foley catheter size 16 French with a 10 milliliter balloon to be changed monthly and flush catheter with 60-120 cc of normal saline as needed for urine retention. On 4/29/26 at 1:55 PM an observation revealed Staff F, a Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) employed for approximately one year 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-30 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, Electronic Health Records (EHR) review, resident interview, staff interviews and policy review the facility failed to provide dignity and respect to a resident who wanted a brief change and staff refused to change the brief for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #3). The facility reported a census of 56 residents.Findings include:1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #3 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 15 indicating no cognitive impairment.On 4/28/26 at 1:08 PM Resident #3 self propelled down the hallway as she stated she was upset because Staff N, Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) ripped her brief when she changed the brief and refused to change it.On 4/28/26 at 1:10 PM Staff M, Housekeeping stated Resident #3 said Staff N refused to change her brief after there was a huge rip in the brief. Staff M explained Resident #3 was upset because there was a huge rip in her brief. Staff M asked Resident #3 if she wanted her to get another staff member 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-30 · tag F0644 — isolated
    Coordinate 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 2 residents (Resident #3) reviewed for PASRR requirements. The facility reported a census of 56 residents.Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #3 documented diagnoses of psychotic disorder, depression, and schizophrenia. The MDS for Resident #3 included a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated no cognitive impairment. The PASRR Notice of Nursing Facility Approval dated 1/29/14 for Resident #3 indicated the facility failed to resubmit the PASRR with changes that occurred since 2014. The PASRR Notice also failed 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-30 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
    Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interviews, Electronic Health Records (EHR) review, and policy review, the facility failed to maintain a professional standard of quality when staff did not apply the prescribed Thrombo-Embolic Deterrent (TED) hose for Resident #7. The facility reported a census of 56 residents.Findings include: On review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented Resident #7 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 10 that indicated moderate cognitive impairment.On review of EHR titled, Order Summary dated 4/28/26 documented a Physician's Order for Resident #7 knee high TED hose to be applied in the morning and removed in the evening. On review of Resident #7's Treatment Administration Record (TAR) for the month of April documented TED hose to be applied in the morning and removed in the evening. Further review of TAR documented nurse signatures everyday of application and removal.On 4/27/26 at 1:52 PM an observation revealed Resident #7 sitting in the common area watching 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-30 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and interviews the facility failed to properly use both mechanical stand brakes in a manner that prevented accidents and hazards for 1 of 2 residents reviewed (Resident #21). The facility reported a census of 56 residents. Findings include:The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #21 documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 7, which indicated severe cognitive impairment. The MDS showed Resident #21 required substantial assistance for transfers. The MDS diagnosis included hip fracture, dementia, and muscle wasting. The Care Plan on 12/3/25 for Resident #21 showed the facility initiated use of a mechanical stand for transfers. Observation on 04/27/2026 at 2:01 PM showed Staff P, Certified Nursing Assistant, applied a sling to Resident #21 then locked the right wheel of the mechanical stand. Using the controls, the CNA lifted the resident from the chair, unlocked the right wheel, then positioned the resident over the toilet. The CNA…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-10-07 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — pattern
    Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to provide complete and accurately documented electronic health records for 4 of 5 residents (Residents #2, #5,#6, and #7) reviewed. The facility reported a census of 61 residents.Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #2's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS further revealed diagnoses of heart failure, peripheral vascular disease, renal insufficiency, diabetes mellitus, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.Review of Resident #2's Electronic Healthcare Record (EHR) page titled, Clinical Immunizations revealed Resident #2 refused the Covid-19 vaccine. Review of Resident #2's EHR page titled, Progress Notes revealed no entry of Resident #2 refusing the Covid-19 vaccine. 2. Review of Resident #5's MDS dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 15 indicating intact cognition. The MDS further revealed diagnoses of…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-05-15 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — pattern
    Ensure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is 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 direct observation, resident interviews, staff interviews, and document review the facility failed to provide and document restorative cares for 4 of 4 residents reviewed (Residents #4, #37, #41 and #42). The facility reported a census of 61 residents. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #4 documented diagnoses of repeated falls, muscle wasting, unsteadiness on feet and need for assistance with personal care. The MDS showed the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13, which indicated no cognitive impairment. In an interview on 5/14/25 at 2:08 PM, Resident #4 reported he rides the therapy bike about once a week. When asked if he received other restorative care the resident said, no I ride the bike once a week. The resident denied he received restorative care for transfers. The Care Plan for Resident #4 showed ADL self-care performance deficit related weakness, balance deficit, and activity intolerance following hospitalization. A restorative…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-05-15 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — pattern
    Ensure 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

    Based on review of the planned menu, observations, staff interviews and facility policy review the facility staff failed to follow the planned menu for residents. The facility identified a census of 61 residents. Findings include: Review of the menu for Week 5 Day 3 identified the following items as part of the planned menu for the lunch meal on 5/13/25: Turkey Tetrazzini Buttered Peas Bread and margarine Fruited Gelatin Milk Observation on 5/13/25 at 10:47 a.m., of the puree process no bread and margarine was pureed for the lunch meal. Observation on 5/13/25 at 12:48 p.m., of lunch meal service revealed the lunch meal served consisted of: Turkey Tetrazzini Buttered Peas Fruited Gelatin Observation of lunch service was completed with the main dining room. No bread and margarine was served with the lunch meal, noted resident menus to have circled bread and margarine as meal choice. Review of the facility provided policy titled Accuracy and Quality of Tray Line Service dated 2021 revealed the following: a. tray line and or meal service positions for breakfast, lunch and dinner will be…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
Show the remaining 20 citations
  • Potential for harm · E2025-05-15 · tag F0868 — pattern
    Have the Quality Assessment and Assurance group have the required members and meet at least quarterly
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on record review, interview, and facility policy the facility failed to have the Medical Director at quarterly meetings for their quarterly Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) meetings. The facility reported a census of 61. Findings include: Review of the facility document titled Quality Assurance Performance and Improvement Meeting Minutes: a. Document dated 11/13/24 lacked the signature of the Medical Director Review of the facility provided policy titled Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) Program-Governance and Leadership dated March 2020 revealed the following individuals serve on the committee, Medical Director. The committee meets at least quarterly or more often as necessary. Interview on 5/15/25 at 09:40 a.m., with the Director of Nursing revealed the Medical Director should be at the quarterly meetings.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-15 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to update the Care Plan for 1 of 17 residents reviewed. Resident #36 was admitted to Hospice on 4/16/25 and staff failed to include a focus area for the special service. The facility reported a census of 61 residents. Findings include: According to the Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE], Resident #36 did not have a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) assessment completed due to severe cognitive deficits. She was total dependent for dressing, hygiene, transfers and toileting. Her diagnoses included; diabetes mellitus, Alzheimer's disease, cerebrovascular accident (CVA) hemiplegia or hemiparesis, and oral dysphagia, The Care Plan updated on 4/8/25 showed that Resident #36 was on oxygen therapy, she was not able to ambulate or propel a wheel chair. The resident required 2 staff with mechanical lift for transfers and required assistance with all decision making. The Care Plan lacked a focus area for Hospice. On 5/12/25 at 11:11 AM,…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-15 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide 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 observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide adequate assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADL) for 2 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #3 and #19.) Resident #3 required regular toileting and repositioning, she was found to be sitting in a urine saturated brief, and in her wheel chair with her legs dangling without support. Resident #19's urinary catheter was hanging on the bedrail above the bladder. The facility reported a census of 61 residents. Findings include: 1) According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], Resident #3 was not able to participate with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) due to severe cognitive deficits. She was total dependent on staff for dressing, toileting and transfers. The Care Plan last updated on 5/9/25, showed that Resident #3 had self-care performance deficit with limited physical mobility. The resident had cognitive deficits, weakness and activity intolerance. She was not able to ambulate and dependent on 2-staff…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-15 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to adequately supervise vulnerable residents to prevent injury for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #3). Resident #3 was observed to have a bruise on her right cheek that spread up under her eye. Staff hypothesized about the cause, but were unable to fully explain the injury. The facility reported a census of 61 residents. Findings include: According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], Resident #3 was not able to participate with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) due to severe cognitive deficits. She was total dependant on staff for dressing, toileting and transfers. The Care Plan last updated on 5/9/25, showed that Resident #3 had self-care performance deficit with limited physical mobility. The resident had cognitive deficits, weakness and activity intolerance. She was not able to ambulate and dependent on 2-staff assistance with a mechanical lift for transfers. Staff were directed to use a padded foot rest under her…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-15 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide 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, staff and resident interviews, and policy reviews, the facility failed to provide staff with current continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) machine settings, and failed to monitor and maintain CPAP mask and tubing needs for 2 of 2 residents reviewed (Resident #8 and #42). The facility reported a census of 61. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #8 documented diagnoses of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), Coronary Artery Disease (CAD) and renal insufficiency.The MDS indicated Resident #8 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 5/12/25 at 1:48 PM revealed a CPAP on Resident #8's bedside table. Resident #8 reported she used the CPAP during sleep. Resident #8 reported she used the same CPAP mask and tubing since admission in June 2024. Resident #8 stated, you can tell the tubing 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-15 · tag F0826 — isolated
    Provide specialized rehabilitative services by qualified personnel, when ordered for a resident by a doctor.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, clinical record review, staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to train staff to maintain properly maintain CPAP settings for resident usage for 1 of 2 residents reviewed (Resident #42). The facility reported a census of 61 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #42 documented diagnoses of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), insomnia and renal insufficiency.The MDS indicated Resident #42 used a non-invasive mechanical ventilator. The MDS showed the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, which indicated no cognitive impairment. Observation on 5/12/25 at 1:12 PM revealed a CPAP on Resident #42's bedside table. Resident #8 reported he used the CPAP during sleep. The Family Member reported staff set a pillow on the CPAP and they weren't certain if settings were inadvertently changed. The Family Member reported she took the CPAP to the home supplier to make certain the settings were correct. The Family…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-15 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide 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, interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure that staff used appropriate hand hygiene during resident cares for 1 of 3 residents reviewed, (Resident #3). The facility reported a census of 61 residents. Findings include: According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], Resident #3 was not able to participate with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) due to severe cognitive deficits. She was total dependent on staff for dressing, toileting and transfers. The Care Plan last updated on 5/9/25, showed that Resident #3 had self-care performance deficit with limited physical mobility. The resident had cognitive deficits, weakness and activity intolerance. Resident #3 had frequent incontinence, she was to be offered toileting before and after meals and with rounds at night. Her diagnoses include post-polio syndrome, intracerebral hemorrhage, type 2 diabetes, and chronic kidney disease. On 5/12/25 at 1:40 PM Staff E, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) and Staff H, CNA transferred…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-05-22 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
    Provide 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, record review, document review, and staff interview the facility failed to provide appropriate infection prevention practices by not completing appropriate hand hygiene, failed to develop policies related to COVID-19 vaccinations, and not following guidelines for enhanced barrier precautions for 63 of 63 residents reviewed. The facility reported a census of 63 residents. Finding include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #24, dated 3/18/2024 documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status of 13 indicating no cognitive impairment. The MDS documented a feeding tube present while a resident. On 5/21/24 at 7:52 AM an observation of Staff E Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) revealed no hand hygiene prior to entering Resident #24 ' s room. Staff E entered Resident #24 ' s bathroom, obtained gloves, and applied gloves. Staff E pushed via 60 mL syringe 10 mL of tap water to auscultate for enteral tube placement. Staff E then pushed medications with a piston syringe. Staff E did not allow…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-05-22 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — pattern
    Develop 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on personnel file reviews, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure all employees had an Iowa Criminal Background check and dependent adult/child abuse registry check completed prior to working in the facility for 1 out of 5 employees reviewed (Staff N). The facility reported a census of 63 residents. Findings include: Review of untitled payroll information provided by the Human Resource Generalist, Employee N, Certified Nurses Assistant (CNA) date of hire recorded as 2/4/24. The date of birth revealed Staff N to be [AGE] years old at the date of hire. The personnel file for Staff N revealed the file lacked documentation of the Iowa Criminal Background Check. Review of facility provided undated policy titled Employee/Volunteer Background checks instruct high school students age [AGE] and older who seek employment or who seek employment to volunteer for positions in which they will be working with minor children, are considered adults and will be bound by the same safe…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-05-22 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — pattern
    Ensure 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 Electronic Health Record (EHR) review, observation, policy review and staff interviews the facility failed to prepare food in a form designed to meet individual needs by sending incorrect consistency for modified diet ordered for 4 of 6 residents reviewed (Resident #33, #35, #39, and #44). The facility reported a census of 63 residents. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented Resident #33 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 11 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS revealed Resident #33 was on a mechanically altered diet. Review of Resident #33 ' s diet order documented a general diet with mechanical soft texture. 2. The MDS dated [DATE] documented Resident #35 had a BIMS of 13 indicating no cognitive impairment. The MDS revealed a diagnosis of dysphagia. Review of Resident #35 ' s diet order documented a low concentrated sweets diet with mechanical soft texture. 3. The MDS dated [DATE] documented Resident #39 was rarely / never understood,…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-05-22 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to store food and follow proper sanitation to prevent spread of illness in accordance with professional standards for 61 of 63 residents. The facility reported a census of 63 residents. Findings include: On 5/21/24 at 11:50 AM -12:35 PM an observation of lunch service on the 2nd floor revealed Staff F completed hand hygiene. Staff F, dietary aide picked up the tongs, removed a hamburger bun from steam table pan, placed the bun on the plate, used left hand to separate the bun, picked up the bottom of the bun in left hand, used tongs to place a hamburger patty on the bun, placed the bun and patty back on the place, placed the top bun on top of the hamburger patty with left hand, obtained small bowl with left hand, picked up scoop with right hand, scooped coleslaw into the small bowl, used right hand with tongs to pick up french fries, picked up plate with the food on it, handed it to staff in the dining room, and obtained a new plate from top of steam table. This was repeated for all plates served with no…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-22 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on electronic health records (EHR) review, observations, staff interview, policy review and resident family interview the facility failed to provide dignity by leaving food on a residents clothing protector as well as face to 1 of 1 resident reviewed (Resident #44). The facility reported a census of 63 residents. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented Resident #44 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 2 indicating severe cognitive impairment. The MDS documented Resident #44 was staff dependent during personal hygiene and substantial / maximal assistance with eating. On 5/20/24 at 1:57 PM an observation of Resident #44 sitting in her bedroom revealed 2-3 tablespoons of orange food present on clothing protector and dry orange food present on chin as well. Review of document titled, facility name SS 2024 (menu) for lunch meal on 5/20/24 revealed baked yam. On 5/20/24 at 2:10 PM Staff A, MDS coordinator stated lunch was over at 12:45 PM - 12:50 PM. On 5/22/24 at…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-22 · tag F0644 — isolated
    Coordinate 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 one 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 1 residents (Resident #48) reviewed for PASRR requirements. The facility reported a census of 63 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #48 documented diagnosis of anxiety disorder, depression and psychotic disorder. Review of the clinical record revealed a Notice of Negative Level I Screen Outcome dated 1/30/23 revealed the PASRR level 1 screen remains valid for your stay at the nursing facility and should be transferred with you if you relocate. No further level 1 screening is required unless you are known to have or are suspected of…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-22 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, observations and staff interview the facility failed to follow a care plan to provide supervision while the resident sat in a wheelchair located in his room for 1 of 21 sampled residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans (Resident #33). The facility reported a census of 63 residents. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #33 documented diagnoses of depression, muscle weakness and history of a left fracture. The MDS showed the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 11, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #33 ' s Care Plan last revised on 5/20/24 showed on 4/2/24 the facility initiated a fall intervention for Resident #33 instructing staff not to leave Resident #33 unattended in a wheelchair while in his room. The intervention was resolved during the survey on 5/20/24. A Health Status Note dated 5/22/24 at 9:53 PM for Resident #33 documented the following: Resident #33 is high risk for fall,…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-22 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
    Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on electronic health records review (EHR), staff interview, and observation the facility failed to implement policies and procedures regarding the technical aspect of feeding tubes by not accurately measuring supplemental formula according to physician ' s order and pushing medications with a piston syringe into feeding tube for 1 of 1 residents (Resident #24). The facility reported a census of 63 residents. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #24, dated 3/18/2024 documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status of 13 which indicated no cognitive impairment. The MDS documented a feeding tube present while a resident. Review of Resident #24 ' s Medication Administration Record (MAR) documented 330 mL of supplemental formula to be administered per PEG tube (enteral tube) three times daily at 8:00 AM, 2:00 PM, and 8:00 PM. On 5/21/24 at 7:52 AM an observation of Staff E revealed no hand hygiene prior to entering Resident #24 ' s room. Staff E entered the bathroom, obtained gloves, and applied gloves. 10cc water auscultated for enteral tube placement.…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-22 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure 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

    Based on observations, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility to properly store medications in a locked storage area for 1 or 1 resident observed (Resident #63). The facility reported a census of 63 residents. Findings include: 1. Observation on 5/19/24 at 2:15 p.m., revealed a bottle of Tums sitting by the sink in Resident #63 ' s room. 2. Observation on 5/20/24 at 11:05 a.m., revealed a bottle of Tums sitting by the sink in Resident #63 ' s room. Review of Resident #63 ' s clinical record lacked documentation of an assessment for Resident #63 to self administer medications. Review of the facility policy titled Conformity with Laws and Professional Standards with a revision date of April 2007 revealed the facilities policies, procedures and operational practices are developed and maintained in accordance with current and accepted professional standards and principles as well as current commonly accepted health standards established by national organizations, boards and councils. Interview on 5/21/24 at 11:54 a.m., with the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed Resident #63…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-22 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
    Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on Electronic Health Records (EHR) review, observations, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to provide complete and accurately documented electronic health records for 1 of 5 resident reviewed (Resident #5). The facility reported a census of 63 residents. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented Resident #5 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 13 indicating no cognitive impairment. On 5/20/24 at 9:13 AM an observation was made of resident #5 wearing oxygen in his bedroom. On 5/20/24 at 9:14 AM Resident #5 stated he had been wearing oxygen almost daily for a couple years. Resident #5 stated the staff check his oxygen saturation a couple of times a day. Review of Resident #5 ' s Care Plan documented oxygen therapy related to shortness of breath and diagnosis of COPD. Review of Resident #5 ' s Physician Orders documented the most recent oxygen order was discontinued on 1/11/23. On 5/21/24 at 3:54 PM Staff I, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) stated…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-02-08 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — pattern
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, resident interview, staff interview and facility policy review the facility failed to provide bathing assistance twice weekly and/or per resident preference for 4 of 4 residents reviewed for bathing (Resident #5, #11, #12, #13). Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #5 revealed the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMs) score of 15, indicating no cognitive impairment. The MDS revealed Resident #5 required functional status under bathing revealed Resident #5 is totally dependent on staff and needed one person's physical assistance. The MDS included diagnoses of hypertension (high blood pressure), traumatic brain injury, hemiplegia (paralysis on half of the body) and depression. The Care Plan revised 6/13/23 identified Resident #5 required assistance from one person for bathing. The Electronic Health Record (EHR) bathing record lacked documentation of completed baths from 7/1/23 to 7/10/23 and 7/12/23 to 7/17/23. The record…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-02-08 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to keep all residents safe from abuse for 1 of 3 reviewed (Resident #2). Resident #2 had a diagnosis of dementia with behavioral disturbances. Around 8:00 PM, while caring for Resident #2, one of three Certified Nurse Aides (CNA)'s, Staff G, saw another CNA, Staff H, with a closed fist and then heard the hand connect with Resident #2's back. Staff G said Staff H and Resident #2 exchanged cuss words between the two. According to the CNA in training, Staff E, she didn't see Staff H hit Resident #2 but did hear him ask why she hit him. Staff G reported that she didn't intervene and was in shock after the situation. Staff G failed to report the incident to the nurse for 4-5 hours after the incident and 2 hours after Staff H went home from the night, allowing Staff H to continue working with other residents for additional 2 hours. Findings include: According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], Resident #2 had a Brief Interview for Mental…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-02-08 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    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 provide adequate assessments and interventions for 2 of 2 residents reviewed (Residents #2 and #6). The facility failed to provide treatment for Resident #2's chronic sores on his legs as ordered and failed to notify the doctor when his wounds changed. The facility failed to offer to apply Resident #6's edema wear to treat his edema (swelling) of his left leg as ordered and charted the treatment as refused. Findings include: 1. According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], Resident #2 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 6, indicating severe cognitive deficit. Resident #2 rejected care every 4-6 days. Resident #2 required extensive assistance from one person for transfers, dressing, toilet use, and personal hygiene. The MDS included a diagnosis of dementia with other behavioral disturbances. The MDS listed Resident #2 as frequently incontinent of urine and bowel. The Care Plan for Resident #2, revised on 3/15/23,…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
THE DIOCESE OF SIOUX CITYOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL100%since 12/03/1984
BERGER, PATRICKIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 12/01/2017
BLOCH, AMYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2019
FESTE, KRAGEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2018
HARRINGTON, LAWRENCEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2001
KAYL, CHRISTINEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2023
LARSON, TRACYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2020
LAWLER, MATTHEWIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2024
WALDSCHMITT, KARENIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2017
HANNO, JOHNIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2023
KEEHNER, JOHNIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 05/01/2025
RANNIGER, ROYCEIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2010
BAKER, ALANIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 05/22/2023
JUNG, MICHAELIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/30/2022
KREBER, JACQUELINEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/07/2025
MENDEZ-AVALOS, JACALYNNIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/13/2023
MESS, JENNIFERIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/16/2021
PRANSCHKE, SHARLENEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 06/07/2021
QUADE, STACEYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 05/20/2019
BCG HOLDINGS INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 12/26/2025
BLUE STONE THERAPY INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 11/01/2025
BRIGHTON CONSULTING GROUP LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2024
CFO NEXT INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025
CITRIN COOPERMAN ADVISORS LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025
FORGE FINANCIAL & MANAGEMENT CONSULTING, INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/31/2015
HEALTHCARE OF IOWA INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2025
REDLERS LONG TERM CARE PHARMACYOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025
THOMPSON SOLUTIONS GROUP COOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025
PATTON, ROXANNEIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025
RANNIGER, KATHRYNIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 33 rows in the source record cover these 30 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

10 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.

$7.9M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-4.4%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$118K
Related-party expense1% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 49%Medicare 11%Other / private 39%

This home reported $118K 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

$400per resident / day
operating cost
$12,147per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$383per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

What families pay in IA

Paying with Medicaid

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

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

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

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 165266. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-30, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

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

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

What to do next