Pinnacle Specialty Care
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Pinnacle Specialty Care in Cedar Falls, Iowa, has a Trust Grade of C, meaning it is average and sits in the middle of the pack compared to other facilities. It ranks #219 out of 392 facilities in Iowa, placing it in the bottom half, and #8 out of 12 in Black Hawk County, indicating limited local options. The facility is improving, with the number of issues decreasing from 6 in 2024 to 4 in 2025. Staffing is a strength, rated at 4 out of 5 stars, with a turnover rate of 38%, which is better than the state average. However, there have been some concerning incidents, including a failure to monitor a resident who developed a blood clot and issues with cleanliness in communal areas, which highlight areas where the facility needs to improve. Overall, while Pinnacle Specialty Care has strengths in staffing and is on an upward trend, it is essential for families to be aware of the existing issues.
- Trust Score
- C
- In Iowa
- #219/392
- Safety Record
- Moderate
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 38% turnover. Near Iowa's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $8,362 in fines. Lower than most Iowa facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ○ Average
- Each resident gets 38 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Iowa. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 14 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (38%)
10 points below Iowa average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, fire safety.
The Bad
Near Iowa average (3.1)
Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities
Near Iowa avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 14 deficiencies on record
Jul 2025
4 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
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 observation, staff interviews and policy review, the facility failed to provide a clean, comfortable and homelike envir...
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 interviews the facility failed to accurately document and submit an accurate resident ...
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 and staff interview, the facility failed to complete a new Preadmission and Resident Review (PAS...
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 clinical record review, policy review and staff interview, the facility failed to revise the resident care plan for 1 o...
Read full inspector narrative →
Sept 2024
4 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 and staff interview, the facility failed to notify the Long-Term Care (LTC) Ombudsman for 1 of 1 resident who transferred to the hospital (Resident #65). The facility r...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to bathe a resident on a frequent and consistent basis...
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
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, observations, and record review, the facility failed to provide safety interventions for 1 of 4 residents r...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0805
(Tag F0805)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, interview and policy review, the facility failed to serve the correct diet for 1 of 2 residents...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2024
2 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 observation, clinical record review, and staff, resident, and visitor interviews, the facility failed to respect dignit...
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 F0919
(Tag F0919)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, staff and visitor interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the resident ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2023
1 deficiency
1 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
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, staff, family, and provider interviews the facility failed to provide ongoing assessments, inte...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 2023
3 deficiencies
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 and family interview, facility record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to provide the opportun...
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 observation, record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide services that met professional standards regarding medication administration for 1 of 2 residents observed (Re...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
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 clinical record review, observation, family interview, staff interview, and facility policy review the facility failed ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • 38% turnover. Below Iowa's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • 14 deficiencies on record, including 1 serious (caused harm) violation. Ask about corrective actions taken.
- • Grade C (58/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Pinnacle Specialty Care's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns Pinnacle Specialty Care an overall rating of 3 out of 5 stars, which is considered average nationally. Within Iowa, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This mid-range rating indicates the facility meets federal standards but may have areas for improvement.
How is Pinnacle Specialty Care Staffed?
CMS rates Pinnacle Specialty Care's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 38%, compared to the Iowa average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Pinnacle Specialty Care?
State health inspectors documented 14 deficiencies at Pinnacle Specialty Care during 2023 to 2025. These included: 1 that caused actual resident harm and 13 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Pinnacle Specialty Care?
Pinnacle Specialty Care is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by CARE INITIATIVES, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 100 certified beds and approximately 89 residents (about 89% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in Cedar Falls, Iowa.
How Does Pinnacle Specialty Care Compare to Other Iowa Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Iowa, Pinnacle Specialty Care's overall rating (3 stars) is below the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (38%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (3 stars) is at the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Pinnacle Specialty Care?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "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?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?"
Is Pinnacle Specialty Care Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, Pinnacle Specialty Care has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 3-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Iowa. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.
Do Nurses at Pinnacle Specialty Care Stick Around?
Pinnacle Specialty Care has a staff turnover rate of 38%, which is about average for Iowa nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.
Was Pinnacle Specialty Care Ever Fined?
Pinnacle Specialty Care has been fined $8,362 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Iowa average of $33,162. While any fine indicates a compliance issue, fines under $50,000 are relatively common and typically reflect isolated problems that were subsequently corrected. Families should ask what specific issues led to these fines and confirm they've been resolved.
Is Pinnacle Specialty Care on Any Federal Watch List?
Pinnacle Specialty Care 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.