5800 Ne 12th Avenue, Pleasant Hill, IA 50327 · Polk County · (515) 265-5348
90 certified beds, about 85 residents a day · Non profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1997
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 165345 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on October 7, 2025, inspectors cited 3 health deficiencies (the Iowa average is 6.5, the national average 9.2).
Of 49 health citations since September 2023, 3 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.27 hours per resident per day, against 3.82 across Iowa and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.70 of those hours.
44.9% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Iowa average 44.0%).
CMS links it to Care Initiatives, an affiliated group of 43 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 49 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on the Provider History Report, State Agency Website, Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement Plan (QAPI), staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to adequately address repeat regulatory violations in the following regulatory categories: F812, F880, F725, and F684. The facility reported a census of 86.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, facility policy review, resident and staff interview, the facility failed to uphold the established grievance process when staff members failed to report repeated resident grievances to management. The facility reported a census of 86.
Inspectors wroteBased on direct observation, clinical record review, staff and resident interview, and facility policy review the facility failed to maintain adequate staffing to ensure residents had access to timely requests for help, as noted by excessively long call light times. The facility reported a census of 86.
Inspectors wroteBased on direct observation, clinical record review, facility policy review, resident and staff interview, the facility failed to treat residents with dignity and respect. An observation revealed a member of the therapy team ignored the wishes of the resident for 2 of 7 residents screened for dignity related concerns (Residents #13 and #14). The facility reported a census of 86.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, clinical record reviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to have an order for a resident to self-administer their own medications before leaving them unattended with Miralax for 2 of 2 residents observed (Residents #10 and #16). The facility reported a census of 86.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, resident interviews, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to complete resident assessments for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for assessment and interventions (Residents #3 and #4). Resident #3 lacked the completion of neurological checks (neuros) after an unwitnessed fall. Resident #4 lacked nursing assessment and follow-up post same-day surgery. The facility reported a census of 86.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, clinical record review, resident interviews, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to provide adequate resident supervision during severe weather warning as well implement Care Plan interventions after a series of falls (Resident #16) for 1 of 9 residents reviewed for supervision. The facility reported a census of 86.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, facility policy review, clinical record review, staff, and Resident Representative interviews, the facility failed to follow-up after a significant change in weight in short period of time for 2 of 2 residents reviewed (Residents #2 and #11). Both residents had significant changes in weight in less than a month. The facility reported a census of 86 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to administer significant medications correctly when a nurse failed to correctly prime an insulin pen before administration, risking the resident not receiving a sufficient dose of the medication for 1 of 8 residents sampled for medication administration (Resident #15). The facility reported a census of 86.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure appropriate food handling practices were followed for 2 of 2 dining rooms observed. The facility reported a census of 86.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interview, and policy review, the facilty failed to complete glove change and hand hygiene during personal cares, implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) as indicated, and proper glucometer cleaning for 3 of 7 residents reviewed for infection control (Resident #8, #11, and #15). The facility reported a census of 86.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, policy review, and staff interview, the facility failed to treat 1 of 7 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for dignity with respect by applying multiple incontinent briefs during personal hygiene care. The facility reported a census of 38 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, policy review, and staff interview, the facility failed to carry out assessments for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for a change in condition(Resident #1) by failing to carry out timely skin assessments after a hospitalization. The facility reported a census of 38 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on document review, observations, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure food served and prepared in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. The facility reported a census of 88.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, policy review, and staff and resident interviews, staff failed to transfer a resident using a technique which would not place pressure on the resident's compromised left foot and failed to notify the podiatrist in a timely manner of an open area for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for skin ulcers(Resident #6). The facility reported a census of 88 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on electronic health record (EHR) review, observations, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents were aware of and offered alternative menu options for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for food (Residents #4 and #79). The facility reported a census of 88.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident and staff interviews, clinical record review and policy review the facility failed to provide interventions to prevent a deep tissue injury (a type of pressure injury that occurs when underlying soft tissue is damaged due to prolonged pressure, often over bony prominence.) from performing for 1 of 5 residents reviewed (Resident #8) and failed to apply treatment to a Moisture Associated Skin Damage (MASD) area on the coccyx (the final bone at the bottom of the spine) for which resulted in the area had gotten worse and the Advance Registered Nurse Practitioner (ARNP was notified 7 days later. (Resident #9). The facility identified a census of 84 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on a document of call light start and end time, resident interview, staff interview, and the facility policy review, the facility failed to consistently answer call lights within a reasonable amount of time for 4 of 4 residents. (#2, #5, #8 and #11) The facility reported a census of 84 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, clinical record review, resident and staff interview, facility policy review, the facility failed to follow the comprehensive Care Plan for 1 of 3 (Resident #2) reviewed for care plans. The facility reported a census of 84 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to provide incontinence care appropriately to prevent cross contamination for 1 of 3 residents observed for incontinence care (Resident #3). The facility reported a census of 84 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, staff interviews, and policy review the facility failed to notify the Physician and family when a resident experienced a change in condition for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Residents #1). The facility reported a census of 75 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, staff interview, facility investigation review and policy review the facility failed to report an allegation of abuse within 2 hours to the Iowa Department of Inspections, Appeals and Licensing (DIAL) for 2 of 3 residents reviewed (Residents #2 and #3). The facility reported a census of 75 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, staff interviews and policy review the facility failed to provide care and services according to accepted standards of clinical practice for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Residents #2). The facility failed to implement physician orders in a timely manner. The facility reported a census of 75 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, staff interviews, and policy review the facility failed to provide assessment and interventions necessary for the care and services, to maintain the residents' highest practical physical well- being for 2 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #1 and #2). The facility failed to complete and document nursing assessments related to nausea, vomiting and diarrhea for Resident #1. The facility also failed to complete vital signs with neurological assessments and complete a range of motion (ROM) assessment after a fall for Resident #1. The facility also failed to complete and document nursing assessments related diuretic usage for fluid overload and assess/monitor the efficacy and side effects of new medications started for fluid overload, sexual inhibition, anxiety and depression for Resident #2. The facility reported a census of 35 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, staff interviews, family interviews, hospital record review and policy review the facility failed to provide adequate nursing supervision to prevent accidents and injuries for 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #1) for falls. Resident #1 was identified as a fall risk prior and upon admission and interventions to prevent falls were not implemented upon admission to the facility. Resident #1 fell two times on the same day within 48 hours of admission. Based on staff interviews and documentation the staff did not provide appropriate level of assistance with transfers and the facility failed to complete a thorough assessment including vital signs and range of motion (ROM) after a fall occurred. The facility reported a census of 75 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to maintain sanitary practices by improperly storing food and failed to maintain essential kitchen equipment. The facility reported a census of 87 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, staff interview, guidance from the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) manual, and facility policy review, the facility failed to complete a quarterly assessment for 1 of 18 (Res #73) residents reviewed. The facility reported a census of 87 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and facility document review, the facility failed to administer medication in a timely manner for 1 of 18 residents reviewed (Resident #50). The facility reported a census of 87. Findings Include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) of Resident #50, dated 6/3/24, documented the resident had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) identified the presence of short and long-term memory impairment. The MDS documented that the resident had short-term, and long-term memory loss. The MDS documented diagnoses that included: renal insufficiency, hypertension, aphasia, quadriplegia, seizure disorder, anxiety disorder, depression, and respiratory failure. It further documented her gastrostomy status, muscle contractures, and dysphagia. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to provide routine scheduled baths for 1 of 21 residents reviewed (Resident #35). The facility reported a census of 87 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, staff interview and resident interview, the facility failed to follow physician orders to obtain a resident's daily weight and twice daily oxygen saturation for 1 of 21 (#35) reviewed. The facility reported a census of 87 residents. Findings Include: On 8/25/24 at 11:42 AM, the resident was observed with bilateral, swollen ankles. The resident stated she had heart problems. The resident's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15 which indicated completely intact cognition. It included diagnoses of heart failure, hypertension, Diabetes Mellitus, cardiogenic shock (lack of blood and oxygen to organs caused by heart failure), prosthetic heart valve, and shortness of breath. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on direct observation, staff interview, record and policy review, the facility failed to perform a gastric tube (G-Tube) feeding in a manner that protects residents from cross-contamination for 2 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #24, #50). In addition, the facility failed to serve meals in a manner that protects residents from cross-contamination. The facility reported a census of 87.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review, resident and staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to prevent a male resident (Resident #1) from inappropriately kissing a female resident (Resident #2). The facility reported a census of 81 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to supervise a male resident (Resident #1) with known sexual behaviors from inappropriately kissing a female resident (Resident #2). The facility reported a census of 81 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, facility policy review, family, resident interviews, and staff interviews, the facility failed to promptly identify and intervene for an acute change in a resident's condition, chest pain, shortness of breath, cough and urinary incontinence related to fluid volume overload. As a result the family transported the resident to the emergency department. Resident #1 was admitted to the hospital with acute hypoxic (lack of oxygen) respiratory failure due to pulmonary edema (excessive fluid in the lungs), sinus bradycardia (slowing of the heart), acute diastolic heart failure and swelling in the scrotum due to the edema. Concerns were identified for 1 or 3 residents reviewed for assessment and intervention. (Resident#1). The facility reported a census 81 of residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, observation, policy review, document review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive water management program and identify areas or devices in the building to reduce the risk and prevent the growth of Legionella or other waterborne pathogens. The facility also failed to evaluate where hazardous conditions may occur in the water systems and implement measures to prevent waterborne pathogens for 1 of 78 residents. Need universe The facility reported a census of 78 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident interviews, call light log review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to answer the residents' call light in less than 15 minutes for 25% of the reviewed time period. The facility reported a census 78 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to provide food served by a method to maintain a safe and appetizing temperature. The facility reported a census of 78.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident and staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to provide alternative food options for residents who refuse the food served. The facility reported a census of 78.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident and staff interviews, facility record review, and the facilities admission Agreement, the facility failed to exercise reasonable care for the protection of the personal property against one resident (Resident #15). The facility also failed to maintain proper maintenance to resident rooms to promote a homelike environment. The facility reported a census of 78 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to implement a comprehensive Care Plan for 1 of 5 residents reviewed (#58). The facility reported a census of 78 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to fully review and revise the comprehensive care plan for 2 of 5 residents reviewed (#34 & #58). The facility reported a census of 78.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to implement physician's orders for 2 of 26 residents (Resident #34 & #80). The facility failed to document the physician order for oxygen therapy for Resident #34 and later titrated oxygen without a physician's order. The facility reported a census of 78.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, resident and staff interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide restorative activities in order to maintain a functional range of motion and prevent a decline in activities of daily living for 2 of 2 residents (#48 and #58). The facility reported a census of 78 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, family interview and staff interviews, the facility failed to promptly assess a resident with a change in condition and provide skin assessments in accordance with professional standards of practice for 3 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #13, #1 and #11). The facility reported census was 82.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, clinical record review, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure call lights were responded to in a timely manner at no greater than 15 minutes for 5 of 5 residents reviewed (Residents #6, #7, #8, #9 and #10). The facility reported census was 82.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, resident and staff interviews the facility failed to maintain a clean and comfortable environment for their residents. The facility reported census as 82 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, family interview, and provider interview the facility failed to ensure physician orders are followed in accordance with professional standards of practice for 2 of 4 residents reviewed (Resident #5 #11). The facility reported census was 82.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, staff, family and resident interview, the facility failed to provide perineal cares of incontinent residents unable to carry out the activity independently for 2 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #10, #11). The facility reported census was 82.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, climatologist review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident accessing the courtyard was adequately supervised for 1 of 1 residents reviewed (Resident #1). The facility reported census was 82.
7 fire safety citations on file: 2 on October 7, 2025, 1 on August 28, 2024, 4 on February 26, 2024.
CMS lists no fines or payment denials against this home in the last three years. The national average is 0.9 fines per home.
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) | 3.27 | 3.82 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.70 | 0.74 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.93 | 3.37 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.23 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.34 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 44.9% | 44.0% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 30.0% | 42.1% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 2 |
CMS expects 3.49 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 3.40 on weekdays and 2.93 on weekends, 14% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.45 in April to June 2025 to 3.27 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 | 3.27 | 0.70 | 3.40 | 2.93 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 85 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.35 | 0.66 | 3.53 | 2.90 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 83 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.20 | 0.58 | 3.39 | 2.74 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 84 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.45 | 0.59 | 3.67 | 2.88 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 77 |
| 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. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| 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 | 21.8 | 17.1 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.5 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.7 | 2.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.1 | 3.8 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 2.1 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 27.5 | 16.6 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.7 | 4.2 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 17.1 | 19.4 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 26.4 | 20.9 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 15.0 | 13.2 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.9 | 1.5 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.4 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Parkridge Specialty Care's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (51.6% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
51.6% this home
No different from the national rate
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. 115 eligible stays.
12.1% 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. 127 eligible stays.
7.7% this home
No different from the national rate
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. 75 eligible stays.
34.8% 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. 46 residents counted.
0.0% 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. 69 residents counted.
2.3% 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. 69 residents counted.
100.0% this home
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. 30 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: CARE INITIATIVES. CMS links this home to Care Initiatives, a group of 43 nursing homes averaging 2.9 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Care Initiatives | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 03/01/2014 |
| Computershare Corporate Trust Company, Na | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Organization | 01/01/2025 | |
| Beal, Michael | Corporate director | Individual | 06/01/2020 | |
| Bowen, Lane | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2021 | |
| Carothers, Mary Jane | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| Childs, Kevin | Corporate director | Individual | 04/01/2023 | |
| Corless, Peter | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2025 | |
| Krein, Keith | Corporate director | Individual | 06/29/2022 | |
| Rust, Elizabeth | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| Sturm, Denise | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2021 | |
| Upmeyer, Linda | Corporate director | Individual | 06/29/2022 | |
| Beal, Michael | Corporate officer | Individual | 06/01/2020 | |
| Dixon, David | Corporate officer | Individual | 06/01/2016 | |
| Drake, Emily | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/04/2023 | |
| Gilyard, Tanya | Corporate officer | Individual | 05/23/2025 | |
| Kuhn, Jeramy | Corporate officer | Individual | 06/25/2008 | |
| McDyer, Jessica | Corporate officer | Individual | 02/22/2023 | |
| Volm, Johanna | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/01/2021 | |
| Kerschner, Michelle | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/13/2023 | |
| Mahler, Carla | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/01/2024 | |
| Wei, Shipeng | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/01/2024 | |
| Beal, Michael | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 01/08/2026 | |
| Computershare Corporate Trust Company, Na | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 08/04/2025 | |
| Kerschner, Michelle | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 08/05/2025 | |
| Wei, Shipeng | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 08/05/2025 |
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.