Prairie Gate
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Prairie Gate in Council Bluffs, Iowa has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating poor quality with significant concerns about care. Ranking #294 out of 392 facilities in Iowa places it in the bottom half, and while it is #2 out of 7 in Pottawattamie County, there is only one other local option that is better. The facility's performance is improving, with issues reducing from 14 in 2024 to 4 in 2025, but it still faces serious challenges, having been fined $27,630, which is higher than 75% of Iowa facilities. Staffing is a strength, with a 4 out of 5-star rating and no turnover, meaning the staff are stable and familiar with residents. However, there are troubling incidents, including a significant medication error that left a resident without their prescribed medication for several days and a failure to prevent the worsening of a pressure sore for another resident. Additionally, there have been complaints about staff treating residents without dignity, such as forcing a resident to shower against her wishes. Overall, while there are some positive aspects, families should weigh the serious issues carefully.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Iowa
- #294/392
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- Turnover data not reported for this facility.
- Penalties ⚠ Watch
- $27,630 in fines. Higher than 96% of Iowa facilities. Major compliance failures.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 64 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than 97% of Iowa nursing homes. RNs are the most trained staff who catch health problems before they become serious.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 20 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
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, fire safety.
The Bad
Below Iowa average (3.0)
Below average - review inspection findings carefully
Below median ($33,413)
Moderate penalties - review what triggered them
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 20 deficiencies on record
Jul 2025
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
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on clinical record review, document review and staff interview the facility failed to protect residents from accidents and injuries for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #135) reviewed. The facility re...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, policy review, and staff interview the facility failed to provide appropriate infection prevention practic...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2025
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
Based on record review, staff, resident and family interviews, and facility policy review the facility failed to treat the resident with respect and dignity for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #4) with dig...
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
Based on observation, record review, staff interview and facility policy review the facility failed to properly check an alarmed door after a resident (Resident #1) exited the care center. The facilit...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2024
8 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, clinical record review, resident interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain a safe, a...
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
Based on clinical record review, policy review, resident interview and staff interviews the facility failed to complete an accurate assessment that reflected the resident's status during the observati...
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 clinical record review, personnel file review, resident interview, staff interviews and policy review the facility fail...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY**
Based on clinical record review, observations, resident interviews and staff interviews the facility failed to provide respirat...
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
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 4. The MDS dated [DATE] for Resident #17 documented a BIMS of 12 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. Review of MDS also in...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on electronic health records (EHR), document review, resident interviews, and staff interviews the facility failed to prov...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Staffing Information
(Tag F0732)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, staff interview and policy review the facility failed to post daily nursing census in a prominent area, accessible to visitors and residents. The facility reported a census of 32...
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, interview and policy review the facility failed to ensure that food was stored according to safe practices. An initial tour of the kitchen revealed that there were many undated, ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 2024
3 deficiencies
1 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
📢 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
Deficiency F0760
(Tag F0760)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, Pharmacy Drug Book review, clinical staff interview, provider interview, staff interviews, and ...
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 F0658
(Tag F0658)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on clinical record review, staff interviews, medical clinic personnel interviews and facility policy review the facility failed to clarify a discrepancy in orders timely and failed to transcribe...
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 F0839
(Tag F0839)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on employee file review, staff interviews, position description and employee handbook review the facility failed to ensure 1 of 3 employed nurses had either a multistate license or a single stat...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2024
3 deficiencies
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
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff interviews, provider interview, clinical record review and facility policy review the facility faile...
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, staff interviews, and facility policy review the facility failed to review and revise the care ...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 5. The MDS assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #22 revealed a score of 15 on the BIMS indicating no cognitive impairment. The r...
Read full inspector narrative →
Sept 2023
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
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
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 complete a comprehensive assessment prior to hospit...
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 F0813
(Tag F0813)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, clinical record review, staff and resident interviews, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure resident's personal refrigerator was looked at daily to ensure it...
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?"
- "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: 1 life-threatening violation(s), 1 harm violation(s), $27,630 in fines, Payment denial on record. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 20 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $27,630 in fines. Higher than 94% of Iowa facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
- • Grade F (33/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Prairie Gate's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns Prairie Gate an overall rating of 2 out of 5 stars, which is considered 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 Prairie Gate Staffed?
CMS rates Prairie Gate's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes.
What Have Inspectors Found at Prairie Gate?
State health inspectors documented 20 deficiencies at Prairie Gate during 2023 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 1 that caused actual resident harm, and 18 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 Prairie Gate?
Prairie Gate is owned by a non-profit organization. Non-profit facilities reinvest revenue into operations rather than distributing to shareholders. The facility is operated by PRESBYTERIAN HOMES & SERVICES, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 72 certified beds and approximately 34 residents (about 47% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in COUNCIL BLUFFS, Iowa.
How Does Prairie Gate Compare to Other Iowa Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Iowa, Prairie Gate's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 3.0 and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Prairie Gate?
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?" "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?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations.
Is Prairie Gate Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, Prairie Gate has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 2-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 Prairie Gate Stick Around?
Prairie Gate has not reported staff turnover data to CMS. Staff turnover matters because consistent caregivers learn residents' individual needs, medications, and preferences. When staff frequently change, this institutional knowledge is lost. Families should ask the facility directly about their staff retention rates and average employee tenure.
Was Prairie Gate Ever Fined?
Prairie Gate has been fined $27,630 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Iowa average of $33,355. 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 Prairie Gate on Any Federal Watch List?
Prairie Gate 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.