Arbor Springs of West Des Moines L L C

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

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.

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.

28.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 37 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 60.7% 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 28 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 0.24 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 31% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 6% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 56 beds and averages 49.0 residents a day — about 88% occupied, or roughly 7 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 5.38 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.32 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 4.36 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 4.76 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.63 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.38 to 0.18 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 97% 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 more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

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

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.

19 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 6 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · Gcited before2026-06-30 · 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 observation, clinical record review, resident, family and staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to provide appropriate supervision for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for falls (Resident #3). The facility failed to provide a complete assessment and investigation to determine the root cause and failed to monitor and modify interventions in order to prevent further accidents for Resident #3. The facility also failed to utilize assistive devices per care plans to prevent bruising injuries for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #4 & #6). During the survey process, staff were observed to transfer residents by gripping forearms and hands. After alerting the facility, to prevent further injury, the staff were observed to place the gait belt then continue to grip the residents by the arms and not by the gait belt during transfers. The facility reported a census of 46 residents.Findings include: 1. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] for Resident #3 revealed the diagnoses of dementia, muscle…

  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 plan of correction
• Actual harm · Gcited before2025-03-12 · 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 observations, clinical record review, staff interviews, facility staff correspondence and policy review, the facility failed to provide a thorough assessment and timely intervention for 1 of 4 residents reviewed. (Resident #1). On 2/23/25 Resident #1 was lowered to the floor. Staff E, Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) notified Staff A, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) who failed to complete a thorough assessment. The Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) was notified at 9:15 AM on 2/24/25 that Resident #1 was in pain, the ADON failed to do an assessment until 3:15 PM and the Director of Nursing (DON) obtained an order for pain medication yet failed to ensure that it was administered. An x-ray on 2/25/25 revealed a displaced hip fracture that required surgical intervention. The facility reported a census of 53 residents. Findings are as follows: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] for Resident #1 revealed a diagnosis of a compression fracture of the thoracic spine at level T11 and T12 vertebrae due 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Actual harm · G2023-03-09 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
  Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, clinical record review, staff interviews and policy review, the facility failed to provide care and services to maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #26 and Resident #37) reviewed for nutrition. This failure resulted in harm due to Resident #26 experiencing a weight loss of over 17% in 6 months and Resident #37 experiencing a weight loss of over 10% in 6 months. The facility reported a census of 53 residents. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #26 identified the presence of short and long-term memory impairment. The MDS revealed the resident required supervision with setup help from staff to eat. The MDS documented diagnoses that included: Non-Alzheimer's dementia, anxiety, depression and post-traumatic stress disorder. The MDS documented a height of 66 inches and weight of 129 pounds (lbs.). The MDS identified a weight loss of 5% or more in the last month or loss of 10% or more in the last 6…

  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 · D2026-06-30 · tag F0637 — isolated
  Assess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, staff interview and guidance from the 2025 Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) User's Manual, the facility failed to complete a significant change in status assessment (SCSA) that should have been completed within 14 days after it was determined the resident's status from baseline had occurred for 2 of 12 residents reviewed (Resident #3 & #1). The facility failed to complete a SCSA when Resident #3 experienced a decline in activities of daily living physical function after the return from hospital care for fractured hip repairs on 3/10/26 and on 5/6/26. The facility also failed to complete a timely significant change for Resident #1 when enrolled into Hospice care. The facility reported a census of 46 residents.Findings include: 1.The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated for 1/8/26 for Resident #3 revealed the diagnoses of dementia, muscle weakness and abnormalities of gait and mobility. The MDS did not identify a pain medication regimen nor that…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has plan of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-02-09 · 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 clinical record review, staff interviews and policy review, the facility failed to fully review and revise the comprehensive Care Plan for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #2) who were sampled for care plan review. The facility reported a census of 49 residents. Findings include:According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], Resident #2 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 2, which indicated severe cognitive impairment. Resident #2 had diagnoses to include Non-Alzheimer's dementia and depression. The MDS documented the resident's current behavior status was worse compared to the prior assessment and the resident sometimes felt lonely or isolated from those around him. Review of the Electronic Health Record (EHR) revealed the following Progress Notes:a. Progress Note dated 5/31/25, titled Health Status Note: Resident upset this AM due to unable to leave, and not safe to leave in room alone. Staff attempted to engage in activities, distract with meals and assist to converse with peers.…

  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 before2026-02-09 · 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 clinical record review, family interview and staff interviews, the facility failed to appropriately supervise and maintain an environment free of potential hazards for 1 of 1 residents reviewed (Resident #2) after a resident made suicidal statements and self harmed. The facility reported a census of 49 residents. Finding include:According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], Resident #2 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 2, which indicated severe cognitive impairment. Resident #2 had diagnoses to include Non-Alzheimer's dementia and depression. The MDS documented the resident's current behavior status was worse compared to the prior assessment and the resident sometimes felt lonely or isolated from those around him. The Care Plan, revised on 6/18/25, documented Resident #2 used antidepressant medication related to a depression diagnosis and instructed staff under interventions to administer antidepressant medications as ordered by the physician and document/report an needed…

  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 · D2025-05-29 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolated
  Develop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on employee file review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure completion of dependent adult abuse training within six months of hire for 1 of 5 employee files reviewed. The facility reported a census of 53 residents. Findings include: Employee record review of Staff P, Certified Medication Aide, showed a hire date of 9/7/23. The file lacked documentation of Staff P completing dependent adult abuse training within six months of their hire date or annually. During an interview on 5/29/25 at 2:00 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed the lack of dependent adult abuse training documentation for Staff P. The policy Abuse Prevention, Identification, Investigation, and Reporting Policy, revised 4/1/17, outlined the following: 1. Employees are required to complete two hours of training related to identification and reporting of dependent adult abuse within six months of initial employment 2. All nurses' aides will receive initial and annual resident abuse prevention training.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-29 · 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 record review, observation, resident and staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to document follow up skin assessments for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for skin concerns (Resident #2). The facility reported a census of 53 residents. Findings include: The admission Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #2 admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses of a left femur fracture and Alzheimer's Disease. The MDS indicated the resident had a risk for pressure ulcers but had no skin issues. The MDS recorded the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 11, indicating moderately impaired cognition. The Care Plan initiated on 5/6/25 revealed the resident had a stasis ulcer on the right outer ankle related to peripheral vascular disease. The Care Plan also documented the resident took aspirin post-surgically. The Care Plan directed staff to utilize a pressure reduction mattress and document adverse reactions of antiplatelet therapy such as bruising. An…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-29 · 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

  Based on direct observation, staff interview, and clinical record review, the facility failed to protect residents from potential accidents and hazards for 1 of 16 residents reviewed (Resident #46). The facility reported a census of 53 residents. Findings include: The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #46, dated 04/29/2025, documented the following relevant diagnoses: Alzheimer's disease and muscle weakness. It did not document the resident using a wheelchair. The Care Plan for Resident #46, last revised on 05/23/2025, documented the resident uses a wheelchair as his primary means of locomotion. It documented the resident is dependent on staff for locomotion with his wheelchair. A direct observation on 05/27/2025 at 11:03 AM revealed Staff E, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA), pushing Resident #46 in a wheelchair with his feet dragging on the floor in socks. The resident was pushed like this from the unit living room to the dining room. The resident was observed to kick his feet erratically, alternating from dragging under his wheel chair to kicking out in front of and to the…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-05-29 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
  Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
  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, staff interview, pharmacy interview, manufacturer recommendations, and policy review the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5%. During observations of medication administration, the facility had 2 errors out of 30 opportunities for error resulting in an error rate of 6.67 % (Residents #1 and #21). The facility identified a census of 53 residents. Findings include: 1. The Order Review History Report dated 5/1/25-5/28/25 indicates Resident #21 has an order for Potassium Chloride Extended Release (ER) oral tablet 20 Milliequivalents (MEQ) one time a day with a start date of 10/26/24. It further indicates that medications may be crushed unless contraindicated by pharmacy with a start date of 2/15/23. During observation on 05/28/25 07:36 AM Staff F, Certified Medication Aide (CMA) prepared and crushed Resident #21's Potassium Chloride 20 MEQ ER with the rest of her medications. Staff F mixed the crushed medications with grape jelly and was…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-05-29 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — isolated
  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

  Based on direct observation, clinical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to provide residents with prescribed therapeutic diets for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #30). The facility reported a census of 53 residents. Findings include: The significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #30, dated 02/14/2025, documented the following relevant diagnoses: gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), non-Alzheimer's dementia, seizure disorder, muscle weakness, and cognitive communication deficit. It documented the resident was rarely or never understood, and had severely impaired cognition skills. It further documented the resident was on a mechanically modified diet and required supervision and touch assistance while eating. The Care Plan for Resident #30, with a last revised date of 05/19/2025, noted the resident had a history of significant weight loss. It instructed staff to provide a therapeutic diet as ordered. It noted the resident's diet as being mechanically altered (mechanically soft diet), with soft or ground meat. A direct…

  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 · D2025-05-29 · 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

  Based on observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to follow Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) practices for a resident with an open pressure injury for 1 of 3 resident reviewed for pressure ulcer/injury (Residents #14). The facility reported a census of 53 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #14, dated 3/21/25, indicated that Resident #14 had a Stage #3 pressure ulcer. The Care Plan revised on 3/24/25, revealed that Resident #14 had a pressure area to the right 4th finger. The Care Plan lacked staff directives for for EBP. During an observation 5/28/25 at 9:25 AM, Resident #14's room did not have signage outside or inside the door to indicate that EBP was in use. During an observation 5/28/25 at 9:30 AM, Staff A, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), performed wound care for Resident #14. Staff A did not wear a gown during the entire wound care process. During an Interview 5/28/25 at 10:00 AM, Staff A stated that the facility followed EBP in the facility. She indicated that EBP is utilized for residents with catheters 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.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-11-25 · 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 record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to provide post-fall assessments and interventions for 3 of 3 residents reviewed (Residents #1, #2, and #3). The facility reported a census of 55 residents. Findings include: 1. On 11/25/24 at 9:30 am, a review of Resident #1's Electronic Health Record (EHR) included a Progress Note that revealed Resident #1 had an unwitnessed fall on 10/19/24. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 05 out of 15, which indicated severely impaired cognition. It included diagnoses of Alzheimer's Disease and depression. It revealed the resident required set-up assistance with eating, moderate assistance with bathing, and supervision with all other aspects of Activities of Daily Living (ADLs). The Care Plan dated 8/11/24 revealed the resident was at risk for falls related to confusion and directed staff to follow the facility's fall protocol. The resident's EHR included 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

“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.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 12 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

This home reported $419K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

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