Cedar Manor Nursing Home
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Cedar Manor Nursing Home has received a Trust Grade of F, which indicates significant concerns about the quality of care provided. It ranks #175 out of 392 facilities in Iowa, placing it in the top half, and #2 out of 4 in Cedar County, meaning there is only one local option that is better. The facility's trend is stable, with 6 issues reported in both 2023 and 2024. Staffing is a relative strength, with a 4 out of 5-star rating and a turnover rate of 44%, which is on par with the state average. However, the facility has accumulated $44,087 in fines, higher than 86% of Iowa facilities, suggesting ongoing compliance issues. Specific incidents include a serious case where a resident fell while being transferred by a CNA, resulting in three fractured ribs. Additionally, there was a failure to properly document wound assessments and seizure durations for other residents, which raises concerns about the quality of care and oversight. While Cedar Manor has some strengths in staffing, the overall poor Trust Grade and concerning incidents highlight significant weaknesses that families should consider carefully.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Iowa
- #175/392
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Holding Steady
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 44% turnover. Near Iowa's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ⚠ Watch
- $44,087 in fines. Higher than 88% of Iowa facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 46 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Iowa. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 18 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
-
4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (44%)
4 points below Iowa average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Near Iowa average (3.1)
Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities
Near Iowa avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Above median ($33,413)
Moderate penalties - review what triggered them
The Ugly 18 deficiencies on record
Oct 2024
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0582
(Tag F0582)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on clinical record review, staff interview and facility policy review the facility failed to provide the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Incontinence Care
(Tag F0690)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure an indwelling catheter collection bag pla...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2024
4 deficiencies
2 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, resident and staff interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to properly do...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, resident, family and staff interview and review of facility policies, the facility failed t...
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
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on medical record review, facility policy review, resident, family, and staff interview, the facility failed to treat two ...
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 F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, staff interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to update Care Plans for th...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 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
Deficiency F0760
(Tag F0760)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
Based on clinical record review, staff, resident, and Advanced Registered Nurse Practitioner (ARNP) interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to administer the correct medication to ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 2023
5 deficiencies
1 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
Based on clinical record review, observation, staff interviews and facility policy review the facility failed to implement interventions to prevent the development of a pressure ulcer for a resident i...
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
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on clinical record review, observations, resident and staff interviews and facility policy review the facility failed to report one out of one allegation of abuse to the state agency (Resident #...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0637
(Tag F0637)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on clinical record review, observations, staff interviews and facility manual review the facility staff failed to complete a Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment when a resident ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0800
(Tag F0800)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations and staff interview the facility failed to transport leftover food items from the East Kitchenette down the hallway to the Main Kitchen in accordance with professional standards ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, staff interview and Dietary documentation review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safe...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2022
3 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Abuse Prevention Policies
(Tag F0607)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on personnel file review, document review, policy review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 1 new employees selected for review, with a criminal background, received an Iow...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0658
(Tag F0658)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, staff and provider interviews, and facility policy review the facility failed to follow professional sta...
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 F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, clinical record review, policy review and staff interviews the facility failed to ensure lorazepam intensol concentrated liquid (anti-anxiety medication), a level 4 controlled dr...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2022
3 deficiencies
1 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Deficiency F0760
(Tag F0760)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. The 5 Day MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #53 scored 12 out of 15 on a BIMS exam, which indicated the resident ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, clinical record review and staff interviews the facility failed to document and assess 1 out of 1 resident...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to follow proper infection control techniques durin...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "What changes have you made since the serious inspection findings?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • 44% turnover. Below Iowa's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s), 4 harm violation(s), $44,087 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 18 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $44,087 in fines. Higher than 94% of Iowa facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
- • Grade F (28/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Cedar Manor Nursing Home's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns Cedar Manor Nursing 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 Cedar Manor Nursing Home Staffed?
CMS rates Cedar Manor Nursing Home's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above 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 Cedar Manor Nursing Home?
State health inspectors documented 18 deficiencies at Cedar Manor Nursing Home during 2022 to 2024. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 4 that caused actual resident harm, and 13 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates Cedar Manor Nursing Home?
Cedar Manor Nursing 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 54 certified beds and approximately 51 residents (about 94% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in Tipton, Iowa.
How Does Cedar Manor Nursing Home Compare to Other Iowa Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Iowa, Cedar Manor Nursing Home'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 Cedar Manor Nursing 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 Cedar Manor Nursing Home Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, Cedar Manor Nursing Home has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 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 Cedar Manor Nursing Home Stick Around?
Cedar Manor Nursing Home 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 Cedar Manor Nursing Home Ever Fined?
Cedar Manor Nursing Home has been fined $44,087 across 3 penalty actions. The Iowa average is $33,520. 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 Cedar Manor Nursing Home on Any Federal Watch List?
Cedar Manor Nursing 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.