Westbrook Acres
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Westbrook Acres in Gladbrook, Iowa, has a Trust Grade of C+, which indicates a slightly above-average level of care. It ranks #243 out of 392 facilities in the state, placing it in the bottom half, and is ranked #3 out of 4 in Tama County, meaning only one local option is better. The facility's performance is worsening, with issues increasing from 3 in 2024 to 6 in 2025. Staffing is rated average with a 3/5 star rating and a 44% turnover rate, which is acceptable as it aligns with the state average, but it has concerning RN coverage, being lower than 86% of Iowa facilities. While Westbrook Acres has not incurred any fines, indicating no significant compliance problems, there have been serious concerns regarding resident safety. For instance, there was an incident where a resident with a history of aggression was not properly monitored, leading to physical abuse of other residents. Additionally, the facility failed to provide RN coverage for eight consecutive hours on several occasions, which is against federal regulations. Overall, while there are some strengths, such as no fines, the increasing number of issues and specific safety concerns should be carefully considered by families researching this nursing home.
- Trust Score
- C+
- In Iowa
- #243/392
- Safety Record
- Moderate
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 44% turnover. Near Iowa's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Iowa facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 25 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Iowa. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 14 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
-
Staff turnover below average (44%)
4 points below Iowa average of 48%
Facility shows strength in fire safety.
The Bad
Near Iowa average (3.1)
Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities
Near Iowa avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
The Ugly 14 deficiencies on record
Mar 2025
6 deficiencies
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 review of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) Staffing Data Report for the quarter of July 1, 2024 - September 30, 2024, facility staffing reports,...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0883
(Tag F0883)
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 follow the Center for Disease Control...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0727
(Tag F0727)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on time card review, schedule review, and staff interview, the facility failed to provide a Registered Nurse (RN) in the facility for eight (8) consecutive hours per day as required by the Feder...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Grievances
(Tag F0585)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on document review, policy review, and staff interview, the facility failed to utilize a grievance form to address missing...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Resident #46 MDS dated [DATE] showed a BIMS score of 3 out of 15 indicating severe cognitive loss. The MDS listed diagnoses o...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, Long-Term Care (LTC) Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) 3.0 User's Manual, Center for Disease...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2024
3 deficiencies
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** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to follow a physician's order for 1 of 1 residents rev...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0727
(Tag F0727)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide 8 consecutive hours of Registered Nurse (RN) coverage daily (in a 24 hour period). The facility reported a census of 51 residents.
...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0625
(Tag F0625)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to provide the bed hold policy for 1 of 2 residents reviewed (Resident #39). On 12/8/23 Resident #39 was sent to the hospital for seizures. ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Sept 2023
2 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
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, resident and staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to implement...
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 F0602
(Tag F0602)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on clinical record review, observation, staff interviews, Pharmacist interview, facility investigation review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 3 resident's reviewe...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 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
Based on clinical record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to update an individual Care Plan for 1 of 8 residents reviewed (Residents #7). The facility reported a census of 47 residents...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0678
(Tag F0678)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on facility record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure staff trained in Cardiopulmonary Resuscitatio...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0638
(Tag F0638)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on clinical record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to complete Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessments in a timely manner using the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) as ...
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
- • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Iowa facilities.
- • 44% 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.
About This Facility
What is Westbrook Acres's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns Westbrook Acres 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 Westbrook Acres Staffed?
CMS rates Westbrook Acres's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 44%, compared to the Iowa average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Westbrook Acres?
State health inspectors documented 14 deficiencies at Westbrook Acres during 2023 to 2025. These included: 1 that caused actual resident harm, 9 with potential for harm, and 4 minor or isolated issues. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Westbrook Acres?
Westbrook Acres is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 54 certified beds and approximately 43 residents (about 80% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in GLADBROOK, Iowa.
How Does Westbrook Acres Compare to Other Iowa Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Iowa, Westbrook Acres's overall rating (3 stars) is below the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (44%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (3 stars) is at the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Westbrook Acres?
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 Westbrook Acres Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, Westbrook Acres 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 Westbrook Acres Stick Around?
Westbrook Acres has a staff turnover rate of 44%, 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 Westbrook Acres Ever Fined?
Westbrook Acres has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.
Is Westbrook Acres on Any Federal Watch List?
Westbrook Acres 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.