Lutheran Retirement Home

701 NINTH STREET NORTH, NORTHWOOD, IA 50459 (641) 324-1712
Non profit - Church related 46 Beds Independent Data: November 2025 3 Immediate Jeopardy citations
Trust Grade
30/100
#203 of 392 in IA
Last Inspection: January 2025

Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.

Overview

Lutheran Retirement Home in Northwood, Iowa has a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the quality of care provided. Ranking #203 out of 392 nursing homes in Iowa places it in the bottom half, while being #1 of 2 in Worth County suggests it is the best local option, but still far from ideal. The facility's performance trend is stable, with the same number of issues reported in both 2024 and 2025. Staffing is a strong point, rated 5 out of 5 stars with a low turnover rate of 30%, well below the state average, which means staff are experienced and familiar with residents. However, the facility has concerning fines totaling $24,922, indicating compliance issues that are higher than 81% of Iowa facilities. Specific incidents reported by inspectors are alarming. There were failures to provide an environment free from sexual abuse, including a situation where one resident inappropriately touched another multiple times, and staff were unaware until it escalated. Additionally, the facility did not report allegations of abuse, which led to a critical situation where immediate action was required. While staffing is a strength, the serious deficiencies and critical incidents raise significant concerns about resident safety and care quality.

Trust Score
F
30/100
In Iowa
#203/392
Bottom 49%
Safety Record
High Risk
Review needed
Inspections
Holding Steady
4 → 4 violations
Staff Stability
✓ Good
30% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 18 points below Iowa's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
Penalties
○ Average
$24,922 in fines. Higher than 68% of Iowa facilities. Some compliance issues.
Skilled Nurses
✓ Good
Each resident gets 52 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Iowa. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
Violations
○ Average
10 deficiencies on record. Average for a facility this size. Mostly minor or procedural issues.
★★★☆☆
3.0
Overall Rating
★★★★★
5.0
Staff Levels
★★★★☆
4.0
Care Quality
★★☆☆☆
2.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2024: 4 issues
2025: 4 issues

The Good

  • 5-Star Staffing Rating · Excellent nurse staffing levels
  • 4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
  • Low Staff Turnover (30%) · Staff stability means consistent care
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record
  • Staff turnover is low (30%)

    18 points below Iowa average of 48%

Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, staff retention, fire safety.

The Bad

3-Star Overall Rating

Near Iowa average (3.1)

Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities

Federal Fines: $24,922

Below median ($33,413)

Minor penalties assessed

The Ugly 10 deficiencies on record

3 life-threatening 1 actual harm
Jan 2025 4 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Grievances (Tag F0585)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on resident interview, staff interviews and grievance policy the facility failed to provide prompt effort to resolve a gri...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on resident interview, staff interviews and grievance policy the facility failed to provide prompt effort to resolve a grievance and failed to complete a grievance form related to missing items for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for missing property (Resident #34). The facility reported a census of 36 residents. Findings include: Resident #34's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating intact cognition. The MDS included diagnoses of debility and cardiorespiratory conditions. On 1/28/25 at 8:50 AM, Resident #34 reported they had a missing black sweatshirt with an emblem that he received from family members prior to his retirement from employment. He added he reported it about three weeks before. He explained he had the same shirt in another color that he showed to the staff so they knew what to look for. He reported he had waited 3 weeks and still didn't have follow up on this from any staff. On 1/29/25 at 10:53 AM Staff G, Laundry, explained the process for missing items if she knew, she would search in other residents' rooms, closets, and drawers during about a week's time frame. Staff G reported if they didn't find the item she would alert Staff C, Social Services, who takes it from there, they probably contacts the family and determines if they need a replacement or some other resolution. On 1/30/25 at 9:30 AM Staff C explained they knew about Resident #34's missing sweat shirt and that he had another one just like it. She added that she didn't have a completed grievance form. Staff C explained they complete the form for items such as wallets, rings, and valuables, but they wouldn't complete the form for items such as a T shirt. On 1/30/25 at 10:50 AM the Administrator stated someone completed a Lost and Found item report that day, dated 1/22/24. The Administrator confirmed no one completed a grievance intake form per the facility policy. The Grievance, Missing Property policy dated 8/30/18 directed, all residents have the right to report property/items that may be missing. If unable to resolve immediately, follow the grievance procedure. 1. Grievances may be presented to any staff who will then report the issue utilizing the grievances form.
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, record review, staff interviews and policy review, the facility failed to follow physician orders to prev...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record review, staff interviews and policy review, the facility failed to follow physician orders to prevent further contractors for 1 of 1 residents reviewed (Resident #19). The facility reported a census of 36 residents. Findings include: Resident #19's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 6, indicating severe cognitive impairment. The MDS included diagnoses of joint disorder, depression, arthritis, and anxiety. A Physician Order for Resident #19 dated 9/26/24 included the following orders: a. Palm grip to right hand at all times when in bed to prevent contractors b. Tubi grip to left hand daily to reduce moisture and prevent injury from her nails digging into her palm. Change on shower days and as needed (PRN). Resident #19's clinical record lacked documentation of notification with the physician on not doing the treatment nor that they voiced pain while providing the treatment order for their hands. The Plan of Care Note dated 1/7/25 at 2:48 PM reflected the facility had a Care Conference with Resident #19's family. They voiced wanting more staff encouragement to remind Resident #19 to move their right hand to minimize the risk of contracture to that hand. Observation on 1/27/25 at 3:00 PM, Resident #19 laid in bed with no palm grip to her right hand and no tubi grip to her left hand. Observation on 1/28/25 at 3:10 PM, Resident #19 laid in bed with no palm grip to her right hand and no tubi grip to her left hand. Observation on 1/29/25 at 2:37 PM Resident #19 laid in bed with no palm grip to her right hand and no tubi grip to her left hand. During an interview on 1/29/25 at 2:44 PM Staff F, Certified Nurses' Aide (CNA), reported the CNAs didn't do anything with Resident #19 hands, only the nurses did. In an interview on 1/29/25 at 2:46 PM Staff E, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), reported the only thing the nurses did for Resident #19's hands was to have a tubi grip to the right hand at all times. During an interview on 1/29/25 at 2:52 PM the Director of Nursing (DON) reported Resident #19's order for her hands got transcribed to the Treatment Administration Record (TAR) wrong and if it is not on there she assumed they didn't do it and not sure why it is documented if she refused. During an interview on 1/29/25 at 2:55 PM Staff D, Registered Nurse (RN), reported the staff tried in the past to put a wash cloth in Resident #19's right hand but she complained of pain so they stopped doing anything for her right hand. Staff D reported she didn't notify the physician at any time about Resident #19's hands. The facility policy Following Physician Orders revised 11/27/24 directed staff to follow the physician orders as ordered.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Dental Services (Tag F0791)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, clinical record review, policy review, resident, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a resi...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, clinical record review, policy review, resident, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident received dental services for 1 of 1 Resident's (Resident #20) reviewed for dental services. The facility reported a census of 36 residents. Findings include: Resident #20's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13, indicating intact cognition. The MDS included a diagnosis of dental caries (cavities). The Interdisciplinary Progress Note dated 2/22/22 at 1:58 PM documented on admission, Resident #20 didn't have any missing or broken teeth. The Care Plan Intervention initiated 5/19/22 directed to refer to professions as needed (PRN), if indicated by Primary Care Physician (PCP), or Psych services. Arrange for appointments with PCP, dental, eye professionals, and podiatrist, per government regulation, family, and at Resident #20's request. Resident #20's Medical Diagnosis included a diagnosis dated 7/29/22 of dental caries, unspecified. On 1/27/25 at 11:40 AM observed Resident #20 had a broken front tooth with the appearance of dental caries on her bottom teeth. During an interview on 1/27/25 at 11:41 AM Resident #20 reported her front tooth continued to chip away, and another piece of her top front tooth came out that morning. Resident #20 explained the front tooth started to chip after it came in contact with a bar during a transfer several months ago. She alerted Staff A, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA). Resident #20 stated they haven't seen a dentist in a very long time, certainly not since she admitted to the nursing facility (2/23/22). Resident #20 stated she would like to see a dentist but, didn't know how to go about that or how to pay. She didn't know of options for dental services. During an interview on 1/29/25 at 12:10 PM Staff A recalled when Resident #20 alerted her of their chipped tooth, she didn't see any breakage. Staff A informed Staff B, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN). During an interview on 1/29/25 at 12:20 PM Staff B recalled when Resident #20 complained of a chipped tooth. They assessed and didn't see signs of chipping or breaking of the tooth. Resident #20 didn't have any further complaints until now. During an interview on 1/29/25 at 12:29 PM Staff C, Social Services, explained Resident #20's insurance as a factor inhibiting their dental services. Staff C added they had difficulty finding a provider. Acknowledged they could have set up transportation available with the state insurance. Staff C reported Resident #20 needed accompanied and they didn't have supportive family. They added having staff accompany residents to outside providers in the past with the Administrator's approval. During an interview on 1/29/25 at 2:20 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) reported Resident #20 lacked family support and felt they wouldn't be willing to pay for dental or assist with transportation. The DON explained in the event of an emergency dental situation, the emergency room could manage Resident #20 until they find a dental provider. The DON added Resident #20's dental services probably consisted of out of town providers only and they lacked family participation. During an interview on 1/29/25 at 4:45 PM the Administrator, explained they would consult with Resident #20's family and look at options for dental services. They didn't know of any dental options investigated for Resident #20. The facility provided a Denture policy and procedure dated 2022 directed, the nurse would assist the resident with both routine and 24 hour emergency dental care. Social Services would assist residents who are eligible and wish to participate to apply for reimbursement of dental services as incurred medical expense under the state plan if applicable.
MINOR (B)

Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact

Deficiency F0625 (Tag F0625)

Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents

**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 a bed hold notice to 2 of 3 r...

Read full inspector narrative →
**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 a bed hold notice to 2 of 3 residents reviewed (Residents #7 and #18). The facility reported a census of 36 residents. Findings include: 1. Resident #7's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating cognitively intact. Resident #7's Clinical Census reflected a discharge to the hospital on 5/28/24. They returned to the facility on 5/31/24. The clinical records lacked documentation of a bed hold notification provided to Resident #7 or Resident #7's Representative when discharged to the hospital on 5/28/24. On 1/28/25 at 2:01 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) reported the facility didn't complete a bed hold for the hospitalization on 5/28/24. The undated Reserve Bed Policy instructed to provide the resident or the resident's representative a Notice of Bed hold Policy upon transfer. 2. Resident #18's MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified a BIMS score of 9, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. Resident #18's Clinical Census indicated they discharged to the hospital on [DATE] and returned to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #18's clinical records lacked documentation that the facility provided a bed hold notification to Resident #18 or Resident #18's Representative when she discharged to the hospital on [DATE]. On 1/28/25 at 2:48 PM, the DON reported the facility didn't complete a bed hold for the hospitalization on 11/19/24.
Aug 2024 4 deficiencies 3 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

Free from Abuse/Neglect (Tag F0600)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, staff interview, policy and procedure review, the facility failed to provide an environment fre...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, staff interview, policy and procedure review, the facility failed to provide an environment free from sexual abuse for residents who didn't have the mental capacity to consent to sexual contact for 1 of 30 residents Resident #1). In addition, the facility failed to prevent a cognitive resident from having sexually aggressive behavior, such as inappropriate touching, grabbing, and fondling for 1 of 30 residents (Resident #2). On three separate occasions reflected Resident #2 fondled and touched Resident #1 underneath her clothes with the staff unaware of the situation. The facility failed to separate the 2 residents after the first and second incidents (4/15/24, and 5/1/24 in the common area). The facility failed to put in interventions in place until 4/15/24. The implemented interventions of continuous 15-minute checks lacked multiple areas of documentation following the 5/1/24 incident, reflecting the staff didn't monitor the residents' location as indicated. In addition, the facility failed to update Interventions on the Care Plan until 4/15/24. As the facility failed to ensure the safety interventions, this resulted in the likelihood of a serious adverse outcome to occur. It can be determined that the reasonable person in their position would have experienced severe psychosocial harm (e.g., embarrassment, humiliation) as a result of the abuse. This resulted in an immediate need for the facility to take steps to ensure the protection for all residents from the risk of abuse. The facility reported a census of 36 residents. On 8/14/24 at 3:15 PM, the Iowa Department of Inspections, Appeals, and Licensing (DIAL) staff contacted the facility staff to notify them the Department staff determined an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) situation existed at the facility. The facility staff removed the immediacy on 8/15/24 after the facility staff completed the following: a. Education on the expected care for residents who have the tendency to show public displays of sexual behavior on 8/14/24 via text and on 8/15/24 at 10:00 AM at the all staff in-person in-service. b. Leadership staff understand the importance of completing an investigation regarding any resident on resident behaviors to include those sexual in nature. c. The staff intervened within 5 minutes after the incidents to ensure the safety of Resident #1. The staff talked with Resident #2 about his inappropriate behaviors. d. Implemented Inappropriate Behavior Protocol (to include sexual in nature behaviors) to aid staff in addressing any inappropriate behaviors. e. The facility updated both Care Plans. f. Resident #1 moved to the locked memory care unit on 5/8/24 g. The facility contacted other facilities for placement of Resident #2. h. Resident #2 discharged to another care facility in on 6/11/24. The facility lowered the Immediate Jeopardy to an E level deficiency prior to the survey exit. Findings include: 1. Resident #1's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 5, indicating severely impaired cognition. Resident #1 required total assistance with toileting hygiene and transfers. Resident #1 didn't walk and used a wheelchair for mobility. The MDS included diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease, and non-Alzheimer's dementia. The Care Plan dated 5/7/24 indicated Resident #1 had a potential for a psychosocial well being problem related to inappropriate touch by another male due to experienced inappropriate touch from another male resident. Interventions included: *15-minute checks initiated for safety. *Family notified of incident. *(5/8/24) moved to locked unit in The locked memory care unit for her safety until perpetrator's behaviors subside and/or discharges to another facility. The family okayed the room change and the facility notified them the room change is short term. *(6/27/24) When conflict arises, remove resident to a calm safe environment and allow to vent/share feelings. The Communication with Family Note on 4/15/24 at 1:49 PM indicated the facility spoke with Resident #1's son about an incident of a male resident touching his mother inappropriately. The staff reported they removed her to a safe area. The facility planned to continue to monitor and provide safe environment for Resident #1. The Self-Report dated 5/1/24 at 12:34 PM, documented an allegation of abuse. A Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) reported to the charge nurse Resident #2 went to Resident #1 in the commons area and put his hand down her shirt. The CNA responded quickly and when they told him to keep his hands to himself, Resident #2 responded, no. The CNA redirected Resident #2 away from Resident #1 to the dining area. The facility started 15-minute checks for 24-hours and updated the Care Plan. The facility indicated the corrective action as 15 minutes checks indefinitely for the time being. Resident #2 added to the provider rounds on 5/7/24 and 5/9/24. The facility educated the staff to keep the residents apart. The Advanced Registered Nurse Practitioner returned the facility's notification fax with the response for the facility to supervise Resident #2 at all times around female residents. The Social Services Note on 5/1/24 at 4:55 PM documented a discussion with Resident #1 that afternoon regarding the report of another male resident reaching down her shirt and touching her inappropriately. The staff reported they separated the residents immediately. The facility didn't observe any immediate changes in mood, anxiety, and affect (emotions). When inquired about Resident #1's feelings, she replied she had so much to do and expressed concern that she couldn't get all the work done. When asked if she specifically felt safe, Resident #1 responded she felt safe as she didn't worry about getting hurt, because she had just so much to do as it's a big event. The Social Services Note dated 5/1/24 at 5:05 PM indicated the facility called Resident #1's son regarding another male resident reached down his mother's shirt. The caller explained that the staff immediately separated the residents and started new intervention of frequent visual checks for the male resident. The call reviewed the comments with his mother as well as the staff observations. Informed the facility took the interactions seriously and they would maintain communication with him. The son reported he needed to think and would call with any questions or concerns. The Self-Report dated 5/7/24 at 4:12 PM documented an allegation of abuse. A CNA observed Resident #2 put his hands down Resident #1's shirt while in the lobby, as Resident #1 waited in the lounge/lobby area to go for supper. The CNA redirected Resident #2 to the dining room and made sure Resident #1 was ok and not exposed. The facility indicated the corrective action as the following: a. 5/7/24 Interventions: i. Education provided to Resident #2 on the importance of not touching other residents. ii. Education provided to the staff to keep Resident #2 away from other female residents. iii. 15-minute checks continued indefinitely on Resident #2. iv. Initiated 15-minute checks on Resident #1. v. The provider saw Resident #1 on rounds. vi. Resident #2 saw the provider on 5/7/24 and had an increase of his antidepressant medications. vii. Resident #2 scheduled to see the Psychiatry provider on 5/9/24. b. 5/8/24 Interventions: i. The facility visited with Resident #2's son about his recurrent behaviors and new interventions. ii. The facility discussed referral options with Resident #2's son. iii. Son requested referral sent to previous facility. iv. Facility initiated referral. v. The facility transferred Resident #1 to another area within the facility away from Resident #2, a locked Alzheimer's wing. The Nurse Progress Note dated 5/7/24 at 7:25 PM reflected the facility called and spoke with Resident #1's son, about a male resident inappropriately touched his mother before supper that evening. When he asked the facility, what they planned to do about the male resident, the writer replied at the time they started interventions. The Director of Nursing (DON) planned a call to both families the next day. When the writer spoke with Resident #1 about the incident, she stated she didn't remember anything happening and felt fine. The staff ensured Resident #1 had her call light within reach. The facility placed Resident #1 on 15-minute checks at that time. The Social Services Note on 5/8/24 at 12:11 PM indicated the facility called Resident #1's son to discuss the on-going concern related to a male resident having inappropriate contact with his mother. The facility updated the other resident's family assisted relocating that resident. The facility inquired as to whether family would consider moving his mother to the locked memory care unit for the time being until situation can be resolved. Resident #1's son verbalized agreement with the plan. In addition, the staff initiated 15 minute checks for both residents, and provided staff supervision to his mother when she left her room. The facility's Self-Report submitted 5/8/24 at 3:40 PM reflected an allegation of abuse following a Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) reporting he saw Resident #2 put his hands down Resident #1's shirt while in the lobby of the facility. When the CNA told Resident #2 to keep his hands to himself, Resident #2 replied no. The CNA redirected Resident #2 from Resident #1 and started 15-minute checks for 24 hours. The facility notified the interim Director of Nursing (DON), Administrator, and Social Worker. In addition, they added Resident #2 to the nursing home rounds. The facility notified the staff to keep the 2 residents separated. The Social Services Note dated 5/8/24 at 4:51 PM reflected Resident #1 had a room change. Resident #1 moved to a room in The locked memory care unit for as a short-term safety precaution. Resident #1 continued with a pleasant demeanor, smiles and answered direct questions. When asked if she had anything on her mind, she replied it's beautiful, nice, and sunny. The staff noted her mood, behavior, and affect unchanged/stable. The facility called Resident #1's son to inform him of her new room. He reported he understood the reasons for the move and verbalized he appreciated the facility implemented strategies to maximize his mother's safety. The facility and clinical record lacked documentation of any incident reports/investigations related to the incidents. 2. Resident #2's MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified a BIMS score of 14, indicating intact cognition. The MDS listed Resident #2 as independent with activities of daily living and used a walker for mobility. Resident #2 exhibited behavioral symptoms directed toward others (e.g., hitting, kicking, pushing, scratching, grabbing, abusing others sexually) occurred 1 to 3 days in the lookback period. In addition, the MDS indicated he significantly intruded on the privacy or activity of others. The MDS included diagnoses of coronary artery disease (impaired arteries of the heart), heart failure, hypertension (high blood pressure), non Alzheimer's dementia and chronic kidney disease. The Care Plan initiated 4/16/24, identified Resident #2 as resident of the facility. The Care Plan included the following problems: a. Hand-written documentation: 4/15/24 that he inappropriately touched a female resident. The staff intervened and redirected him. Provided education to Resident #2 on keeping his hands to himself. Educated the staff on resident not being around female residents. Monitor behaviors and added to the provider rounds. The goal reflected he would maintain his current level of function in all activities of daily living (ADLs) safety and thoroughly through the review date. The additional hand-written information indicated he saw the provider on rounds and started an antidepressant. b. Resident #2 attempted to touch female residents inappropriately at times. Additional hand-written documentation indicated 5/7/24: Inappropriate touching of a female resident. Education provided to Resident #2 and the staff. Provide direct supervision when out of his room. Continue 15-minute checks. Antidepressant increased. Added hand-written documentation 5/10/24: Current antidepressant discontinued and new antidepressant started with Depakote per the Psychiatric provider. The Goal reflected he would verbalize the need to control behavior through the review date. Hand-written documentation 5/8/24: Voluntary discharge process underway. Referral initiated to previous facility per son's request. 5/14/24: Previous facility completed their evaluation with a plan to transfer Resident #2 to new location beginning the next week. *(4/16/24) Monitor and document observed behaviors and attempted interventions in behavior log. *(4/16/24) Provide close supervision when Resident #2 is around female residents. *(5/2/24) Provide redirection as needed: Past Interests /Conversation Starters: Resident enjoys reading the newspaper, he used to work with scrap iron junking, and drove truck to the scrap yard. Favorite television shows include Gunsmoke and old westerns. *(5/2/24) Resident to be seen on Dr Rounds 5/7/24. Referral to Psychiatry as recommended. Referral for Talk Therapy as needed (PRN). *(5/2/24) Redirect when wandering, invading other resident's personal space, and monitor/report behaviors to charge nurse. *(5/9/24) Hand-written: Saw Psychiatry provider and recommendations sent to the ARNP. *(5/17/24) Hand-written: Facility visited with Resident #2's son and he didn't know when he would transfer to his previous facility. The family requested referrals sent to additional facilities. The Social Services Note dated 4/9/24 at 3:09 PM recorded a staff member notified the writer Resident #2 held another female resident's hand during the movie and popcorn activity. During this time, he attempted to take Resident #1's hand and place it on his chest underneath his denim bibs. The writer spoke with Resident #1 about inappropriate behavior and reminded him to respect peers and not to touch anyone inappropriately. The writer notified the Charge Nurse of the incident. The facility would continue to monitor for those types of behaviors. The Social Services Note dated 4/10/24 at 12:19 PM reflected the staff saw Resident #2 inappropriately touch another resident. After the staff moved Resident #2 to a safe place, they contacted the social worker and charge nurse. The Nurse Progress Note dated 4/14/24 at 6:31 PM, labeled Late Entry reflected the writer saw Resident #2 outside of another resident's room. The writer redirected him to his room. The Nurse Progress Note dated 4/15/24 at 10:16 AM, indicated the staff found Resident #2 in the commons area visiting with another resident with his hand down the resident's shirt. The staff moved the resident to a safe area. The staff spoke to Resident #2 about his inappropriate behaviors and left a voicemail his son to call back at his convenience. The staff planned to continue watching for behaviors. The Nurse Progress Note dated 4/15/24 at 10:49 AM, recorded the nurse informed Resident #2's son of Resident #2's inappropriate behaviors when he returned the call. Resident #2's son stated he would have a face to face conversation with Resident #2 when he had time the next day. The Nurse Progress Note dated 4/15/24 at 3:35 PM, reflected the CNA's reported Resident #2 outside of another resident's room. He looked at the door, then he attempted to try and open the door. The staff redirected him. The Nurse Progress Note dated 4/15/24 at 8:30 PM indicated Resident #2 didn't have further attempts to enter the woman's room and no behaviors noted. The Nurse Progress Note dated 4/16/24 at 10:50 AM, reflected Resident #2 attempted to enter a female resident's room while she slept. The staff redirected him to the commons area. Resident #2 cooperated with the staff. The Nurse Progress Note dated 4/17/24 at 11:13 AM, documented after Resident #2 finished listening to the music, he left the chapel, and stood in the commons area. Resident #2 walked over to a female resident and started to rub her shoulder. The staff redirected Resident #2 immediately. Resident #2 requested to go to the dining room for lunch. The Social Services Note dated 4/17/24 at 3:27 PM recorded the writer spoke with Resident #2 about not invading the privacy of peers. Resident #2 voiced understanding. In addition, encouraged him to keep his hands to himself and not touch peers inappropriately. The Nurse Progress Note dated 4/18/24 at 1:19 PM reflected Resident #2 didn't make any inappropriate comments, inappropriate touching of any of the staff or residents at the facility, or wondering into any other rooms. The facility planned to monitor him. The Nurse Progress Note dated 5/1/24 at 12:34 PM, reflected a CNA reported to the charge nurse Resident #2 went up to a female resident in the commons area and put his hand down her shirt. The CNA responded quickly and when they told him to keep his hands to himself, Resident #2 responded, no. The CNA redirected Resident #2 away from Resident #1 to the dining area. The facility started 15-minute checks for 24-hours and updated the Care Plan. The Self-Report dated 5/1/24 at 12:34 PM, documented an allegation of abuse. A Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) reported to the charge nurse Resident #2 went to Resident #1 in the commons area and put his hand down her shirt. The CNA responded quickly and when they told him to keep his hands to himself, Resident #2 responded, no. The CNA redirected Resident #2 away from Resident #1 to the dining area. The facility started 15-minute checks for 24-hours and updated the Care Plan. The facility indicated the corrective action as 15 minutes checks indefinitely for the time being. Resident #2 added to the provider rounds on 5/7/24 and 5/9/24. The facility educated the staff to keep the residents apart. The Advanced Registered Nurse Practitioner returned the facility's notification fax with the response for the facility to supervise Resident #2 at all times around female residents. The Nurse Progress Note dated 5/1/24 at 1:47 PM indicated the facility updated the 15- minute checks to continue indefinitely for the time being and added to rounds. The staff educated to keep residents apart. The Nurse Progress Note dated 5/1/24 at 2:28 PM documented the staff reported Resident #2 touched another resident in an inappropriate manner. The staff visited with Resident #2 regarding the concern and explained he couldn't touch another resident in an inappropriate manner. In addition, the staff wrote the message on his whiteboard. Resident #2 voiced he understood he shouldn't touch and respect other residents. Staff initiated 15 minute checks indefinitely. The staff contacted Resident #2's son by telephone to update on the situation, the son voiced agreement with the plan of care. The Nurse Progress Note dated 5/7/24 at 4:12 PM indicated the staff observed Resident #2 putting his hand down another resident's shirt while in the lobby. The CNA redirected him to the dining room. The Self-Report dated 5/7/24 at 4:12 PM documented an allegation of abuse. A CNA observed Resident #2 put his hands down Resident #1's shirt while in the lobby, as Resident #1 waited in the lounge/lobby area to go for supper. After redirecting Resident #2 to the dining room, the CNA checked to see if Resident #1 was ok and not exposed. The facility indicated the corrective action as the following: a. 5/7/24 Interventions: i. Education provided to Resident #2 on the importance of not touching other residents. ii. Education provided to the staff to keep Resident #2 away from other female residents. iii. 15-minute checks continued indefinitely on Resident #2. iv. Initiated 15-minute checks on Resident #1. v. The provider saw Resident #1 on rounds. vi. Resident #2 saw the provider on 5/7/24 and had an increase of his antidepressant medications. vii. Resident #2 scheduled to see the Psychiatry provider on 5/9/24. b. 5/8/24 Interventions: i. With the family's consent, the facility transferred Resident #1 to another area within the facility away from Resident #2, into a locked Alzheimer's wing. The Communication with Family Note dated 5/7/24 at 4:20 PM documented the facility called Resident #2's son to update of him inappropriately touching another resident in the lobby. The Communication with Physician dated 5/7/24 at 4:26 PM labeled Late Entry reflected the CNA reported to the nurse that he observed Resident #2 touching another resident inappropriately in the lobby. The situation is recurrent behaviors of the same nature with these two residents. The CNA redirected Resident #2 to the dining room for the evening meal and educated him on the importance of not touching other residents. The facility placed both residents on 15-minute checks by staff again. The facility educated the staff to keep the two residents separated. The Nurse Progress Note dated 5/8/24 at 12:21 PM reflected a follow-up regarding the report of another incident of Resident #2 inappropriately touching another resident. Visited with Resident #2 who denied recollection of the incident from the day before. The author reiterated to Resident #2 that behavior is not acceptable. The facility called Resident #2's son and explained the facility couldn't tolerate Resident #2's behavior. The author informed him the facility had a goal to keep all residents safe. For that reason, they recommended he review relocating his father for his benefit as well as the benefit for the other resident. The 15 Minutes Resident Checks Form lacked documentation on the following dates and times of Resident #2's whereabouts: *5/1/24 from 8:30 PM 10:00 PM *5/2/24 from 7:00 AM 8:00 AM and 2:30 PM 3:30 PM *5/3/24 from 2:30 PM 10:00 PM *5/6/24 from 2:00 PM 10:00 PM *5/10/24 from 6:30 AM 10:00 PM Interview on 8/13/24 at 1:50 PM, Staff A, Social Worker/admission Coordinator, said Resident #2 and Resident #1 knew each other from being neighbors in the community. They sat by each other at activities and in the dining room. They held hands and Resident #2 would rub Resident #1 shoulders. Staff A described the interactions as friendly gestures, then it escalated to inappropriate touching/behaviors with Resident #2. Staff A verified the incident on 4/9/24 as the same incident as 4/10/24. Staff A said after the first incident she didn't think anyone directed to watch Resident #2 and Resident #1. In addition, she didn't believe they put any interventions or instructions in place to prevent further incidents. Staff A said to her knowledge no other incidents happened to any other residents, only with Resident #1. Staff A said she didn't report the 4/9/24 incident to anyone due to it being a friendly gesture between two old friends. Now when she looked back at it, she should have separated them right away, and added interventions to the Care Plan. Interview on 8/13/24 at 3:20 PM Staff B, Activity Director, said the incident on 4/9/24 happened in the chapel, during a movie Resident #2 and Resident #1 held hands. Then nonchalantly Resident #2 took Resident #1 hand and put it inside of Resident #2 bib overalls. She went to Resident #2 and told him that it was not appropriate for him to place Resident #1's hand inside of his bibs. Staff B, took Resident #1's hand out from under his bibs. Staff B said she didn't remember if anyone told the Administrator or Director of Nursing (DON) about the incident. Staff B, said she now knew any allegation of abuse needs reported right away. She verified the facility didn't report the incident to the DIAL and/or update the Care Plan. Interview on 8/13/24 at 3:50 PM, Staff C, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), said she didn't know of the incident on 4/9/24. Staff C said after the 4/15/24 incident, Staff D, Registered Nurse (RN), and Staff A told the staff to make sure and keep a closer eye on Resident #2 and Resident #1. In addition, make sure Resident #2 is nowhere near Resident #1. Staff C, said the 5/1/24 incident they started a directive to do 15-minute checks on Resident #2 and Resident #1. Staff C described the 5/7/24 incident as Resident #2 came out of the chapel and Resident #1 sat in the rock n go chair facing towards the television on the south wall. Resident #2 walked up to Resident #1 and put his hands down her shirt. The CNA, said he had his back towards Resident #1 talking with another staff member. When he turned around Resident #2 had his hand down her shirt. They went over right away, removed Resident #2 from the area, and told Resident #2 that was very inappropriate. Interview on 8/13/24 at 4:00 PM, Staff D, RN, said she spoke to Resident #2 about the incidents on 4/9/24 and 4/10/24. Staff D explained to Resident #2 the facility didn't allow inappropriate touching. They just told the staff to keep an eye on both residents when out of their rooms. Staff D confirmed she didn't put anything on the Care Plan about the incident. Interview on 8/14/24 at 9:30 AM, Staff E, RN, said that he didn't know about the 4/9/24 or 4/10/24 incident. The facility directed the staff on 4/15/24 to just keep Resident #1 and Resident #2 away from each other, they didn't get any other communication to prevent any further incidents from happening. Interview on 8/14/24 at 11:50 AM, Staff F, CNA, said didn't know about the incident between Resident #2 and Resident #1 until after she found Resident #2 with his hand down Resident #1's shirt on 5/1/24. Staff F said Resident #2 stood next to Resident #1 in the common area, with one hand down Resident #1's shirt. Staff F said the facility didn't give any directive on the 4/9/24 or 4/15/24 incident and they didn't have a communication book to look at. After the 5/1/24 incident the facility told them to keep a close eye on Resident #2. If he tried to go to Resident #1, they should redirect and navigate him to another area of the facility. The undated Abuse Prevention/Identification Policies and Procedure defined the purpose as to protect residents from other human beings (staff, visitors, family members or other residents) who may perpetrate verbal, sexual, physical, financial, and mental abuse, corporal punishment or involuntary seclusion. The Policy directed no resident is subjected to abuse through words of deeds of any person, from within or out of the facility. The facility will assure that all residents are free from neglect, mistreatment, and misappropriation of their property. The facility will do all within its control to prevent actions from occurring. That included doing whatever possible to control resident-on-resident altercations from occurring.
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

Report Alleged Abuse (Tag F0609)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, staff interview, and facility policy/procedure the facility failed to report an allegation of a...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, staff interview, and facility policy/procedure the facility failed to report an allegation of abuse to the Department of Inspections, Appeals, and Licensing (DIAL) following the observation of a male resident putting a female resident's hand inside his bib overalls or the continued instances of him putting his hand down the female resident's shirt for 2 of 5 residents reviewed (Residents #1 and #2). The failure to report the incident resulted in an immediate jeopardy situation. See citation F600 for additional information. The facility reported a census of 36 residents. On 8/14/24 at 3:15 PM, the Iowa Department of Inspections, Appeals, and Licensing (DIAL) staff contacted the facility staff to notify them the Department staff determined an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) situation existed at the facility. The facility staff removed the immediacy on 8/15/24 after the facility staff completed the following: a. Education on the expected care for residents who have the tendency to show public displays of sexual behavior, including reporting on 8/14/24 via text and on 8/15/24 at 10:00 AM at the all staff in-person in-service. b. Leadership staff understand the importance of completing an investigation regarding any resident on resident behaviors to include those sexual in nature. c. Implemented Inappropriate Behavior Protocol (to include sexual in nature behaviors) to aid staff in addressing any inappropriate behaviors. The facility lowered the Immediate Jeopardy to an E level deficiency prior to the survey exit. Findings include: 1. Resident #1's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 5, indicating severely impaired cognition. Resident #1 required total assistance with toileting hygiene and transfers. Resident #5 didn't walk and used a wheelchair for mobility. The MDS included diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease, and non-Alzheimer's dementia. Resident #1's clinical record reflected a male resident (Resident #2) continued to make sexual advances to her on the following days: a. 5/1/24 b. 5/7/24 c. 5/8/24 2. Resident #2's MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified a BIMS score of 14, indicating intact cognition. The MDS listed Resident #2 as independent with activities of daily living and used a walker for mobility. Resident #2 exhibited behavioral symptoms directed toward others (e.g., hitting, kicking, pushing, scratching, grabbing, abusing others sexually) occurred 1 to 3 days in the lookback period. In addition, the MDS indicated he significantly intruded on the privacy or activity of others. The MDS included diagnoses of coronary artery disease (impaired arteries of the heart), heart failure, hypertension (high blood pressure), non Alzheimer's dementia and chronic kidney disease. Resident #2's clinical record reflected he continued to touch a resident (Resident #1) with impaired cognition and without the ability to consent on the following days: a. 4/9/24: Resident #2 took Resident #1's hand and placed it inside his bib overalls. b. 4/10/24: Staff observed Resident #2 with his hand down Resident #1's shirt. c. 4/15/24: Staff observed Resident #2 with his hand down Resident #1's shirt. d. 5/1/24: Staff observed Resident #2 with his hand down Resident #1's shirt. e. 5/7/24: Staff observed Resident #2 with his hand down Resident #1's shirt. f. 5/8/24: Staff observed Resident #2 with his hand down Resident #1's shirt. The Self-Report dated 5/1/24 at 12:34 PM, documented an allegation of abuse. A Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) reported to the charge nurse Resident #2 went to Resident #1 in the commons area and put his hand down her shirt. The CNA responded quickly and when they told him to keep his hands to himself, Resident #2 responded, no. The CNA redirected Resident #2 away from Resident #1 to the dining area. The facility started 15-minute checks for 24-hours and updated the Care Plan. The facility indicated the corrective action as 15 minutes checks indefinitely for the time being. Resident #2 added to the provider rounds on 5/7/24 and 5/9/24. The facility educated the staff to keep the residents apart. The Advanced Registered Nurse Practitioner returned the facility's notification fax with the response for the facility to supervise Resident #2 at all times around female residents. The Self-Report dated 5/7/24 at 4:12 PM documented an allegation of abuse. A CNA observed Resident #2 put his hands down Resident #1's shirt while in the lobby, as Resident #1 waited in the lounge/lobby area to go for supper. The CNA redirected Resident #2 to the dining room and made sure Resident #1 was ok and not exposed. The facility indicated the corrective action as the following: a. 5/7/24 Interventions: i. Education provided to Resident #2 on the importance of not touching other residents. ii. Education provided to the staff to keep Resident #2 away from other female residents. iii. 15-minute checks continued indefinitely on Resident #2. iv. Initiated 15-minute checks on Resident #1. v. The provider saw Resident #1 on rounds. vi. Resident #2 saw the provider on 5/7/24 and had an increase of his antidepressant medications. vii. Resident #2 scheduled to see the Psychiatry provider on 5/9/24. b. 5/8/24 Interventions: i. The facility visited with Resident #2's son about his recurrent behaviors and new interventions. ii. The facility discussed referral options with Resident #2's son. iii. Son requested referral sent to previous facility. iv. Facility initiated referral. v. The facility transferred Resident #1 to another area within the facility away from Resident #2, a locked Alzheimer's wing. The facility, Resident #1, and Resident #2's clinical records lacked documentation of the facility reporting any incidents to the DIAL until 5/1/24 and then not again until 5/7/24. This reflected incidents not reported for the 4/9/24, 4/10/24, or the 4/15/24. Interview on 8/13/24 at 1:50 PM, Staff A, Social Worker/admission Coordinator, said Resident #2 and Resident #1 knew each other from being neighbors in the community. They sat by each other at activities and in the dining room. They held hands and Resident #2 would rub Resident #1 shoulders. Staff A described the interactions as friendly gestures, then it escalated to inappropriate touching/behaviors with Resident #2. Staff A verified the incident on 4/9/24 as the same incident as 4/10/24. Staff A said she didn't report the 4/9/24 incident to anyone due to it being a friendly gesture between two old friends. Now when she looked back at it, she should have separated them right away, and added interventions to the Care Plan. Interview on 8/13/24 at 3:20 PM Staff B, Activity Director, said the incident on 4/9/24 happened in the chapel, during a movie Resident #2 and Resident #1 held hands. Then nonchalantly Resident #2 took Resident #1's hand and put it inside of his bib overalls. She went to Resident #2 and told him that it was not appropriate for him to place Resident #1's hand inside of his bibs. Staff B, took Resident #1's hand out from under his bibs. Staff B said she didn't remember if anyone told the Administrator or Director of Nursing (DON) about the incident. Staff B, said she now knew any allegation of abuse needs reported right away. She verified the facility didn't report the incident to the DIAL and/or update the Care Plan. Interview on 8/13/24 at 4:00 PM, Staff D, RN, said she spoke to Resident #2 about the incidents on 4/9/24 and 4/10/24. Staff D explained to Resident #2 the facility didn't allow inappropriate touching. Staff D said she didn't do an investigation on the incidents and/or didn't report it to DIAL. She added the 4/15/24 incident didn't get report to the DIAL either. Interview on 8/13/24 at 4:45 PM, the Administrator said they expected the staff to start an investigation into any allegation of abuse. He verified no one told him of the 4/9/24, 4/10/24, and 4/15/24 incidents. The Administrator said the staff knew the policy to notify DIAL within a certain time frame, to start/initiate, and investigate. The facility went over the information during in-services, the new staff orientation policy, and procedures. The Administrator confirmed they expected the staff to follow the facility policy/procedures for reporting/investigating allegations. Interview on 8/14/24 at 11:50 AM, Staff F, CNA, said didn't know about the incident between Resident #2 and Resident #1 until after she found Resident #2 with his hand down Resident #1's shirt on 5/1/24. Staff F said Resident #2 stood next to Resident #1 in the common area, with one hand down Resident #1's shirt. Staff F said the facility didn't give any directive on the 4/9/24 or 4/15/24 incident and they didn't have a communication book to look at. After the 5/1/24 incident the facility told them to keep a close eye on Resident #2. If he tried to go to Resident #1, they should redirect and navigate him to another area of the facility. Staff F explained if they had an allegation of abuse, they are told to tell upper management. They will start an investigation, conduct interview, and notify the DIAL. The undated Abuse Prevention/Identification Policies and Procedure directed to report abuse allegations per Federal and State law. The facility will ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse are reported immediately, but no later than 2 hours after the allegation is made, if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury, or no later than 24 hours if the event that caused the allegation didn't involve abuse and didn't result in serious bodily injury. The staff must immediately report within 2 hours to the DON or Administrator or their designee any violations concerning mistreatment, neglect or abuse, including injuries of unknown source or misappropriation of resident property, no later than 24 hours if the events that cause the allegation didn't involve abuse or didn't result in serious bodily injury. The undated Abuse Investigation Policy instructed to assure all residents are protected from any form of abuse. To assure anyone committing any form of abuse is identified and removed from further opportunity to inflict. Any staff, who observes or are aware of an abuse situation occurring from staff and /or families, will report it immediately to the Administrator of Director of Nursing. In the event that the Administrator of Director of Nursing are not available staff should report any allegation to the Supervisor of duty. *When a report of suspected or alleged abuse is made to a supervisor, the person to whom it is reported will immediately begin the investigation process. *Staff will immediately report within 2 hours to the DON or Administrator or their designee any violations concerning mistreatment, neglect or abuse, including injuries or unknown source, or misappropriation of resident property or not later than 24 hours if the events that cause the allegation do not involve abuse or do not result in serious bodily injury.
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

Investigate Abuse (Tag F0610)

Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, policy review, staff interview, the facility staff failed to thoroughly investigate all allegat...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, policy review, staff interview, the facility staff failed to thoroughly investigate all allegations of abuse, and separate a possible abuser from other residents. The facility lacked documentation of thorough investigations. In addition, the facility failed to conduct resident and staff interviews to determine the extent of the allegations, and if other residents were involved. The facility failed to separate the two residents until the incident occurred a third time and the family had to request something be done. After the facility added an intervention to monitor first Resident #2, then Resident #1's location, the facility failed to document as indicated. The facility's failure to investigate and separate the alleged abuser from the alleged victim resulted in an immediate jeopardy situation. It can be determined that the reasonable person in their position would have experienced severe psychosocial harm (e.g., embarrassment, humiliation) as a result of the abuse. See citations F600 and F609 for additional information. The facility reported a census of 36 residents. On 8/14/24 at 3:15 PM, the Iowa Department of Inspections, Appeals, and Licensing (DIAL) staff contacted the facility staff to notify them the Department staff determined an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) situation existed at the facility. The facility staff removed the immediacy on 8/15/24 after the facility staff completed the following: a. Education on the expected care for residents who have the tendency to show public displays of sexual behavior on 8/14/24 via text and on 8/15/24 at 10:00 AM at the all staff in-person in-service. b. Leadership staff understand the importance of completing an investigation regarding any resident on resident behaviors to include those sexual in nature. c. Implemented Inappropriate Behavior Protocol (to include sexual in nature behaviors) to aid staff in addressing any inappropriate behaviors. d. Resident #1 moved to the locked memory care unit on 5/8/24 e. The facility contacted other facilities for placement of Resident #2. f. Resident #2 discharged to another care facility in on 6/11/24. The facility lowered the Immediate Jeopardy to an E level deficiency prior to the survey exit. Findings include: 1. Resident #1's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 5, indicating severely impaired cognition. Resident #1 required total assistance with toileting hygiene and transfers. Resident #1 didn't walk and used a wheelchair for mobility. The MDS included diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease, and non-Alzheimer's dementia. The Communication with Family/NOK/POA Note dated 4/15/24 at 1:49 PM reflected the facility contacted Resident #1's son to notify him a male resident touched his mother inappropriately. The facility told the son they moved Resident #1 to a safe area. The Care Plan dated 5/7/24 indicated Resident #1 had a potential for a psychosocial well being problem related to inappropriate touch by another male due to experienced inappropriate touch from another male resident. Interventions included: *15-minute checks initiated for safety. *Family notified of incident. *(5/8/24) moved to locked memory care unit for her safety until perpetrator's behaviors subside and/or discharges to another facility. The family okayed the room change and the facility notified them the room change is short term. *(6/27/24) When conflict arises, remove resident to a calm safe environment and allow to vent/share feelings. Resident #1's clinical record lacked documentation to keep the male resident away from her. The facility and clinical record lacked documentation of any incident reports/investigations related to the incidents. 2. Resident #2's MDS assessment dated [DATE] identified a BIMS score of 14, indicating intact cognition. The MDS listed Resident #2 as independent with activities of daily living and used a walker for mobility. Resident #2 exhibited behavioral symptoms directed toward others (e.g., hitting, kicking, pushing, scratching, grabbing, abusing others sexually) occurred 1 to 3 days in the lookback period. In addition, the MDS indicated he significantly intruded on the privacy or activity of others. The MDS included diagnoses of coronary artery disease (impaired arteries of the heart), heart failure, hypertension (high blood pressure), non Alzheimer's dementia and chronic kidney disease. The Care Plan initiated 4/16/24, identified Resident #2 as resident of the facility. The Care Plan included the following problems: a. Hand-written documentation: 4/15/24 that he inappropriately touched a female resident. The staff intervened and redirected him. Provided education to Resident #2 on keeping his hands to himself. Educated the staff on resident not being around female residents. Monitor behaviors and added to the provider rounds. The goal reflected he would maintain his current level of function in all activities of daily living (ADLs) safety and thoroughly through the review date. The additional hand-written information indicated he saw the provider on rounds and started an antidepressant. b. Resident #2 attempted to touch female residents inappropriately at times. Additional hand-written documentation indicated 5/7/24: Inappropriate touching of a female resident. Education provided to Resident #2 and the staff. Provide direct supervision when out of his room. Continue 15-minute checks. Antidepressant increased. Added hand-written documentation 5/10/24: Current antidepressant discontinued and new antidepressant started with Depakote per the Psychiatric provider. The Goal reflected he would verbalize the need to control behavior through the review date. Hand-written documentation 5/8/24: Voluntary discharge process underway. Referral initiated to previous facility per son's request. 5/14/24: Previous facility completed their evaluation with a plan to transfer Resident #2 to new location beginning the next week. *(4/16/24) Monitor and document observed behaviors and attempted interventions in behavior log. *(4/16/24) Provide close supervision when Resident #2 is around female residents. *(5/2/24) Provide redirection as needed: Past Interests /Conversation Starters: Resident enjoys reading the newspaper, he used to work with scrap iron junking, and drove truck to the scrap yard. Favorite television shows include Gunsmoke and old westerns. *(5/2/24) Resident to be seen on Dr Rounds 5/7/24. Referral to Psychiatry as recommended. Referral for Talk Therapy as needed (PRN). *(5/2/24) Redirect when wandering, invading other resident's personal space, and monitor/report behaviors to charge nurse. *(5/9/24) Hand-written: Saw Psychiatry provider and recommendations sent to the ARNP. *(5/17/24) Hand-written: Facility visited with Resident #2's son and he didn't know when he would transfer to his previous facility. The family requested referrals sent to additional facilities. Resident #2's son to update of him inappropriately touching another resident in the lobby. Resident #2's clinical record lacked direction to keep him separated from Resident #1 on the typed information of the Care Plan last revised 4/17/24. The facility added handwritten information for 4/15/24 on that same Care Plan. The 15 Minutes Resident Checks Form lacked documentation on the following dates and times of Resident #2's whereabouts: *5/1/24 from 8:30 PM 10:00 PM *5/2/24 from 7:00 AM 8:00 AM and 2:30 PM 3:30 PM *5/3/24 from 2:30 PM 10:00 PM *5/6/24 from 2:00 PM 10:00 PM *5/10/24 from 6:30 AM 10:00 PM The facility failed to keep Resident #1 safe from Resident #2 by failing to ensure he stayed away from Resident #1 following the first incident on 4/9/24 or the second incident on 4/15/24. Resident #2 continued to have access to Resident #1 before staff intervened on the following days: a. 4/9/24: Resident #2 took Resident #1's hand and placed it on his chest inside his bib overalls during an activity. b. 4/15/24: Resident #2 reached down Resident #1's shirt in commons area c. 4/17/24: After leaving the chapel, Resident #2 walked over to Resident #1 and started to rub her shoulder. d. 5/1/24: Resident #2 put his hand down Resident #1's shirt in the commons area. e. 5/7/24: Resident #2 observed putting his hand down Resident #1's shirt in the lobby. Interview on 8/13/24 at 1:50 PM, Staff A, Social Worker/admission Coordinator, said after the first incident she didn't think anyone directed the staff to watch Resident #2 and Resident #1. In addition, she didn't believe they put any interventions or instructions in place to prevent further incidents. Staff A said to her knowledge no other incidents happened to any other residents, only with Resident #1. Staff A said she didn't report the 4/9/24 incident to anyone due to it being a friendly gesture between two old friends. Now when she looked back at it, she should have separated them right away, and added interventions to the Care Plan. Interview on 8/13/24 at 3:50 PM, Staff C, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), said she didn't know of the incident on 4/9/24. Staff C said after the 4/15/24 incident Staff D, Registered Nurse (RN), and Staff A told the staff to make sure and keep a closer eye on Resident #2 and Resident #1. In addition, make sure Resident #2 is nowhere near Resident #1. Staff C, said the 5/1/24 incident they started a directive to do 15-minute checks on Resident #2 and Resident #1. Staff C described the 5/7/24 incident as Resident #2 came out of the chapel and Resident #1 sat in the rock n go chair facing towards the television on the south wall. Resident #2 walked up to Resident #1 and put his hands down her shirt. The CNA, said he had his back towards Resident #1 talking with another staff member. When he turned around Resident #2 had his hand down her shirt. They went over right away, removed Resident #2 from the area, and told Resident #2 that was very inappropriate. Interview on 8/13/24 at 4:00 PM, Staff D, RN, said she spoke to Resident #2 about the incidents on 4/9/24 and 4/10/24. Staff D explained to Resident #2 the facility didn't allow inappropriate touching. Staff D said she didn't do an investigation on the incidents and/or didn't report it to DIAL. They implemented the intervention to redirect Resident #2 away from Resident #1. Staff D stated that she didn't do a thorough investigation on the incident, as she didn't interview staff or other residents. They just told the staff to keep an eye on both residents when out of their rooms. Staff D confirmed she didn't put anything on the Care Plan about the incident. She didn't think the facility had a paper incident/accident report made out. Interview on 8/13/24 at 4:45 PM, the Administrator said they expected the staff to start an investigation into any allegation of abuse. He verified no one told him of the 4/9/24, 4/10/24, and 4/15/24 incidents. The administrator confirmed the facility didn't have, as he couldn't find, a completed thorough investigation with staff or resident interviews in the facility. The facility went over the information during in-services, the new staff orientation policy, and procedures. The Administrator confirmed they expected the staff to follow the facility policy/procedures for reporting/investigating allegations. Interview on 8/14/24 at 9:30 AM, Staff E, RN, said that he didn't know about the 4/9/24 or 4/10/24 incident. The facility directed the staff on 4/15/24 to just keep Resident #1 and Resident #2 away from each other, they didn't get any other communication to prevent any further incidents from happening. Interview on 8/14/24 at 11:50 AM, Staff F, CNA, said didn't know about the incident between Resident #2 and Resident #1 until after she found Resident #2 with his hand down Resident #1's shirt on 5/1/24. Staff F said Resident #2 stood next to Resident #1 in the common area, with one hand down Resident #1's shirt. Staff F said the facility didn't give any directive on the 4/9/24 or 4/15/24 incident and they didn't have a communication book to look at. After the 5/1/24 incident the facility told them to keep a close eye on Resident #2. If he tried to go to Resident #1, they should redirect and navigate him to another area of the facility. Staff F explained if they had an allegation of abuse, they are told to tell upper management. They will start an investigation, conduct interview, and notify the DIAL. The undated Abuse Prevention/Identification Policies and Procedure defined the purpose as to protect residents from other human beings (staff, visitors, family members or other residents) who may perpetrate verbal, sexual, physical, financial, and mental abuse, corporal punishment or involuntary seclusion. The facility will assure that all residents are free from neglect, mistreatment, and misappropriation of their property. The facility will do all within its control to prevent actions from occurring. That included doing whatever possible to control resident-on-resident altercations from occurring. The Procedure instructed the facility to take actions necessary to provide a safe, secure environment that will protect the right of all residents who reside in the facility. The facility will ensure staff, visitor, family members or other residents do not use verbal, mental, sexual, financial or physical abuse, corporal punishment or seclusion toward a resident. The facility supervisors will routinely monitor the facility staff to assure the delivery of resident care and services and to assure the potential for abuse or neglect is minimized.
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, policy and procedure review, and staff interviews the facility failed to recognize a resident a...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, policy and procedure review, and staff interviews the facility failed to recognize a resident as a victim prior to transferring them to a different unit, instead of their alleged abuser for 1 of 5 residents reviewed (Resident #1). It can be determined that the reasonable person in the resident's position would have experienced severe psychosocial harm (e.g., embarrassment, punishment, humiliation, anxiety) as a result of having to move after getting violated by another resident. The facility identified a census of 36 residents. Findings include: Resident #1's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 5, indicating severely impaired cognition. Resident #1 required total assistance with toileting hygiene and transfers. Resident #1 didn't walk and used a wheelchair for mobility. The MDS included diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease, and non-Alzheimer's dementia. The Communication - with Family Note dated 4/15/24 at 1:49 PM indicated the facility discussed the incident with Resident #1's son about a male resident touching her inappropriately. The staff explained they moved Resident #1 to a safe area and addressed all questions, who voiced no concerns. The staff planned to monitor and provide safe environment for Resident #2. The Social Services Note on 5/1/24 at 4:55 PM documented a discussion with Resident #1 that afternoon regarding the report of another male resident reaching down her shirt and touching her inappropriately. The staff reported they separated the residents immediately. The facility didn't observe any immediate changes in mood, anxiety, and affect (emotions). When inquired about Resident #1's feelings, she replied she had so much to do and expressed concern that she couldn't get all the work done. When asked if she specifically felt safe, Resident #1 responded she felt safe as she didn't worry about getting hurt, because she had just so much to do as it's a big event. The Social Services Note dated 5/1/24 at 5:05 PM indicated the facility called Resident #1's son regarding another male resident reached down his mother's shirt. The caller explained that the staff immediately separated the residents and started new intervention of frequent visual checks for the male resident. The call reviewed the comments with his mother as well as the staff observations. Informed the facility took the interactions seriously and they would maintain communication with him. The son reported he needed to think and would call with any questions or concerns. The Self-Report dated 5/7/24 at 4:12 PM documented an allegation of abuse. A CNA observed Resident #2 put his hands down Resident #1's shirt while in the lobby, as Resident #1 waited in the lounge/lobby area to go for supper. After redirecting Resident #2 to the dining room, the CNA checked to see if Resident #1 was ok and not exposed. The facility indicated the corrective action as the following: a. 5/7/24 Interventions: i. Education provided to Resident #2 on the importance of not touching other residents. ii. Education provided to the staff to keep Resident #2 away from other female residents. iii. 15-minute checks continued indefinitely on Resident #2. iv. Initiated 15-minute checks on Resident #1. v. The provider saw Resident #1 on rounds. vi. Resident #2 saw the provider on 5/7/24 and had an increase of his antidepressant medications. vii. Resident #2 scheduled to see the Psychiatry provider on 5/9/24. b. 5/8/24 Interventions: i. With the family's consent, the facility transferred Resident #1 to another area within the facility away from Resident #2, into a locked Alzheimer's wing. The Nurse Progress Note dated 5/7/24 at 7:25 PM reflected the facility called and spoke with Resident #1's son, about a male resident inappropriately touched his mother before supper that evening. When he asked the facility, what they planned to do about the male resident, the writer replied at the time they started interventions. The Director of Nursing (DON) planned a call to both families the next day. When the writer spoke with Resident #1 about the incident, she stated she didn't remember anything happening and felt fine. The staff ensured Resident #1 had her call light within reach. The facility placed Resident #1 on 15-minute checks at that time. The Care Plan dated 5/7/24 indicated Resident #1 had a potential for a psychosocial well being problem related to inappropriate touch by another male due to experienced inappropriate touch from another male resident. Interventions included: *15-minute checks initiated for safety. *Family notified of incident. *(5/8/24) moved to locked unit in The locked memory care unit for her safety until perpetrator's behaviors subside and/or discharges to another facility. The family okayed the room change and the facility notified them the room change is short term. *(6/27/24) When conflict arises, remove resident to a calm safe environment and allow to vent/share feelings. The Social Services Note on 5/8/24 at 12:11 PM indicated the facility called Resident #1's son to discuss the on-going concern related to a male resident having inappropriate contact with his mother. The facility updated the other resident's family assisted relocating that resident. The facility inquired as to whether family would consider moving his mother to the locked memory care unit for the time being until situation can be resolved. Resident #1's son verbalized agreement with the plan. In addition, the staff initiated 15 minute checks for both residents, and provided staff supervision to his mother when she left her room. The facility's Self-Report submitted 5/8/24 at 3:40 PM reflected an allegation of abuse following a Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) reporting he saw Resident #2 put his hands down Resident #1's shirt while in the lobby of the facility. When the CNA told Resident #2 to keep his hands to himself, Resident #2 replied no. The CNA redirected Resident #2 from Resident #1 and started 15-minute checks for 24 hours. The facility notified the interim Director of Nursing (DON), Administrator, and Social Worker. In addition, they added Resident #2 to the nursing home rounds. The facility notified the staff to keep the 2 residents separated. The Social Services Note dated 5/8/24 at 4:51 PM reflected Resident #1 had a room change. Resident #1 moved to a room in The locked memory care unit for as a short-term safety precaution. Resident #1 continued with a pleasant demeanor, smiles and answered direct questions. When asked if she had anything on her mind, she replied it's beautiful, nice, and sunny. The staff noted her mood, behavior, and affect unchanged/stable. The facility called Resident #1's son to inform him of her new room. He reported he understood the reasons for the move and verbalized he appreciated the facility implemented strategies to maximize his mother's safety. On 8/14/24 at 12:30 PM, the facility's DON confirmed they expected the staff, residents, and visitors must always treat all residents with dignity and respect. The undated Resident Rights brochure directed resident's rights included *Being treated with respect and dignity *Being free from abuse *Making independent choices
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

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

Based on clinical record review and staff interviews the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and follow physicians order's which resulted in a fall with injury for 1 of 1 residents reviewe...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on clinical record review and staff interviews the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and follow physicians order's which resulted in a fall with injury for 1 of 1 residents reviewed (Resident #1). The facility reported a census of 33 residents. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident #1 dated 4/27/23 documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10 indicating moderate impaired cognition. The MDS revealed diagnoses of anemia, dementia, hypertension, generalized muscle weakness and chronic kidney disease stage 3. A Care Plan focus area revised 4/26/23 documented Resident #1 to be assist of one with front wheeled walker as of 3/30/23 and to have a motion sensor when in bed or in recliner as of 3/27/23. A document titled Physician's Telephone Orders revealed a signed physician's order dated 3/28/23 for the motion sensor while in bed and recliner for Resident #1. During an interview on 11/20/23 at 10:18 AM, Staff A, Certified Nurse's Assistant (CNA) reported he was in a near by resident's room when he heard the sound of what he thought sounded like someone crashing against the closet door in a room. He voiced the closet doors make a certain sound so he knew it had to be that. He stated once he was finished in the resident's room he then headed down the hallway to make sure the residents were safe. When he went by Resident #1's room he saw her laying on the floor on her back with her head by the closet door and feet out in front of her. The resident's walker was by her bed and he did not see or hear a motion sensor alarm going off. He reported prior to the fall he had seen the resident resting in bed when passing ice water and snacks. During an interview on 11/20/23 at 10:35AM, Staff B, CNA verbalized after lunch on the day of the incident he assisted Resident #1 to the bed. He was unsure of the time but reported the resident's walker and call-light were both in reach. He reported he did not remember to put the motion alarm on when assisting her to bed. During an interview on 11/20/23 at 12:35 PM, Staff C, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) reported she worked as the nurse on the day of the incident. She verbalized she was at the nurse's station getting report and Staff A, CNA came and reported Resident #1 fell. When she entered the room the resident's head was by the bathroom door and her feet facing toward the windows laying on her back without her walker. She reported the floor alarm was not down or on at the time. She reported no visible signs of a fracture but the resident reported pain at 10 out of 10. The Advanced Nurse Practitioner (ARNP) was doing round in the building so she went and got her to further assess. The ARNP gave the order to send to the emergency room for further evaluation. She reported she later received a call from the hospital reporting Resident #1 sustained a right hip fracture from the fall. She then notified the acting DON at the time of the fracture. During an interview on 11/20/23 at 2:16 PM, Staff D, Director of Nursing (DON) reported she expected staff to follow physician's orders and the care plan. She reported the facility does not have a policy on physician's orders.
Dec 2022 1 deficiency
CONCERN (D)

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 observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensu...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure a resident's dignity was respected by removing facial hair timely for 1 (Resident #16) of 8 sampled residents observed for facial hair. Findings included: Review of a facility policy titled, Shaving the Resident, dated 06/2013, specified, This is a daily activity. A review of an admission Record indicated the facility admitted Resident #16 with diagnoses that included vascular dementia, rheumatoid arthritis, and macular degeneration (vision loss). The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], revealed Resident #16 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. The resident required setup help of staff for personal hygiene. A review of Resident #16's Care Plan, initiated 06/07/2021, revealed the resident needed help with activities of daily living (ADLs). Interventions included the resident needed set-up assistance with ADLs and assist as needed. On 12/05/2022 at 11:56 AM, Resident #16 was observed with facial hair. During an interview at this time, Resident #16 indicated they needed to be shaved, and that it bothered them. Resident #16 said they had gotten a shower but did not get shaved. On 12/06/2022 at 9:44 AM, Resident #16 was observed ambulating in the hall with a walker. The facial hair was still present. Resident #16 indicated they had been in therapy. On 12/06/2022 at 12:25 PM, Resident #16 was observed in the dining room eating. Resident #16 remained unshaven. During an interview on 12/07/2022 at 10:11 AM, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #1 indicated residents were shaved when whiskers were seen for male and female residents. CNA #1 indicated residents were shaved at least two times a week. CNA #1 said Resident #16 got a shower on Monday (12/05/2022) and should have been shaved then. During an interview on 12/07/2022 at 10:49 AM, Registered Nurse (RN) #2 indicated Resident #16 should be shaved on shower days. RN #2 indicated Resident #16 should not have to ask to be shaved. RN #2 indicated the CNAs were responsible for shaving. During an interview on 12/07/2022 at 11:20 AM, RN #2 confirmed Resident #16's facial hair was pretty long. During an interview on 12/07/2022 at 1:55 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed she had seen Resident #16's facial hair and meant to get staff to take care of it. The DON indicated the frequency to be shaved was different for everybody. The DON indicated the resident being unshaven was a dignity issue. During an interview on 12/08/2022 at 8:39 AM, the DON indicated her expectation was for facial hair to be shaved if staff saw it while they were getting the residents ready. During an interview on 12/08/2022 at 8:40 AM, the Provisional Administrator indicated her expectation was that residents should be assessed daily for care and to follow the shaving policy.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

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

Strengths
  • • 30% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 18 points below Iowa's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
Concerns
  • • Multiple safety concerns identified: 3 life-threatening violation(s), 1 harm violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
  • • 10 deficiencies on record, including 3 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
  • • $24,922 in fines. Higher than 94% of Iowa facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
  • • Grade F (30/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
Bottom line: This facility has 3 Immediate Jeopardy findings. Serious concerns require careful evaluation.

About This Facility

What is Lutheran Retirement Home's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns Lutheran Retirement Home 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 Lutheran Retirement Home Staffed?

CMS rates Lutheran Retirement Home's staffing level at 5 out of 5 stars, which is much above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 30%, compared to the Iowa average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.

What Have Inspectors Found at Lutheran Retirement Home?

State health inspectors documented 10 deficiencies at Lutheran Retirement Home during 2022 to 2025. These included: 3 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 1 that caused actual resident harm, 5 with potential for harm, and 1 minor or isolated issues. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.

Who Owns and Operates Lutheran Retirement Home?

Lutheran Retirement Home 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 46 certified beds and approximately 34 residents (about 74% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in NORTHWOOD, Iowa.

How Does Lutheran Retirement Home Compare to Other Iowa Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Iowa, Lutheran Retirement Home's overall rating (3 stars) is below the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (30%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Lutheran Retirement Home?

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 Lutheran Retirement Home Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, Lutheran Retirement Home has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 3 Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 3-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 Lutheran Retirement Home Stick Around?

Staff at Lutheran Retirement Home tend to stick around. With a turnover rate of 30%, the facility is 16 percentage points below the Iowa average of 46%. Low turnover is a positive sign. It means caregivers have time to learn each resident's needs, medications, and personal preferences. Consistent staff also notice subtle changes in a resident's condition more quickly. Registered Nurse turnover is also low at 17%, meaning experienced RNs are available to handle complex medical needs.

Was Lutheran Retirement Home Ever Fined?

Lutheran Retirement Home has been fined $24,922 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Iowa average of $33,328. 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 Lutheran Retirement Home on Any Federal Watch List?

Lutheran Retirement Home 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.