Willow Dale Wellness Village
Battle Creek, Iowa · CCN 165342
14 surveys since 2011, 4 of them producing a finding at harm level or worse.
Data as of , released by CMS on October 8, 2026. Source: CMS Provider Data Catalog.
- Citations on record
- 32
- Surveys
- 14
- Harm or worse
- 4
- Immediate jeopardy
- 0
Findings where a surveyor recorded actual harm to a resident.
Older surveys no longer in CMS’s monthly file or on Care Compare. They are shown here.
The facility
- Certified beds
- 40
- Ownership
- For profit - Corporation
- Chain
- LEGACY HEALTHCARE
- County
- Ida · rural
- Medicare-certified since
- 1997
CMS ratings
- Overall
- 4
- Health inspection
- 4
- Staffing
- 4
- Quality measures
- 3
CMS’s own Five-Star ratings.
Compared with similar facilities
Not shown for this facility: too few citations in window (n=11, floor 20).
Last survey on record
Dec 11, 2025
333 days ago.
Counts surveys with at least one finding. A clean survey leaves no record here, so the real gap may be shorter.
Staffing
| Measure | This facility | Peer median |
|---|---|---|
| Nurse hours per resident day | 3.93 | 3.63 |
| Registered-nurse hours per resident day | 0.49 | — |
| Annual nurse turnover | 33.3% | 44.5% |
As reported by the facility to CMS, beside the peer-group median.
Enforcement
No fines, payment denials or special-focus designation on the current CMS record.
Severity of recent findings
| Severity | Isolated | Pattern | Widespread |
|---|---|---|---|
| Immediate jeopardy | J— | K— | L— |
| Actual harm | G— | H— | I— |
| No harm, potential for more than minimal | D4100.0% | E— | F— |
| No harm, potential for minimal | A— | B— | C— |
In the surveyor’s words
From the most serious findings on record at Willow Dale Wellness Village, in the surveyor’s own words.
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF657Jun 13, 2022
Based on resident interviews, clnical record reviews, and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide Care Conferences or have each member of the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) review the Care Plan with the resident for five (Residents #4, #12, #14, #19, and #28) of sixteen residents reviewed. The facility reported a census of 32 residents. Findings include: 1. Resident #4's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating no cognitive impairment. On 6/6/22 at 2:11 PM, Resident #4 stated she didn't know of any care conferences. She reported that she didn't attend a Care Conference or get invited to one. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF657Dec 11, 2025
Based on clinical record review, staff interview, guidance from the 2025 Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) 3.0 User's Manual and facility policy review, the facility failed to update the Comprehensive Care Plan for 1 of 13 residents (Resident #32) reviewed for Care Planning. The facility reported a census of 29 residents. Findings include:The Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) of Resident #32, dated 8/31/25, documented diagnoses that included atrial fibrillation, heart failure and hypertension. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF759Dec 11, 2025
Based on observation, staff interview, clinical record review, drug manufacturer guidance, and facility policy review, the facility failed to assure a medication error rate of less than 5%. Medication administration was observed for a total of five residents, with errors being observed for one of five residents (Resident #25). A total of 26 ordered medications were reviewed with two errors, an error rate of 7.7%. The facility reported a census of 29 residents. Findings include:On 12/10/25 at 7:48 am, the observation of the medication pass began. Staff A, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) stated Resident #25 was done eating his breakfast so she would start with him. Staff A prepared a total of 12 medications for Resident #25. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF656Nov 14, 2024
Based on clinical record review and staff interview the facility failed to revise and update care plans to include and address high risk medications and side effects to watch for in 3 out of 12 sampled residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans (Resident #20, #21 and #22). The facility reported a census of 27 residents. Findings include: 1. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #20 documented diagnoses of cancer, hypertension and diabetes mellitus. The MDS showed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12 indicating moderately cognitive impairment. The MDS revealed the resident was taking diuretic medication in the review period. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF644Aug 24, 2023
Based on clinical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to refer two residents with a negative Level I result for the Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR), who was later identified with newly evident or possible serious mental disorder, intellectual disability, or other related condition, to the appropriate state-designated authority for Level II PASRR evaluation and determination for 2 out of 3 residents (Residents #6 and #7) reviewed for PASRR requirements. Findings include: The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #6 documented diagnosis of dementia, depression, and anxiety disorder. The MDS included diagnoses of anxiety disorder and depression. […]
Read 22 findings in full →The most serious and the most recent: 22 of 32 on record.
Every survey on record
FindingsAt actual harm or above
- Dec 11, 2025Standard2 findings
- Nov 14, 2024Standard1 finding
- Aug 24, 2023Standard1 finding
- Jun 13, 2022Standard3 findings
- Jul 29, 2021Standard4 findings
- Aug 14, 2020Complaint1 finding
- Jun 14, 2018Standard1 finding
- May 4, 2017Complaint1 finding
Show the 6 earlier surveys
- Sep 23, 2015Complaint2 findings · 1 harm
- Apr 2, 2015Standard1 finding · 1 harm
- Jan 23, 2014—4 findings
- Sep 16, 2013—1 finding · 1 harm
- Nov 21, 2012—5 findings · 1 harm
- Nov 3, 2011—5 findings
Surveys that found no deficiencies are not in CMS’s files and do not appear here.
Comparable facilities
The nearest facilities to this one in the same peer group, by weighted findings.
Deficiency Index is independent and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or approved by CMS, Medicare, or any government agency. About this data · Report a correction