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

Highland Ridge Care Center, LLC

102 Highland Circle, Williamsburg, IA 52361 · Non profit - Corporation · 59 certified beds · (319) 668-3800 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citations — no harm found (F0607, F0610) — most recent May 2024Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0741)2 immediate-jeopardy citations$36,752 in federal fines
Insights

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

In its favor
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (35% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • inspectors cited 2 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (16) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $36,752 in federal fines (most recent 2023-08-22)
  • its payroll-based staffing score sits 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) 5 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's staffing rating runs 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the staffing score rests on the facility's own payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
819 S Highland St · (319) 668-2722 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
Star Drug0.3 mi
517 Court St · (319) 668-1520 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
103 W Walnut St · (319) 668-2535 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Williamsburg Town Square · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 3 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 4 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating 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 increased20.6%17.1%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight7.0%4.6%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.4%1.5%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection3.7%2.4%2.0%worse
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 injury7.1%3.8%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened16.2%16.6%16.1%typical
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication21.1%20.8%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine79.7%95.3%95.3%worse
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers3.3%4.2%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control28.1%25.6%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table10.1%19.5%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%2.1%1.4%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.211.491.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.882.081.80worse

* 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.

33.9% 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 31 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

33.9%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.5%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
71.4%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.10U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.04hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.04hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.02hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 71.4% 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 21 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 0.10 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 6% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 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 SNF33.9%CMS range 22.3–48.751.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.5%CMS range 7.4–18.010.7%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 discharge71.4%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 discharge52.4%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 discharge42.9%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 identified95.7%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 dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%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 worsened4.3%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 hospitalization6.8%CMS range 3.3–12.67.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.801.02Oct 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

0.89
RN hours/ resident / day
0.13
LPN hours/ resident / day
3.08
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.10
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.41
RN hoursweekends
34.9%
Total nursing turnover
0.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 59 beds and averages 51.3 residents a day — about 87% occupied, or roughly 8 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 4.10 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.89 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.08 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 3.72 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.25 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.08 to 0.41 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 35% is below 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

4
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-09-11)
0
at the previous standard inspection (2024-10-03)

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.

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.

16 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2023-09-20 · 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 clinical record review, family interview, physician interview, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide appropriate assessment and interventions for 1 out of 3 residents (Resident #158). Clinical record review revealed on [DATE] at 9:30 p.m., Resident #158 fell and sustained a laceration to her head with a significant amount of blood loss. The facility staff failed to immediately call 911, call the physician, call the family, or conduct neurological assessments as per policy. The facility staff moved the resident to the shower and then to bed. Upon arrival of the next shift 9 hours later, the facility sent the resident to the emergency room (ER) where the resident was assessed to have fractures of the humerus and femur. The failure of assessing the resident properly and seeking immediate emergency treatment caused an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) to the health and safety of the resident. The State Agency informed the facility of the Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) that began as 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2023-09-20 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
    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, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide appropriate pain management for 1 out of 3 residents (Resident #158). Clinical record review revealed on [DATE] at 9:30 p.m., Resident #158 fell and sustained a laceration to her head with a significant amount of blood loss. The facility staff moved the resident to the shower and then to bed and the resident reported pain that was not treated. Upon arrival of the next shift 9 hours later, the facility sent the resident to the emergency room (ER) where the resident was assessed to have fractures of the humerus and femur and immediately treated for pain; the resident admitting diagnoses included uncontrolled pain. The failure created an immediate jeopardy to the health and safety of the resident. The facility reported a census of 57 residents. After a QA Review, the State Agency informed the facility of the Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) that began as of [DATE] on [DATE] at 12:30 p.m. related to…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Actual harm · Gcited before2025-11-19 · 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, clinical record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to appropriately provided assessment and interventions for the necessary care and services, to maintain the residents' highest practical physical well-being for 2 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #1 & #2). R#1 returned from a hospital stay, at which time staff failed to notice the resident had duplicate laxatives order for five days, and during that time the resident fell. R#2 complained of pain after a fall the facility staff failed to perform a thorough assessment, and call the physician provide intervention. The facility reported a census of 50 residents. 1.The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] for Resident #1 revealed the diagnoses of diabetes mellitus, kidney disease, dementia, anxiety, depression and required maximal assistance for toileting, shower or bathing and personal hygiene. The MDS documentation revealed Resident #1 was incontinent of bowels and bladder. The brief interview for mental status (BIMS)…

    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 · G2025-11-19 · 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, family and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide appropriate and sufficient supervision to ensure each resident's individual safety and to prevent an avoidable accident for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for falls (Resident #1 & #2). The facility reported a census of 50 residents. 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] for Resident #1 revealed the diagnoses of Diabetes Mellitus, kidney disease, dementia, anxiety, depression, visual hallucinations, osteoarthritis and required maximal assistance for toileting, shower or bathing and personal hygiene with moderate assistance for dressing. Resident #1 required moderate assistance to transfer into and out of the shower and was independent with sit to stand, chair to bed transfers, and toilet transfers. Resident #1 was independent with ambulation up to 10 feet (ft) and required moderate assistance for ambulation 50 ft to 100 ft, utilizing a walker. The MDS documentation revealed Resident was unable to answer 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 · Dcited before2025-11-19 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
    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 and staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to provide appropriate pain management for 1 out of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #2). The MDS dated [DATE] for Resident #2 revealed the diagnoses of type 2 diabetes mellitus, Alzheimer's disease, bone density disorder, macular degeneration, and had a history of falls. Resident #2 required the use of walker, one staff to assist and a wheelchair and able to self-propel. Resident #2 required maximum assistance with toileting, dressing upper body and showers, and was dependent on staff for dressing her lower body. Resident #2 was independent with moving in a bed and was continent of bladder but had frequent incontinent bowel movements. During the assessment, Resident #2 had no complaints of pain, experienced two falls without injury and one fall with a minor injury, no major injuries noted. The MDS documented that the resident scored a 3 out 15 for the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), which indicated…

    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 · D2025-11-19 · tag F0741 — failed to have staff trained for behavioral health — isolated
    Ensure that the facility has sufficient staff members who possess the competencies and skills to meet the behavioral health needs of residents.
    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 interviews and facility assessment review, the facility failed to ensure there was a sufficient number of direct care staff to provide care for residents with dementia, mental and psychosocial disorder. The facility also failed to provide supervision and skills training for staff in how to approach a resident who may be agitated, combative, verbally or physically aggressive, or anxious, and how and when to obtain assistance in managing a resident with behavior symptoms. The facility reported a census of 50 residents. The findings include:The Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] for Resident #1 revealed the diagnoses of dementia, anxiety, depression, visual hallucinations and required maximal assistance for toileting, shower or bathing and personal hygiene with moderate assistance for dressing. Resident #1 rejected care for 3 of the 5 days reviewed and had physical behavior symptoms directed toward others. Resident #1 was incontinent of bowels and bladder. The brief interview for…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-09-11 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, clinical record review, review of facility policy, personnel file review, resident and staff interview, the facility to ensure staff provided care with dignity and respect for 4 of 33 residents reviewed (Residents #1, #18, #31 and #49). The facility reported a census of 51 residents.Findings include: 1.The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #1 dated 8/19/25 revealed the resident scored 9 out of 15 on a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) exam, which indicated moderately impaired cognition. The MDS revealed the resident had a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease, used a wheelchair and was dependent on staff for toileting, transfers, and repositioning in bed. On 9/8/25 at 10:23 AM, interview conducted with the resident in Resident #1's room. The door to the room was shut to maintain the resident's privacy. At 10:29 AM during the interview Staff A, Certified Nurses Aide (CNA), opened the resident's room door and entered without knocking or announcing herself. Staff A dropped off the resident's breakfast, provided set up assistance, and left the room.…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-09-11 · tag F0628 — isolated
    Provide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, facility discharge list, facility policy review, and staff interview, the facility failed to notify the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman of the discharge of residents for 3 of 3 residents sampled (Resident #56, #58 and #59) with a discharge to home. The facility reported a census of 51 residents. Findings include:Review of list of resident discharged from the facility, dated 6/1/25 to present (9/8/25), revealed a total of 3 residents discharged from the facility to home, Residents #56, #58 and #59.1.The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #56 dated 7/10/25 indicated the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 7/10/25. A Discharge Summary/Recapitulation of Stay dated 7/7/25, included documentation the resident planned to discharge home with home health services including skilled nursing, occupational and physical therapy services. On 9/10/25, review of the clinical record revealed a lack of documentation regarding notification of…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-11 · 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

    Based on clinical record review, observation, facility policy review, resident and staff interview, nursing staff failed to perform assessment and intervention of a resident (Resident #28) after a meal observation revealed staff served the resident food the resident had documented as an allergy. The facility reported a census of 51 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #28 dated 8/17/25 revealed the resident scored 15 out of 15 on a Brief Interview for Mental Status exam, which indicated intact cognition. The Care Plan for Resident #28 included an intervention dated 9/22/24 to for staff to provide and serve the resident's diet as ordered. The main page of the electronic clinical record for Resident #28 identified the resident had a food allergy to shellfish (shrimp, crab, lobster, oysters, clams, mussels and scallops).A History and Physical report dated 8/8/25 scanned into the clinical record revealed Resident #28's had an allergic reaction of hives (small red bumps on the skin) to shellfish. On 9/8/25 at 12:16 PM, observation revealed 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 · D2025-09-11 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on clinical record review, meal service observation, review of facility policy, resident and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure they did not serve a resident food that was known to cause an allergic response during 1 of 2 resident meal service observations (Resident #28). The facility reported a census of 51 residents. Findings include:The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #28 dated 8/17/25 revealed the resident scored 15 out of 15 on a Brief Interview for Mental Status exam, which indicated intact cognition. The Care Plan for Resident #28 included an intervention dated 9/22/24 to for staff to provide and serve the resident's diet as ordered. The main page of the electronic clinical record for Resident #28 identified the resident had a food allergy to shellfish (shrimp, crab, lobster, oysters, clams, mussels and scallops).A History and Physical report dated 8/8/25 scanned into the clinical record revealed Resident #28 had an allergic reaction of hives (small red bumps on the skin) to shellfish. On 9/8/25 at 12:16 PM, observation revealed Staff F,…

    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 · D2024-05-21 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, clinical record review, and staff interviews the facility failed to investigate an injury of unknown origin for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #3) reviewed. The facility reported a census of 55 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #3, dated 2/14/24, revealed diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease, dementia with behavioral disturbance, and anxiety. The resident was unable to complete the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) due to short- and long-term memory problems. The MDS indicated a need for partial to moderate assistance with toileting and bathing, and supervision or touch assistance with personal hygiene. The Care Plan, dated 2/8/24, included focus areas for impaired skin integrity, and for risks of falls. The focus area for skin integrity included an intervention to assess/evaluate my risk status per policy, upon admission, quarterly and as needed. indicated the resident was at risk for impaired skin integrity. Another area indicated a psychosocial well-being problem related to anxiety, dementia with behavioral…

    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 · Dcited before2024-05-21 · 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

    Based on clinical record review, interviews, and policy review the facility failed to complete neurological assessments after unwitnessed falls for 1 of 6 residents (Residents #2 )reviewed. The facility reported a census of 55 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #2, dated 3/5/24, included diagnoses of vascular dementia with psychotic disturbance, anxiety disorder, and insomnia. The MDS listed the resident's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score as 5 out of 15, which indicated severely impaired cognition. Progress notes dated 2/2024 x 2, 2/29/24, 3/11/24, 3/13/24 x 2, 3/15/24, 3/17/24, 3/19/24, 3/23/24, 3/24/24, 3/30/24, 4/18/24 x 2, 4/22/24, and 4/25/24 documented Resident #2 ' s unwitnessed falls. Facility documentation titled Neuro-Check Flow Sheet documented neurological assessments were completed for the fall that occurred on 3/23/24. The facility lacked neurological assessments for the other 15 unwitnessed falls. During an interview with Staff C, Registered Nurse (RN), on 5/14/24 at 9:21 AM she indicated that staff should…

    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 · F2023-09-20 · tag F0882 — widespread
    Designate a qualified infection preventionist to be responsible for the infection prevent and control program in the nursing home.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on policy review and staff interviews the facility failed to provide an Infection Preventionist with specialized training or certification to monitor and provide oversight for the facility's Infection Prevention and Control Program. The facility reported a census of 57 residents. Findings Include: The policy, entitled Infection Prevention and Control Manual and dated 2020, documented the facility Infection Preventionist is responsible for the facility's Infection Prevention and Control Program. On 8/16/23 at 9:31 AM, Staff B, Clinical Coordinator for Infection Control and Education, provided documentation that her Infection Preventionist Training was incomplete. Staff B demonstrated a lack of understanding of information necessary to complete her duties as the facility Infection Preventionist. Staff B indicated she took over the Infection Preventionionist role in June 2023. On 8/17/23 at 9:21 AM Staff A, Director of Nursing (DON), indicated the last certified Infection Preventionist left in May 2023.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-09-20 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
    Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, physician interview, family interview, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to notify the physician and family in a timely manner when acute changes occurred in a resident's physical condition for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #158). Clinical record review revealed on 6/2/23 at 9:30 p.m., Resident #158 fell and sustained a laceration to her head with a significant amount of bleeding. The facility staff failed to immediately call 911, call the physician, and call the family for 9 hours. The facility reported a census of 57 residents. Findings Include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #158 included the following diagnoses: dementia, anxiety, depression, glaucoma, high blood pressure and kidney disease. The MDS recoreded the resident's cognitive skills for daily decision making as moderately impaired and the resident required supervision with limited assistance of 1 person for bed mobility, toileting and personal…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-09-20 · 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 personnel file review, staff interview and policy review the facility failed to assure 1 of 5 staff reviewed met the requirements for Mandatory Adult Abuse Training (Staff D). The facility reported a census of 57 residents. Findings Include: Record review of the personnel record for Staff D, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA), shown a hire date of 1/4/22. Staff D completed the two-hour Dependent Adult Abuse Mandatory Training on 4/9/20. The Renewal training due to be completed by 4/9/23 was not documented. In an interview on 8/17/23 at 11:06 AM, Staff C, the Administrative Support Staff acknowledged the expectation for staff to complete the two-hour Dependent Adult Mandatory Reporter Training every three years. The facility Abuse Policy with a modified Date of January 2023, documented each employee shall be required to complete training including Iowa Dependent Adult Abuse Training for Iowa. The Iowa Department of Health and Human Services recorded, beginning 7/01/19 the two-hour Dependent Adult Abuse Training is required every three years for Mandatory Reporters.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-09-20 · 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, staff interview, and facility policy review the facility failed to complete a follow-up Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) for one out of one resident reviewed in the current sample who had a change in mental health diagnoses (Resident #12). The facility reported a census of 57 residents. Findings Include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment at admission for resident #12, dated 7/1/21 included Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 11 out of 15, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS recorded Resident #12 diagnoses included heart disease, non-Alzheimer's dementia of uncertain or unknown etiology. The MDS coded that antipsychotics were not given during the last seven days. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] included a BIMS score of 5 out of 15, indicating severe cognitive deficit. The MDS recorded Resident #12 diagnoses that included heart disease, non-Alzheimer's dementia of uncertain or unknown etiology with additional…

    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.

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

$36,752 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $36,752 — penalty dated 2023-08-22

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to PRESBYTERIAN HOMES & SERVICES — 21 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 3 of 54.3-1.3 vs chain
Health inspection 2 of 53.4-1.4 vs chain
Staffing 5 of 54.9≈ chain avg
Quality measures 3 of 52.8+0.2 vs chain
The other 20 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.3★, per CMS)

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
WILLIAMSBURG RETIREMENT COMMUNITY INCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 09/29/2005
HILLS BANK AND TRUST COMPANYOrganization5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; 5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTERESTsince 02/26/2014
BLYTHE, CURTISIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 09/29/2005
BLYTHE, MARYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 09/29/2005
KINZENBAW, MARCIAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 09/29/2005
LARSON, DUANEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2020
LINDH, DANIELIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 09/29/2005
MCCURRY, SUSANIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 09/29/2005
OLSON, DANIELIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2024
FLETCHER, JONATHANIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 02/01/2025
MEYER, MARKIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/28/2005
PHS MANAGEMENT, LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/11/2011
HADLEY, VICTORIAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/22/2023
HUDSON, JERRYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2023
PHELPS, BRANDONIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025
PETERSON, HEIDIIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 23 rows in the source record cover these 16 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

3 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.

$6.0M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-76.0%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$567K
Related-party expense5% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 19%Medicare 3%Other / private 78%

This home reported $567K 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

$513per resident / day
operating cost
$15,581per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$291per 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 165566. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-09-11, 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