Above average — CMS composite of the measures below.
The next survey window likely opens around June 2027
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of October 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Franklin General Hospital during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Failure to identify and document pressure ulcers correctly for a resident with paraplegia and multiple skin breakdown areas. Staff did not consistently stage or measure wounds as pressure injuries, several skin assessments lacked complete measurements or used non-applicable staging, and the dietitian was not notified when a new Stage 2 pressure ulcer was identified. Leadership and nursing staff acknowledged the documentation gaps and the delay in recognizing the pressure area.
A resident with pruritus had an active PRN hydroxyzine order that remained on the MAR despite repeated pharmacy recommendations to discontinue it. The facility also missed the resident’s monthly pharmacy review for one month, and records lacked documentation of provider response or GDR follow-up. Staff noted the medication was unavailable on the cart, a prior auth was requested, and the DON acknowledged the missing review; the facility also lacked a policy for monthly reviews or GDRs.
The facility failed to maintain accurate code status directives for four residents, leading to discrepancies between documented orders and visible indicators. A resident had conflicting information with a DNR order and IPOST indicating DNR status, yet a heart sticker on the door suggested full code status. Another resident, listed as DNR, lacked a DNR sticker on the chart. Staff interviews revealed confusion and lack of consistent procedures for verifying code status, with reliance on electronic health records and physical indicators like stickers, which were not consistently updated.
A facility failed to report an allegation of missing money for a resident to DIAL within the required 24-hour timeframe. The incident was reported to the staff, who informed the Administrator and DON immediately. However, the Administrator conducted an internal investigation before reporting, resulting in a delay beyond the mandated period.
The facility did not meet the minimum requirements for its quarterly QA meeting as the DON, who is also the IP, was absent. A clinical nurse attended instead but did not fulfill the IP role, as confirmed by the LNHA. This absence indicates non-compliance with the facility's QAPI policy, which requires a core group for the PIP team.
Failure to Identify, Stage, Measure, and Report Pressure Ulcers
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to timely identify pressure ulcers, consistently document wounds as pressure ulcers with correct staging and measurements, and notify the dietitian when a pressure ulcer was identified for one resident. The resident had a history of non-traumatic spinal cord dysfunction, paraplegia, depression, and anxiety, and the MDS documented intact cognition with a BIMS score of 15. The care plan identified the resident as at risk for impaired skin integrity related to decreased mobility, prolonged time in bed, neurogenic bowel and bladder, moisture exposure, and independent manual stool removal, and noted prior pressure areas on the buttock and coccyx that had resolved. The record showed multiple skin findings over time, including a left iliac crest blister, a right buttock abrasion, bilateral buttock blisters, and blisters/open areas on the posterior thighs. Several skin assessments lacked depth measurements or listed the areas as not applicable or unstageable, even when the documentation described open areas, blisters, or pressure-related skin breakdown. A physician note documented a small Stage 2 pressure area on the right buttock, but the facility’s skin documentation did not consistently reflect that staging. Staff also documented recurrent skin breakdown on the coccyx, buttocks, and upper thighs, with wound therapy and pressure-relief interventions later discussed after the areas had already been present. The facility did not notify the dietitian when the new pressure ulcer was identified. The dietitian stated she was not informed of the new Stage 2 pressure ulcer and found no documentation showing staff had notified her. Staff and leadership acknowledged that the wound documentation did not reflect the continuance of a pressure ulcer or pressure areas, that staff did not identify wounds correctly as pressure areas, and that there was a delay in identifying a pressure area. The DON stated nurses must notify the physician when a pressure area is identified so the physician can assess and stage it, and staff stated they generally waited for a formal provider diagnosis before documenting wounds as pressure injuries.
Incomplete Pharmacy Review and Unresolved Hydroxyzine Order
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to complete monthly pharmacy reviews and failed to address pharmacist irregularity recommendations for one resident who had an active as-needed hydroxyzine order for pruritus. The pharmacy monthly review for November 2025 was missing, and the December 2025, January 2026, and February 2026 pharmacy reviews each recommended discontinuation of the hydroxyzine. The resident’s MARs from October 2025 through July 2026 showed the hydroxyzine order remained active each month, and the records did not show further direction regarding discontinuation or GDR documentation. A progress note dated 12/1/25 documented that staff faxed the pharmacy because the cart lacked stock of hydroxyzine, even though the resident still had an active order for itching. The pharmacy advised that a prior authorization was needed, and staff sent the request to the clinic and communicated the issue in shift report, on the communication board, and to nursing staff and social services. A care conference note dated 12/22/25 documented the resident reported frequent itchy skin and noted hydroxyzine in use. During interviews, the DON stated staff would have faxed the pharmacy recommendation to the provider and documented the response, and acknowledged the November 2025 monthly review was not completed. The facility also did not maintain a policy addressing monthly reviews or gradual dosage reductions.
Inaccurate Code Status Directives
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain accurate code status directives for four residents, leading to discrepancies between documented orders and visible indicators. Resident #13 had conflicting information with a DNR order and IPOST indicating DNR status, yet a heart sticker on the door suggested full code status. Resident #27, listed as DNR in both IPOST and provider's order, lacked a DNR sticker on the chart. The Director of Nursing (DON) acknowledged these inconsistencies and removed the incorrect heart sticker from Resident #13's door. Additionally, Resident #15, who was documented as DNR, did not have a DNR sticker on the chart, and Resident #27, listed as full code, lacked a heart sticker on the door. Staff interviews revealed confusion and lack of consistent procedures for verifying code status, with reliance on electronic health records and physical indicators like stickers, which were not consistently updated. The DON failed to mention a red book at the nurses' station as a resource for code status, further contributing to the confusion.
Failure to Timely Report Allegation of Missing Money
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to report an allegation of missing money for a resident to the Iowa Department of Inspection and Appeals and Licensing (DIAL) within the required 24-hour timeframe. The incident was reported to the facility staff on 4/19/24 at 6:33 PM by the resident's family. Staff D, a Registered Nurse, immediately informed the Administrator and Director of Nursing. However, the Administrator decided to conduct an internal investigation before reporting the incident to DIAL, resulting in a delay. The allegation was eventually reported on 4/23/24 at 4:05 PM, which was beyond the mandated reporting period. The facility's policy, revised in August 2023, clearly states that allegations of abuse, including misappropriation, must be reported within 24 hours, but this protocol was not followed in this case.
Failure to Meet QA Meeting Requirements
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to meet the minimum requirements for its quarterly Quality Assessment and Assurance (QA) meeting by not having the required members present. Specifically, the Director of Nursing (DON), who also serves as the Infection Preventionist (IP), was absent from the meeting held on May 7, 2024. Instead, a clinical nurse attended the meeting, but did not fulfill the role of the IP. This was confirmed during an interview with the Licensed Nursing Home Administrator (LNHA) on May 22, 2024. The facility's Quality Assurance and Process Improvement (QAPI) policy, dated May 2017, outlines the need for a core group of individuals to be appointed to the performance improvement project (PIP) team, which should consist of 2 to 5 people and meet regularly. However, the absence of the DON/IP at the QA meeting indicates a failure to adhere to these guidelines.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 61 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near Hampton
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rehabilitation Center Of Hampton | 1 mi | ★★★★★ | 3 | 0 |
| Sheffield Care Center | 10.5 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| The Village Of Ackley | 14.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 8 | 0 |
| Scenic Manor | 15.1 mi | ★★★★★ | 5 | 0 |
| Rockwell Community Nursing Home | 17 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Franklin General Hospital.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release October 2026) and official state health department websites.