Valley View Village
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Valley View Village has a Trust Grade of C, which means it is average and positioned in the middle of the pack, indicating that while it is not the worst option, it does not stand out positively either. In Iowa, it ranks #238 out of 392 nursing homes, placing it in the bottom half, and #16 out of 29 in Polk County, where only one local facility is rated higher. The facility is currently improving, with reported issues decreasing from 7 in 2024 to 5 in 2025. Staffing is a strong point with a perfect 5-star rating and a lower turnover of 37%, which is better than the state average of 44%, indicating that staff members are likely to stay longer and provide consistent care. However, there are concerning incidents, such as a resident suffering a ligament injury from an improper transfer and another resident experiencing severe health issues due to lack of adequate staff intervention. Additionally, there were failures in hand hygiene practices that could lead to infections. Overall, while there are strengths in staffing and a positive trend, families should be cautious of the serious care deficiencies noted.
- Trust Score
- C
- In Iowa
- #238/392
- Safety Record
- Moderate
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 37% turnover. Near Iowa's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ○ Average
- $18,860 in fines. Higher than 72% of Iowa facilities. Some compliance issues.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 96 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
- 19 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
5-Star Staffing Rating · Excellent nurse staffing levels
-
4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (37%)
11 points below Iowa average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, 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 19 deficiencies on record
May 2025
4 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
MDS Data Transmission
(Tag F0640)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on resident record review, facility record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to submit the Minimum Data Set (MDS) in a timely manner for 2 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #28 & ...
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 record review, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to code an anticoagulant drug accurately on the M...
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 record review, observation, and staff interviews and policy the facility failed to update Care Plans for 3 of 18 reside...
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, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to follow Enhanced Barrier Protection (EBP) practi...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2025
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
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, clinical record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the safety for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #2) reviewed. This failure caused har...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2024
7 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
Deficiency F0741
(Tag F0741)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on direct observation, clinical record review, staff interviews, family interviews, and policy review, the facility failed...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. The Comprehensive Skin Risk assessment dated , of Resident #30, reflected a Braden score of 14, which indicates a moderate ri...
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 observation, resident interview, staff interview, record review and policy review, the facility failed to provide neces...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Drug Regimen Review
(Tag F0756)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record, provider interview, and policy review, the facility failed to document a reason for declining a Gradua...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to protect medical records in a confidential and secure manner for 2 of 19 (Resident #41, #26) residents reviewe...
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 facility policy the staff failed to perform hand hygiene to prevent the spread of possible food borne illness for one of one meal observation. The facility reporte...
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
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to place a barrier prior to performing blood glucose monitoring for 3 of 3 residents reviewed (Residents #13, #26...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2023
1 deficiency
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, resident interview, staff interview and a lift device user's manual review, the facility failed to ensure staff maintained a safe and secure environment for 2 of 3 res...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2023
1 deficiency
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, observation, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2023
5 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 observation, record review, and resident and staff interviews the facility failed to treat residents with dignity for 1 of 8 residents reviewed (Resident #59). The facility scheduled an appoi...
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 interviews and record review, the facility failed to follow professional standards of medication administration leaving medication at bedside (Resident #50). The facility reported a census of...
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
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record and policy review, and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide grooming/bathing assistance for 1 of 4 residents reviewed (Resident #59). The facility...
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
Tube Feeding
(Tag F0693)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the head of the bed was elevated while the gastrostomy (g-tube) (tube inserted directly into the stomach through...
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
2. During an observation on 3/1/23 at 8:20 AM, Staff B, Certified Medication Aide (CMA), completed a blood glucose check using a glucometer machine for Resident #43. Staff B, CMA used good technique, ...
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
- • 37% turnover. Below Iowa's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 2 harm violation(s), Payment denial on record. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 19 deficiencies on record, including 2 serious (caused harm) violations. Ask about corrective actions taken.
- • $18,860 in fines. Above average for Iowa. Some compliance problems on record.
- • Grade C (53/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Valley View Village's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns Valley View Village 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 Valley View Village Staffed?
CMS rates Valley View Village's staffing level at 5 out of 5 stars, which is much above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 37%, compared to the Iowa average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Valley View Village?
State health inspectors documented 19 deficiencies at Valley View Village during 2023 to 2025. These included: 2 that caused actual resident harm and 17 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Valley View Village?
Valley View Village is owned by a non-profit organization. Non-profit facilities reinvest revenue into operations rather than distributing to shareholders. The facility is operated by CASSIA, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 79 certified beds and approximately 71 residents (about 90% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in DES MOINES, Iowa.
How Does Valley View Village Compare to Other Iowa Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Iowa, Valley View Village's overall rating (3 stars) is below the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (37%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Valley View Village?
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 Valley View Village Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, Valley View Village 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 Valley View Village Stick Around?
Valley View Village has a staff turnover rate of 37%, 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 Valley View Village Ever Fined?
Valley View Village has been fined $18,860 across 2 penalty actions. This is below the Iowa average of $33,267. 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 Valley View Village on Any Federal Watch List?
Valley View Village 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.