Above average — CMS composite of the measures below.
A standard survey is most likely before around August 2026
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of July 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Mayflower Home during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Two cognitively intact residents with progressive neurological conditions reported that a CNA repeatedly failed to treat them with dignity and respect during overnight care. One resident with Parkinson’s disease, who required one-person assistance with ADLs and toileting, stated the CNA appeared frustrated when he could not perform tasks independently at night, questioned his use of the call light, told him he was not dealing with him, and tossed blankets onto him, causing the resident to feel anxious and distressed. Another resident with MS, anxiety, and depression reported that the same CNA spoke to her in a rude and obnoxious tone, made faces, rolled his eyes, and acted as if he did not want to help her. Multiple CNAs and RNs corroborated that the CNA used a sarcastic or inappropriate tone, that residents did not want him to provide care, and that his interactions created visible tension, contrary to the facility’s resident rights policy requiring respect and dignity.
The facility did not meet the requirement for 8 consecutive hours of RN coverage on a specific day, as per their policy. An RN worked the night shift but did not fulfill the 8-hour requirement. The facility could not provide additional documentation to demonstrate compliance, and the DON acknowledged the deficiency. The facility had 28 residents at the time.
Two residents in a facility expressed distress over the use of alarms intended to prevent falls. Despite having intact cognition, one resident with anxiety and depression found the alarm anxiety-inducing, while another with Parkinson's disease found it jarring and frightening. The facility continued using alarms without adequately addressing the residents' psychosocial concerns, contrary to its policy of aligning interventions with residents' needs and preferences.
A resident with diabetes mellitus received insulin via a KwikPen without following the manufacturer's protocol. An LPN administered the insulin but did not hold the pen in place for the recommended time, removing it immediately after a click. The LPN lacked training on proper use, despite facility policies requiring adherence to manufacturer instructions. The DON confirmed the expectation for staff to follow these protocols.
Failure to Treat Two Cognitively Intact Residents With Dignity and Respect
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure residents were treated with respect and dignity, as required by resident rights, for two cognitively intact residents. Resident #1 had Parkinson’s disease with visual hallucinations, impaired functional ability, and required assistance with ADLs and mobility, particularly at night when his abilities declined. His care plan specified one-person assistance with ambulation, transfers, bed mobility, dressing, personal hygiene, and toileting, with encouragement and emotional support. Despite these documented needs, Resident #1 reported that a CNA (Staff A), who worked the overnight shift, repeatedly appeared frustrated when the resident stated he could not perform tasks independently at night, told him to do tasks on his own because Staff A had seen him do them before, and questioned why he could not complete tasks himself. Resident #1 further reported that when he used his call light, Staff A would respond by saying he could not come in every five minutes and would ask why the resident was using his call light. On one night in January, when Resident #1 activated his call light and requested to be changed, Staff A allegedly stated, “I am not dealing with you today,” tossed the blankets onto the resident, and told him to straighten them himself. The resident described Staff A’s tone as frustrated and stated that Staff A looked at him with disdain during care and even later in the hallway. Resident #1 reported experiencing stress, anxiety, and difficulty sleeping when Staff A was working, and he filed a written grievance documenting that Staff A treated him with very little compassion, begrudgingly assisted him to the bathroom at night, and said he was not dealing with the resident when answering his call light. Resident #9, who had MS, anxiety, and depression with intact cognition, also reported that Staff A did not treat her well. She stated that Staff A was rude, talked to her in a rude and obnoxious way, made faces at her, addressed her with “Yes [her name]” or “what do you want [her name]” in a negative tone, acted as if he did not want to work there or help her, rolled his eyes at her, and had a bad attitude. Other staff corroborated concerns about Staff A’s interactions with residents. Staff B, a CNA, stated she had worked with staff who were not as respectful as they should be, specifically Staff A, and knew of residents, including Resident #1 and Resident #9, who did not want Staff A to provide care. Staff B recalled an overnight shift when she was assisting Resident #1, a one-person assist, and Staff A entered the room uninvited and tossed the resident’s blankets onto his legs; she observed that the resident’s facial expression changed and he appeared upset when Staff A entered. Additional staff interviews supported the pattern of disrespectful or sarcastic behavior. Staff C, an RN, described witnessing “back and forth” bickering between Staff A and Resident #1 during an overnight shift, with Staff A using a sarcastic and inappropriate tone. Staff D, an RN, reported that Resident #1 told her that Staff A was not nice to him and that he thought Staff A did not like him; she observed tension between them when Staff A entered the room, noting that the resident remained kind and thanked Staff A, but Staff A did not respond and was quiet toward him. Social Services (Staff E) stated that Resident #9 had previously said she did not like Staff A and that he was too sarcastic. In his own interview, Staff A acknowledged that these residents had issues with him, that he could be stern and to the point with residents he viewed as having behaviors, that he told residents he had other residents to help when they used their call lights repeatedly, and that he had been sarcastic with Resident #9, which he characterized as joking. The facility’s resident rights policy stated that residents have the right to a dignified existence and to be treated with respect and dignity, which was not upheld in these interactions.
Failure to Provide 8-Hour RN Coverage
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide the required 8 hours of Registered Nurse (RN) coverage on June 16, 2024, as mandated by their Nursing Services and Sufficient Staff policy. The policy, revised on October 10, 2023, stipulates that the facility must have an RN on duty for at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week, unless waived. On the specified date, the daily healthcare schedule showed that Staff B, an RN, worked the night shift, clocking in at 10:07 PM and clocking out at 6:37 AM the following day. This schedule did not meet the requirement for 8 consecutive hours of RN coverage on June 16, 2024. The facility was unable to provide additional documentation, such as daily healthcare schedules or punch details, to demonstrate compliance with the RN coverage requirement for that day. During an interview on July 10, 2024, the Director of Nursing acknowledged that an RN did not work the required 8 consecutive hours on June 16, 2024, as expected. The facility reported a census of 28 residents at the time of the deficiency.
Failure to Respect Residents' Psychosocial Feedback on Alarm Use
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to recognize and respect the psychosocial feedback and responses of two residents, both of whom had alarms that sounded when they stood up. One resident, with a history of anxiety, depression, COPD, and osteoarthritis, reported that the alarm made her anxious and feel like she needed to move. Despite her intact cognition and repeated expressions of discomfort with the alarm, the facility continued to use various alarms as interventions for her fall risk. The resident often removed or hid the alarms, indicating her distress and noncompliance with the alarm system. The facility's staff did not effectively communicate with the resident about the purpose of the alarms or address her concerns about falling. Another resident, who had Parkinson's disease and a history of a hip fracture, also expressed distress over the use of alarms. This resident reported the alarm as jarring and frightening, and she avoided using her bed due to the bed alarm. Despite her intact cognition and ability to express her feelings, the facility continued to use a floor mat alarm, which she disliked. The resident expressed a desire to be more independent and questioned the necessity of the alarms, indicating a lack of understanding and agreement with the facility's interventions. The facility's policy on resident alarms emphasized the need for alarms to be used in accordance with the resident's needs, goals, and preferences. However, the facility did not adequately assess the psychosocial impact of the alarms on the residents or modify interventions based on their feedback. The facility's approach to using alarms did not align with its policy of supporting residents' emotional and mental well-being, as evidenced by the residents' reports of anxiety and distress caused by the alarms.
Failure to Follow Insulin Administration Protocol
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adhere to the manufacturer's recommendations for administering insulin using an insulin KwikPen for a resident with diabetes mellitus. The resident, who had severely impaired cognition, was prescribed Basaglar KwikPen insulin to be administered subcutaneously. During an observation, a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) was seen administering the insulin but did not follow the manufacturer's instructions to hold the pen in place and count to five before removing the needle. Instead, the LPN removed the pen immediately after hearing a click, indicating a deviation from the recommended procedure. Interviews with the LPN revealed a lack of training regarding the proper use of the insulin KwikPen, as the LPN was unaware of the need to hold the pen in place post-administration. The facility's Insulin Pen policy and Medication Administration policy both directed staff to follow manufacturer protocols, which were not adhered to in this instance. The Director of Nursing confirmed the expectation for staff to follow these recommendations, highlighting a gap in training and adherence to established procedures.
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 129 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 Grinnell
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| St Francis Manor | 1 mi | ★★★★★ | 4 | 0 |
| Montezuma Specialty Care | 14.5 mi | ★★★★★ | 6 | 0 |
| Brooklyn Community Estates | 14.5 mi | ★★★★★ | 1 | 0 |
| Accura Healthcare Of Newton East, Llc | 16.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 25 | 0 |
| Newton Village Health Care Center | 17.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 3 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Mayflower Home.
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 July 2026) and official state health department websites.