Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →
Part of chain: CARE INITIATIVES (43 facilities, chain avg rating 2.9★)
1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Dec 3, 2025
6
Serious findings on record
most recent Dec 3, 2025
$216,061
Fines, last 3 years
4.21
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and quality measures from resident assessments and claims.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Dec 3, 2025 · F-0686 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving.
Why it matters: Bedsores are painful, can become deeply infected, and in serious cases can be life-threatening.
Severity (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Dec 23, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Dec 3, 2025 · F-0684 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Why it matters: Care that strays from doctor's orders or ignores the resident's wishes can lead to declining health and avoidable harm.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Dec 23, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Dec 3, 2025 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Dec 23, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving.
Why it matters: Bedsores are painful, can become deeply infected, and in serious cases can be life-threatening.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Dec 10, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Sep 4, 2024 · F-0658 · triggered by a complaint
The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Why it matters: Care that falls below professional standards can directly harm a resident's health and recovery.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Sep 16, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 9, 2024 · F-0684 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Why it matters: Care that strays from doctor's orders or ignores the resident's wishes can lead to declining health and avoidable harm.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Jun 4, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 28 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated
The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · from a complaintF-0686
G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaintF-0684
G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaintF-0689
View all 28 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.
Date
Severity
What the facility was cited for
Dec 3, 2025
▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated
The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · from a complaint · F-0686
Dec 3, 2025
▲ G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684
Dec 3, 2025
▲ G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Dec 3, 2025
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584
Dec 3, 2025
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · from a complaint · F-0725
Dec 3, 2025
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880
Dec 3, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · from a complaint · F-0550
Dec 3, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · from a complaint · F-0552
Dec 3, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · from a complaint · F-0677
Dec 3, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required. · F-0730
Dec 3, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761
Dec 3, 2025
C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day. · F-0732
Dec 3, 2025
C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them. · F-0865
Nov 21, 2024
▲ G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · F-0686
Nov 21, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · F-0725
Nov 21, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812
Nov 21, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not designate a qualified infection preventionist — a trained person responsible for running the infection prevention and control program. · F-0882
Nov 21, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal. · F-0623
Sep 4, 2024
▲ G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · from a complaint · F-0658
Sep 4, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not treat residents with respect and dignity, or did not let them keep and use their own personal belongings. · from a complaint · F-0557
May 9, 2024
▲ G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684
Feb 1, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584
Feb 1, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · F-0677
Feb 1, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · F-0690
Nov 8, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · from a complaint · F-0580
Nov 8, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684
Nov 8, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · from a complaint · F-0686
Nov 8, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (5 → 13).
Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations:
4
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2024
All citations:
11
Serious citations (G–L):
3
2025
All citations:
13
Serious citations (G–L):
3
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Year
Citations
Serious (G–L)
Worst severity that year
2023
4
0
D
2024
11
3
G ▲
2025
13
3
J ▲
Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.
Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.
Date
Type
Amount / length
Dec 3, 2025
Fine
$184,438
Nov 21, 2024
Fine
$19,877
Sep 4, 2024
Fine
$11,746
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityIowa averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility:
4.21
Iowa average:
4.37
U.S. average:
3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility:
0.93
Iowa average:
0.85
U.S. average:
0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility:
3.75
Iowa average:
3.86
U.S. average:
3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Measure
This facility
Iowa avg
U.S. avg
Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
4.21
4.37
3.95
bottom 49% in Iowa; top 32% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours
0.93
0.85
0.69
top 33% in Iowa; top 19% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing
3.75
3.86
3.50
bottom 49% in Iowa; top 31% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)
0.63
0.51
0.48
top 22% in Iowa; top 20% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)
62.7
44.0
45.8
bottom 9% in Iowa; bottom 13% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)
77.8
42.1
42.9
bottom 10% in Iowa; bottom 7% in the U.S.
Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 3.67, RN 0.81, weekend 3.27.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.67 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
Quality measures: assessments & claims
Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Crestview Specialty Care. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
Calculate a stay from a quote you receive
Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.
Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.
Before you compare prices
Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.
Individual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNF
NOT APPLICABLE
08/11/2025
Bowen, Lane
Individual
Corporate Director
NOT APPLICABLE
01/01/2021
Branscomb, Tyson
Individual
Operational/Managerial Control
NOT APPLICABLE
01/03/2025
Branscomb, Tyson
Individual
ADP of the SNF
NOT APPLICABLE
04/10/2025
Carothers, Mary Jane
Individual
Corporate Director
NOT APPLICABLE
01/01/2023
Childs, Kevin
Individual
Corporate Director
NOT APPLICABLE
04/01/2023
Computershare Corporate Trust Company, Na
Organization
5% or Greater Mortgage Interest
NOT APPLICABLE
02/01/2025
Computershare Corporate Trust Company, Na
Organization
ADP of the SNF
NOT APPLICABLE
04/10/2025
Corless, Peter
Individual
Corporate Director
NOT APPLICABLE
01/01/2025
Dixon, David
Individual
Corporate Officer
NOT APPLICABLE
06/01/2016
Drake, Emily
Individual
Corporate Officer
NOT APPLICABLE
01/04/2023
Eberly, Scott
Individual
Operational/Managerial Control
NOT APPLICABLE
01/01/2024
Eberly, Scott
Individual
ADP of the SNF
NOT APPLICABLE
07/28/2025
Gilyard, Tanya
Individual
Corporate Officer
NOT APPLICABLE
05/23/2025
Krein, Keith
Individual
Corporate Director
NOT APPLICABLE
06/29/2022
Kuhn, Jeramy
Individual
Corporate Officer
NOT APPLICABLE
06/25/2008
Showing 20 of 28 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 8 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Care Initiatives — 43 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.
CMS records place this facility in Cedar, IA — 4 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 165287.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).
The Care File
Visit checklist — Crestview Specialty Care
451 West Orange Street, West Branch, IA 52358 · (319) 333-7182
Health inspection rating 1/5 · CMS overall 1/5· Fines (3y): $216,061
Most serious findings on record:
▲ Dec 3, 2025 (F-0686, Immediate jeopardy, isolated): The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving.
▲ Dec 3, 2025 (F-0684, Actual harm, isolated): The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
▲ Dec 3, 2025 (F-0689, Actual harm, isolated): The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Questions for the administrator:
☐ "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
☐ "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
☐ "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
☐ "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
☐ "Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
☐ "What is your nurse and aide staffing ratio on each shift, including nights and weekends?"
☐ "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
☐ "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
☐ "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Iowa midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
☐ "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
☐ "CMS reports 63% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
☐ "The ownership record on file lists 28 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
☐ "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
While you're there, notice:
☐ Smell and cleanliness in hallways, not just the lobby
☐ How staff speak to residents; call lights answered promptly
☐ Residents up, dressed, and engaged (visit mealtimes and a weekend if you can)
Data: CMS Provider Data Catalog, version 2026-08-01 · CCN 165287 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)