The Village of Ackley
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
The Village of Ackley has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the facility's care and operations. It ranks #388 out of 392 nursing homes in Iowa, placing it in the bottom half of facilities statewide and last in Hardin County, meaning there are no better local options available. Although the facility's trend is improving, with issues decreasing from 22 to 4 recently, it still faces serious challenges, including a high staffing turnover rate of 70%, which is concerning compared to the state average of 44%. The nursing home has incurred fines totaling $99,979, higher than 97% of Iowa facilities, reflecting ongoing compliance issues. Specific incidents include a resident wandering off unsupervised and being found a city block away, as well as another resident suffering falls due to inadequate supervision, highlighting both critical safety concerns and the need for better oversight. While staffing is rated average, the high turnover and troubling incidents suggest families should carefully consider these factors when evaluating care for their loved ones.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Iowa
- #388/392
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 70% turnover. Very high, 22 points above average. Constant new faces learning your loved one's needs.
- Penalties ○ Average
- $99,979 in fines. Higher than 59% of Iowa facilities. Some compliance issues.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 58 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Iowa. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 36 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in fire safety.
The Bad
Below Iowa average (3.0)
Significant quality concerns identified by CMS
24pts above Iowa avg (46%)
Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity
Well above median ($33,413)
Moderate penalties - review what triggered them
22 points above Iowa average of 48%
The Ugly 36 deficiencies on record
Feb 2025
4 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, staff interviews and policy review, the facility failed to treat residents with dignity and res...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
PASARR Coordination
(Tag F0644)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to submit a Level II Preadmission Screen...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Staffing Data
(Tag F0851)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Payroll Based Journal Staffing Data Report (July 1, 2024 - September 30, 2024) review, facility staffing reports review, and staff intervie...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on clinical record review and staff interview the facility failed to inform the Long Term Care (LTC) Ombudsman office of a resident transfer from the facility for 1 of 1 resident's reviewed (Res...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2024
6 deficiencies
2 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, staff interviews, and policy review the facility failed to provide adequate nursing supervision...
Read full inspector narrative →
SERIOUS
(G)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Deficiency F0692
(Tag F0692)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff interviews, clinical record review, hospital record review, family interviews, and policy review the facility fai...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Notification of Changes
(Tag F0580)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, staff interviews, and policy review the facility failed to notify the physician and family for ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, staff, and family interviews the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable environment for 1 ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0825
(Tag F0825)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide Speech Therapy (ST) as ordered by the Physi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, staff interviews, and policy review the facility failed to accurately document a fall and the r...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2024
16 deficiencies
1 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Deficiency F0757
(Tag F0757)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Resident #5's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 9...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0578
(Tag F0578)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, policy review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure code status between the facil...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Notification of Changes
(Tag F0580)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, staff and family interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to provide family notificat...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to transmit a discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessme...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on resident interview, clinical record review, policy review and staff interview, the facility failed to invite a resident...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Incontinence Care
(Tag F0690)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff interviews, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to provide appropriate treatment a...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medication Errors
(Tag F0758)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to evaluate and manage an as needed psychotropic...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0801
(Tag F0801)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on document review and staff interview, the facility failed to employ sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition serv...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0836
(Tag F0836)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
481-58.20(135C) Duties of health service supervisor. Every nursing facility shall have a health service supervisor who shall:
58.20(13) Evaluate in writing the performance of each individual on the he...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0849
(Tag F0849)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, record reviews, and policy review the facility failed to update a resident's Care Plan following their admi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0868
(Tag F0868)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review, policy review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the required members were present at quarterly Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) meetings. The f...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0943
(Tag F0943)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on clinical record review, policy review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure Dependent Adult Abuse Mandatory Training recertification training was completed timely for 2 of 5 staf...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Menu Adequacy
(Tag F0803)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to follow the approved diet menu and failed to me...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0804
(Tag F0804)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based 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 34.
Fi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to maintain sanitary practices by (a) improperly storing food, (b) failing to maintain correct dishwasher opera...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, staff interviews, document reviews, and policy review, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive water management program and identify areas or devices in the building to re...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2023
3 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Notification of Changes
(Tag F0580)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on clinical record review and staff interview the facility failed to notify the physician and family of a significant weight loss for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #2) reviewed. The facility report...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on clinical record review and staff interview the facility failed to recognize, assess and investigate the cause of a weight loss and implement appropriate interventions based on the assessment ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0725
(Tag F0725)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on staff schedule review, facility assessment review, nurse written statement and staff interview the facility failed to provide professional nursing coverage 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The ...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2023
1 deficiency
1 IJ (1 affecting multiple)
CRITICAL
(K)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Someone could have died · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, staff interviews, and facility policy review the facility failed to provide adequate nursin...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2023
6 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on clinical record review, policy review, and staff interview, the facility failed to notify the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman of a discharge for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for hos...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0625
(Tag F0625)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on clinical record review, policy review, and staff interview, the facility failed to provide a bed hold policy upon discharge to a resident or resident representative for 1 of 2 residents revie...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0658
(Tag F0658)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, clinical record review, policy review and staff interviews the facility failed to follow accepted nursing practices during medication administration for 2 of 3 residents reviewe...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on clinical record review, policy review, and staff interview, the facility failed to carry out adequate assessments after a change of condition for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for hospitalization...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, clinical record review, policy review, and staff interview, the facility failed to create and/or carry out care plan interventions and/or treatments in order to prevent the devel...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, policy review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure proper function of the dishwasher, and failed to ensure proper food handling and kitchen sanitation. The facilit...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "What changes have you made since the serious inspection findings?"
- "Why is there high staff turnover? How do you retain staff?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 2 life-threatening violation(s), 2 harm violation(s), $99,979 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 36 deficiencies on record, including 2 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $99,979 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in Iowa. Major compliance failures.
- • Grade F (0/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is The Village Of Ackley's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns The Village of Ackley an overall rating of 1 out of 5 stars, which is considered much below average nationally. Within Iowa, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. A rating at this level reflects concerns identified through health inspections, staffing assessments, or quality measures that families should carefully consider.
How is The Village Of Ackley Staffed?
CMS rates The Village of Ackley's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 70%, which is 24 percentage points above the Iowa average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs. RN turnover specifically is 79%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.
What Have Inspectors Found at The Village Of Ackley?
State health inspectors documented 36 deficiencies at The Village of Ackley during 2023 to 2025. These included: 2 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 2 that caused actual resident harm, and 32 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates The Village Of Ackley?
The Village of Ackley is owned by a non-profit organization. Non-profit facilities reinvest revenue into operations rather than distributing to shareholders. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 38 certified beds and approximately 24 residents (about 63% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in ACKLEY, Iowa.
How Does The Village Of Ackley Compare to Other Iowa Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Iowa, The Village of Ackley's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 3.0, staff turnover (70%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (1 stars) is much below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting The Village Of Ackley?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations and the facility's high staff turnover rate.
Is The Village Of Ackley Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, The Village of Ackley has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 2 Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 1-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Iowa. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.
Do Nurses at The Village Of Ackley Stick Around?
Staff turnover at The Village of Ackley is high. At 70%, the facility is 24 percentage points above the Iowa average of 46%. Registered Nurse turnover is particularly concerning at 79%. RNs handle complex medical decisions and coordinate care — frequent RN changes can directly impact care quality. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?
Was The Village Of Ackley Ever Fined?
The Village of Ackley has been fined $99,979 across 3 penalty actions. This is above the Iowa average of $34,079. Fines in this range indicate compliance issues significant enough for CMS to impose meaningful financial consequences. Common causes include delayed correction of deficiencies, repeat violations, or care failures affecting resident safety. Families should ask facility leadership what changes have been made since these penalties.
Is The Village Of Ackley on Any Federal Watch List?
The Village of Ackley is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.