5608 Sw 9th Street, Des Moines, IA 50315 · Polk County · (515) 285-3070
80 certified beds, about 69 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1992
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 165175 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on June 10, 2025, inspectors cited 13 health deficiencies (the Iowa average is 6.5, the national average 9.2).
Of 66 health citations since September 2023, 8 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (5 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 5 fines totaling $252,963 in the last three years; the largest was $86,520, and the latest is dated May 14, 2026.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.44 hours per resident per day, against 3.82 across Iowa and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.30 of those hours.
62.3% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Iowa average 44.0%).
CMS links it to The Ensign Group, an affiliated group of 344 nursing homes.
Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.
Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.
CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 66 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, Electronic Health Record review, hospital record review, staff interviews and policy review the facility failed to provide respiratory care and services by leaving residents in the dining room without oxygen in the tank when oxygen was required (Resident #45 and #67) and failed to suction a resident (Resident #5) appropriately in compliance with professional standards. Resident #5 was sent to the hospital for cough and increased secretions from their tracheostomy. Chest X-ray revealed atelectatic change (blocked airway). The facility reported a census of 74 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, electronic health record review (EHR), resident interviews, staff interviews and policy review the facility failed to provide dignity and respect by not completing personal cares or wound cares in a timely manner, staff raising their voice and talking on the phone during cares to 5 of 10 residents reviewed (Resident #10, #51, #39, #53 and #57). The facility reported a census of 74 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to provide appropriate incontinence care for one (Resident #8) of one resident reviewed. The facility reported a census of 74 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, hospital record review, medical provider, staff, resident, and family interviews and facility policy review, the facility failed to accurately reconcile hospital discharge orders for three out of four residents reviewed (Res #2, #4, #6). The facility additionally failed to notify the medical provider of orders requiring follow-up upon a resident's return from a hospitalization. This resulted in harm due to the erroneous discontinuation of Res #4's diabetic medications, resulting in the resident experiencing 14.5 months of no diabetic treatment. Consequently, Resident #4 required hospitalization for a life-threatening blood sugar of 1200 mg/dL (milligrams per deciliter, the unit of measure for blood sugar). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical and hospital record reviews, interviews with staff, residents, family members of residents and a medical provider, the facility failed to ensure nursing competencies were maintained. This resulted in multiple significant medication errors for three of four residents reviewed (residents #2, #4, #6), lack of documentation regarding resident care, and concerns of failing to provide consistent, thorough personal assistance to the residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interviews and policy review the facility failed to report an allegation of abuse to the Iowa Department of Inspections, Appeals and Licensing (DIAL) within two (2) hours for one of three residents reviewed for potential abuse (Resident #2). The facility reported a census of 66 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to update and revise the care plan to reflect changes in the plan of care for 1 of 10 residents reviewed for smoking and/or vaping (Residents #7). The facility reported a census of 66.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observation, staff and resident interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to monitor and supervise a resident with access to a vape for 1 of 10 residents reviewed for smoking and/or vaping (Resident #7). The facility reported a census of 66.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, staff interview, hospital record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to obtain an order for supplemental oxygen for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #3). The facility reported a census of 66 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, staff interviews, hospital record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to administer medication as prescribed and ordered by the physician for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #3) reviewed for medication. Resident #3 required hospitalization due to acute hypoxia (low oxygen saturation in the blood). The facility reported a census of 66 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, policy review and staff interviews, the facility failed ensure residents were free from abuse for 2 of 3 residents reviewed (Residents #1 and #3). The facility reported a census of 71 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, policy review and staff interviews, the facility failed to report allegations of abuse to the Department of Inspections, Appeals and Licensing (DIAL) in a timely manner for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for abuse (Residents #1 and #3). The facility reported a census of 71 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, policy review and staff interviews, the facility failed to complete a thorough investigation in regard to an allegation of sexual abuse in a timely manner for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for abuse (Residents #1). The facility reported a census of 71 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, staff interview, resident interview and policy, the facility failed to ensure full admission orders for Resident #3 (R#3). The facility lacked medication orders, R#3 did not receive pertinent medication including insulin, cardiac, pain and psychotropic drugs. The facility reported a census of 71 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, staff interviews, resident interview and policy, the facility failed to provide appropriate pain medications for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for pain, Resident #3 (R#3) and Resident #4 (R#4). The facility reported a census of 71 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on confidential resident interviews, family interviews, staff interviews, clinical record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide appropriate staffing to meet residents needs. The facility reported a census of 70.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observation, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure a resident's buttocks was appropriately covered in order to maintain the resident's dignity for one of sixteen residents sampled (Residents #15). The facility reported a census of 70 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to administer treatments and perform dressing changes as ordered by the physician for one of four residents reviewed (Resident #11). The facility reported a census of 70 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on direct observation, clinical record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide appropriate infection control practices in the form of enhanced barrier precautions when required for 3 of 5 individual reviewed (Resident's #9, #11, #14). The facility reported a census of 70.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the lunch menu and meal met the nutritional needs and preferences for 7 out of 68 resident lunch trays prepared. The facility reported a census of 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interviews, and policy review, the dietary staff failed to maintain clean and sanitary conditions in the kitchen, failed to label and store food items in the kitchen in order to maintain food quality and reduce the risk of food-borne illness, and failed to thaw food to reduce the risk of food-borne illness. The facility reported a census of 72 residents.
Inspectors wrote4. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #54 had diagnoses of neurogenic bladder, diabetes, and renal insufficiency. The MDS revealed the resident had a indwelling catheter. The care plan initiated 5/25/25 revealed the resident had a Foley catheter due to neurogenic bladder. The care plan directed staff to use enhanced barrier precautions (EBP). The Order Summary revealed orders for catheter care ordered on 05/28/25 and EBP's ordered on 05/14/25. Gown and gloves were required for residents with a indwelling medical device and during high-contact care activities. During observation on 06/02/25 at 01:31 PM, an EBP sign hung on the door to the resident's room. During observation on 06/05/25 at 08:00 AM, an EBP sign hung on the door to the resident's room. [...]
Inspectors wrote2. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #30 had diagnoses that included metabolic encephalopathy, diabetes, hypertension (high blood pressure), and respiratory failure. The Care Plan revised [DATE] revealed the resident desired a full code status or DNR status per the IPOST (Iowa Physician's Orders for Scope of Treatment) form. The staff directives included to refer to the IPOST form on file and review the advanced directives routinely at the care conferences and PRN (as needed). The Electronic Medical Health Record (EHR) physician's orders revealed Resident #30's code status as a Full Code. The order was created on [DATE] and listed as active. The Order Summary Report revealed a prescriber's active order for a full code ordered on [DATE]. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure timely follow-up for the initiation of an as-needed (PRN) use of a psychotropic drug for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Resident #37). The facility reported a census of 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, staff interview, and guidance from the 2024 Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual, the facility failed to accurately reflect the status of 3 of 3 residents in the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessments (Resident #11, #13, #37). The facility reported a census of 72 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure completion of a resident's baseline Care Plan within 48 hours of admission for 1 of 2 residents reviewed with an admission date within the past 30 days (Resident #223). The facility reported a census of 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations, resident and staff interviews, and policy review the facility failed to carry out therapy recommendations and provide restorative exercises for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for rehabilitation services and/or limited range of motion (Resident #30). The facility reported a census of 72 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to offer a morning meal or snack to a resident (Resident #8). The facility reported a census of 72. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment completed on 3/21/25 revealed Resident #8 unable to complete the Brief Interview for Mental Status, is severely impaired for daily decision-making, and has long/short term memory problems. Diagnoses on the MDS include non-Alzheimer's dementia and malnutrition with weight loss. The MDS reported Resident #8 relies on staff for substantial eating assistance. The Care Plan, last revised on 5/19/25, outlined Resident #8 receives a puree diet with nectar-thick liquids. The Care Plan further documented the presence of an unstageable pressure injury to the coccyx as well as a stage 3 pressure injury to the left ankle. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, clinical record review, and policy review, the facility failed to assure a medication error rate of less than 5%. Medication errors were observed for Resident #45 and Resident #11. A total of 27 ordered medications were reviewed with two errors, an error rate of 7%. The facility reported a census of 72 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observations, resident and staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to securely store medications for 1 of 7 residents observed during medication administration (Resident #34). The facility reported a census of 72 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident was served the correct food texture for 1 of 2 residents on a puree diet (Resident #47). The facility reported a census of 72. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment completed on 5/7/25 revealed Resident#47 with a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 10, indicating a moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS stated Resident #47 requires maximum eating assistance. Medical diagnoses listed in the electronic health record include dementia and dysphagia (swallowing difficulties). Review of Physician Orders noted Resident #47 on a puree texture diet with moderately thick liquids as of 3/14/25. During the lunch service observation on 6/4/25, Resident #47 was provided a lunch plate consisting of puree barbeque pork steak, puree baked beans, and mashed potatoes. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, family and staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to verify patient identifiers before sending transfer paperwork, resulting in the receiving facility obtaining inaccurate medical records for one of three residents reviewed for discharge planning (Res #172). The facility reported a census of 72 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, clinical record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to identify and report ongoing abnormal vital signs, outside of normal ranges, for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2). The facility further failed to complete respiratory assessment (Resident #1) when identified as short of breath on exertion for 5 out of 10 days reviewed. The facility reported a census of 68 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations, resident interview, visitor interview, staff interview, and policy review the facility to treat residents in a dignified, respectful manner by entering resident rooms without announcement or knocking and by not ensuring clothing appropriate to the weather conditions for 3 of 10 residents reviewed. (R#1, R #2, R#4). The facility reported a census of 70.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, facility document review, personnel file review, resident interview, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to protect 1 of 3 residents (Resident #3) reviewed from financial abuse. The facility reported a census of 70 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, staff interview, resident interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure before and after dialysis assessments were completed for 1 of 1 resident reviewed on dialysis (Resident #2). The facility reported a census of 70 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interviews, resident interviews and policy review, the facility failed to provide a proper functioning call system to allow resident to staff communication for 1 of 5 residents reviewed. (Resident #1). The facility reported a census of 70.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to identify a hazard, and the facility did not take action to reduce the risk for further injuries. On 10/28/24, Resident #2 was identified to have a rectangular shaped red mark to the right forearm measuring 10.3cm x 5.6cm, with scattered blisters. Resident #2 reported to the staff that the water in the shower room caused the injury. On 10/31/24 the resident went to the Urgent Care and was found to have a 2nd degree burn on the right arm. The facility continued to give showers in the identified shower room. On 11/5/24, After 3 residents received showers, a Department of Inspection, Appeals and Licensing (DIAL) staff measured the water temperature to be 145.2 degrees Fahrenheit. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, hospital documentation review, resident, staff interviews and policy review the facility failed to assure that 1 of 1 resident (Resident #1) that received dialysis treatments, was provided with arrangements to and from the dialysis facility of his choice. The facility reported a census of 59 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to provide assessment and intervention for the necessary care and services for 4 of 4 residents reviewed (#4, #8, #9, & #10). This resulted in harm to Resident #10 due to delayed interventions and resulted in an emergent transfer to a higher level of care. The facility reported a census of 67 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to properly protect resident information from unauthorized access for two of two laptops reviewed in common areas. The facility reported a census of 67 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, resident, family, and staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure the resident's representative rights were met for 1 of 3 residents reviewed. (Resident#10). The facility identified a census of 67 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, family and staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to notify a resident family/representative of a medication change for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #1). The facility reported a census of 67 residents. Findings Include: The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #1 carried the diagnoses of congestive heart failure, diabetes, mitral and aortic valve stenosis and venous insufficiency. The MDS indicated the resident's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was 99 indicating the resident was unable to complete the interview and had severely impaired decision making. Resident #1 was dependent on staff for toileting, bathing, personal hygiene and transfers and required set up assistance with eating. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure physician orders were followed and documented appropriately and accurately for 2 of 4 residents reviewed (Resident #2 and #8). The facility reported a census of 67 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure physician's orders were followed for 2 of 3 residents reviewed (#2, #10). The facility identified a census of 67 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, clinical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to provide treatment and services to promote the healing of a pressure ulcer for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (#4). The facility reported a census of 67 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure oxygen was available to a resident requiring the use of oxygen for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #9). The facility reported a census of 67 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident and family interviews, staff interviews, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to maintain competent staff to appropriately perform an enema on a resident (#5) and provide wound vacuum care for 1 resident (#4). The facility reported a census of 67 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to properly secure medications from unauthorized access for two of two medication carts observed. The facility reported a census of 67 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, resident and staff interviews, police report, and policy review the facility failed to properly secure exit doors and failed to ensure residents were adequately supervised for 1 of 7 residents reviewed for wandering and elopement risk (Resident #1). The facility staff failed to know the whereabouts of a resident who left the facility unattended. Resident #1 was last seen by staff on 8/21/24 at approximately 9:00 PM, and not found until 8/23/24 at approximately 6:45 AM. The resident reported he had walked several blocks from the facility to a retail store, and later admitted himself to the Emergency Department (ED) for an evaluation. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and clinical record review, the facility failed to safely serve the recommended therapeutic meals according to physician orders and speech therapy recommendations for 2 of 2 residents reviewed (Res #4, and Res #26). The facility contains 16 residents on a mechanically altered diet. The facility reported a census of 60. The State Agency informed the facility of the Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) on 07/09/24 at 03:26 PM. The IJ began on 07/08/24. Facility staff removed the Immediate Jeopardy on 07/11/24. The facility staff removed the Immediate Jeopardy by implementing the following actions: 1. 100% Audit of Resident diet orders on 07/09/24 2. 100% Audit of resident diet cards on 07/09/24 3. 100% Care plan audit for all residents to verify diet and texture are accurate on 07/09/24 4. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to refer two residents (Residents #29 and #36) with a Level I Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) with a previously unknown serious mental disorder for evaluation of a Level II PASRR at the time the diagnosis was known to the facility for 2 of 4 residents reviewed for PASRR. The facility reported a census of 60.
Inspectors wroteBased on family interview, staff interview, and facility training material the facility failed to include the resident representative in the care plan participation conference for one (Resident #33) of fourteen residents reviewed. The facility reported a census of 60 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident interview, family interview, staff interview, record review and policy review, the facility failed to provide necessary services to maintain grooming for nail care for 2 of 2 residents (Residents #33 and #57) reviewed for Activities of Daily Living (ADL). The facility reported a census of 60 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, policy review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure bathroom surfaces were clean and tile in good repair for 4 of 4 resident bathrooms observed. The facility reported a census of 59 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, policy review, and staff and resident interview, the facility failed to notify the family of a resident's change in condition for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for assessment(Resident #1). The facility reported a census of 59 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, policy review, and staff and resident interview, the facility failed to follow professional standards by failing to carry out leg wraps as ordered, failing to ensure a resident received a meal in a timely manner after receiving insulin (an injectable medication used to treat diabetes), and failing to ensure the provision of audiology (the medical specialty which treated disorders of the ear) services for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for professional standards (Resident #1). The facility reported a census of 59 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, policy review, and staff and resident interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident was secured in a van during transport causing the resident to bump his shoulder during the ride for 1 of 3 resident's reviewed for supervision(Resident #1). The facility reported a census of 59 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, staff interview, Nurse Practitioner (NP ) interview, and Registered Nurse (RN)/Certified Wound Ostomy Continence Nurse (CWOCN) interview, Job Description forms and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide an assessment and interventions for a 2 of 3 residents who presented with a condition change. (Resident #2 and #3) The facility identified a census of 58 residents. On [DATE] at 2:30 p.m. the Iowa Department of Inspections, Appeals and Licensing (DIAL) staff contacted the facility staff to notify them the Department staff dtermined an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) situation existed at the facility. The facility staff removed the immediacy on [DATE] after the facility staff completed the following: 1. NP/Designee Completed 100% Audit on All Residents; Change of Condition Evaluation in EMR/PCC on [DATE]. 2. 100% Care Plan Audit Completed; [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, resident and staff interviews, record review and policy review, the facility failed to provide safe mechanical lift transfers for 2 of 3 residents reviewed (Residents #1 and #5). The facility failed to transfer residents safely by locking the lift wheels while raising the resident. The mechanical lift recommendations and warning sign posted on the lift stated that the wheels must remain unlocked during transfers. If the wheels are in the locked position it can affect stabilization during the lift procedure. The facility identified a census of 62 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, facility policy review resident interview and staff interview, the facility failed to follow physician orders as directed for 1 of 4 residents reviewed (Resident #4). Medications for Resident #4 were omitted without physician notification. The facility reported a census of 62 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observations, resident interview and staff interviews, the facility failed to accommodate residents needs with assurance of accessibility to call lights within resident's reach and provision of appropriate and adaptive equipment for 1 of 1 residents reviewed (Resident #33). The facility reported a census of 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to notify the Long Term Care Ombudsman for 1 of 1 residents who transferred to the hospital (Resident #47). The facility reported a census of 59 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to refer one of three residents (Resident #18) with a negative Level I result for the Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR), who had a possible serious Mental Disorder, Intellectual Disability, or other related condition, to the appropriate state-designated authority for Level II PASRR evaluation and determination. The facility reported a census of 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, staff interviews and facility policy review, the facility failed to revise the comprehensive care plan to accurately reflect status of 1 of 18 residents reviewed (Resident #18). The facility reported a census of 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, family interview and staff interviews the facility failed to provide restorative therapy to 1 of 3 residents reviewed for limited range of motion (Resident #43).
26 fire safety citations on file: 8 on June 10, 2025, 8 on July 12, 2024, 10 on September 7, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| May 14, 2026 | Fine | $86,520 |
| October 2, 2024 | Fine | $85,810 |
| August 29, 2024 | Fine | $25,454 |
| July 12, 2024 | Fine | $26,374 |
| April 19, 2024 | Fine | $28,805 |
| April 19, 2024 | Payment Denial | 17 days from May 28, 2024 |
A payment denial means Medicare and Medicaid stopped paying for new admissions for that period.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | Iowa | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.44 | 3.82 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.30 | 0.74 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.68 | 3.37 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.28 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.87 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 62.3% | 44.0% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 72.7% | 42.1% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.69 hours a day for residents as sick as this home's (its case-mix figure). The staffing star compares the two.
Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In January to March 2026, nursing staff hours per resident were 3.75 on weekdays and 2.68 on weekends, 29% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.3% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.29 in April to June 2025 to 3.44 in January to March 2026.
| Quarter | All nursing staff | Registered nurses | Weekdays | Weekends | Contract staff share | Days with no RN hours | Residents a day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.44 | 0.30 | 3.75 | 2.68 | 0.3% | 0 of 90 | 69 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.34 | 0.24 | 3.58 | 2.72 | 0.1% | 0 of 92 | 72 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.30 | 0.26 | 3.55 | 2.67 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 72 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.29 | 0.42 | 3.53 | 2.70 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 71 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Iowa, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.80 | 0.71 | 3.98 | 3.36 | 4.7% | 0.3% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Iowa, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $18.92 | $17.96 to $21.95 | 22,670 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $30.11 | $27.12 to $34.06 | 5,510 |
| Registered nurses | $37.80 | $32.83 to $41.32 | 34,420 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Iowa | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 8.5 | 17.1 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.7 | 1.5 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.4 | 2.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.6 | 3.8 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.4 | 2.1 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 10.0 | 16.6 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.6 | 4.2 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 21.9 | 19.4 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 27.3 | 20.9 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 10.6 | 13.2 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.2 | 1.5 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.6 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Greater Southside Health and Rehabilitation's Medicare short-stay residents. How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
US median of homes 51.5% · Iowa: 28 better, 21 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 24 eligible stays.
11.5% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Iowa: 1 better, 1 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 53 eligible stays.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
US median of homes 7.1% · Iowa: 0 better, 0 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 24 eligible stays.
59.3% this home
Median of homes: Iowa56.7% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 27 residents counted.
4.7% this home
Median of homes: Iowa0.0% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 43 residents counted.
3.9% this home
Median of homes: Iowa1.8% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 43 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Iowa100.0% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 11 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: TERRACE HILL HEALTHCARE LLC. CMS links this home to The Ensign Group, a group of 344 nursing homes averaging 3.2 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gateway Healthcare LLC | Direct ownership interest | Organization | 04/17/2024 | |
| The Ensign Group Inc | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 04/17/2025 | |
| Burnam, Soon | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 04/17/2024 | |
| Oconner, Michael | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 08/01/2024 | |
| Timm, Dirk | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 08/01/2024 | |
| Burnam, Soon | Corporate officer | Individual | 04/17/2024 | |
| Timm, Dirk | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 08/01/2024 | |
| Jorgensen, David | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 06/02/2025 | |
| Keetch, Chad | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 06/02/2025 | |
| Port, Barry | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 06/05/2025 | |
| Ensign Services Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 08/01/2024 | |
| Skywalk Health Holdings LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 08/01/2024 | |
| Standard Bearer Healthcare Op, LP | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 08/01/2024 | |
| The Ensign Group Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 08/01/2024 | |
| Oconner, Michael | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/20/2025 | |
| Timm, Dirk | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 06/05/2025 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in Iowa. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.