Above average — CMS composite of the measures below.
The next survey window likely opens around April 2027
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 Prairie Manor Care Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A deficiency was cited when a facility area was found to contain accident hazards and lacked adequate supervision to prevent accidents. The environment was not maintained to ensure resident safety, and supervision was insufficient, leading to the deficiency.
Two residents were not given completed SNF ABN forms with required cost estimates after their Medicare Part A coverage ended. Instead, the forms directed them to consult the business office for cost information. Staff interviews revealed that the required monetary amounts were not routinely included, and the responsible nurse was unaware of this requirement. As a result, residents were not properly informed in writing of their potential financial liability for non-covered services.
A facility failed to update care plans and Kardexes with Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for four residents with indwelling catheters, leading to a deficiency. Despite being on EBP to prevent the spread of MDROs, the residents' care plans lacked documentation of their EBP status. Staff interviews revealed that the expectation was for EBP status to be documented, but this was not done, leaving unfamiliar staff uninformed of the residents' care needs.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment experienced two falls due to the facility's failure to ensure the safe use of mechanical lifts and slings. The facility used multiple types of lifts and slings without proper assessment or training on their compatibility. The resident fell when using a Volaro lift with a Tollos sling, which were not tested for compatibility. Staff interviews revealed a lack of comprehensive assessment and training, contributing to the unsafe conditions.
A facility failed to store a container of oranges properly, as it was found on the floor of the walk-in refrigerator during a kitchen tour. The cook and dietary director acknowledged the mistake, noting that the oranges should have been placed on a shelf. The facility's policy requires all items to be stored at least six inches off the floor.
A resident with moderate cognitive impairment and Parkinson's Disease did not receive routine fingernail care, despite being dependent on staff for assistance with ADLs. Observations showed long fingernails with debris, and the resident expressed a desire for them to be clipped. Facility records indicated that nail care was not consistently provided, and staff interviews confirmed a lapse in routine care. The facility's policies lacked specific documentation and frequency guidelines for nail care.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and a history of trauma exhibited daily verbal and frequent physical behavioral symptoms, which the facility failed to manage effectively. The care plan was not updated since admission, and staff lacked awareness of the resident's history, leading to ineffective interventions. The facility's documentation did not include non-pharmacological interventions or a comprehensive reassessment of triggers and interventions, despite the facility's policy emphasizing the importance of behavioral health services.
Failure to Maintain Accident-Free Environment and Adequate Supervision
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency was identified due to the failure to ensure that a specific area within the facility was free from accident hazards and that adequate supervision was provided to prevent accidents. The report notes that the environment contained hazards that were not addressed, and supervision was insufficient to prevent potential accidents. These conditions directly contributed to the deficiency cited by surveyors.
Failure to Provide Required Cost Estimates on SNF ABN Forms
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide completed Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice (SNF ABN CMS 10055) forms to two residents whose Medicare Part A coverage ended and who remained in the facility. Specifically, the SNF ABN forms for both residents did not include an estimated cost for services, instead instructing the resident to 'see business office' for this information. Interviews with the business office manager and the MDS nurse revealed that neither routinely provided a monetary estimate on the SNF ABN forms, and the MDS nurse was unaware that a cost estimate was required. All SNF ABNs were completed in this manner, without the required cost information. Further review of the SNF ABN form instructions confirmed that a good faith estimate of the projected costs of care should be included, and that omitting this information should not be a routine practice. One resident's family member, who was also employed at the facility, stated that no written cost information was provided on the form, and another resident did not recall being told the amount they would have to pay. The deficiency was identified through interviews and document review, confirming that the facility did not meet the requirement to provide residents with adequate notice of potential financial liability for non-covered services.
Failure to Update Care Plans with Enhanced Barrier Precautions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that care plans were revised to include Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for four residents who were placed on these precautions to reduce the spread of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs). The deficiency was identified during a survey when it was observed that the care plans and Kardexes for residents R10, R16, R24, and R31 did not document their EBP status, despite these residents having indwelling catheters and being dependent on staff for various activities of daily living. The surveyors noted that the facility's infection control preventionist (ICP) provided a list of residents on EBP, which included R10, R16, R24, and R31. However, upon reviewing the care plans and Kardexes, it was found that these documents lacked information on the residents' EBP status. Interviews with staff, including LPN-A, NA-A, and NA-B, revealed that the expectation was for EBP status to be documented in the care plans, Kardexes, and the nursing communication book, but this was not the case. The ICP, who is also the assistant director of nursing, confirmed that the facility's method of communication regarding EBP included updating individualized care plans, Kardexes, and the nursing communication book. However, these updates were not made, leaving unfamiliar staff, such as agency staff, uninformed of the residents' care needs. The facility's policy stated that care plans should be updated with any changes in resident care, and a Kardex should be completed with each care plan update to ensure staff are notified of changes.
Inadequate Assessment and Use of Mechanical Lifts and Slings
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure the safe use of mechanical lifts and slings for resident transfers, which led to two falls for a resident with severe cognitive impairment. The resident, who was dependent on staff for all activities of daily living and required a mechanical lift for transfers, experienced falls on two separate occasions. The first fall occurred when the resident grabbed and shook the sling straps, causing a leg strap to come loose, and the second fall happened when the resident slid out of the sling. Both incidents involved the use of a Volaro mechanical lift with a Tollos brand sling, which were not tested for compatibility. Interviews with staff revealed that the facility used multiple types of mechanical lifts and slings, and there was no comprehensive assessment or training on the compatibility and safe use of these devices. The Director of Nursing (DON) and Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) were responsible for assessing the appropriate equipment for residents, but they did not consult with the manufacturers for guidance on compatibility. The facility's maintenance department was responsible for routine maintenance, but there was no facility-wide education on checking the equipment for safety. Representatives from both the sling and lift manufacturers confirmed that their products were not recommended for use together without proper training and assessment. The facility's policy indicated that residents should be assessed for appropriate lift and sling use based on their physical characteristics, but the ADON relied on visual inspection rather than manufacturer guidance. This lack of proper assessment and training contributed to the unsafe conditions that led to the resident's falls.
Improper Food Storage in Walk-in Refrigerator
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper storage of food items, specifically a container of oranges, which was observed on the floor of the walk-in refrigerator during an initial kitchen tour. This observation was made in the presence of a cook, who acknowledged that the oranges should not have been on the floor. The dietary director confirmed that the oranges were part of a shipment received two days prior and should have been placed on a shelf in the refrigerator. Another staff member reiterated that storing oranges on the floor is a contamination risk and emphasized the facility's high usage of oranges. The facility's policy on perishable food storage mandates that all items must be stored at least six inches off the floor.
Failure to Provide Routine Nail Care for Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide routine hygiene care, specifically nail care, for a resident identified as R10, who was dependent on staff for assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs). R10, who had moderate cognitive impairment and Parkinson's Disease, required assistance with personal hygiene and bathing due to impaired mobility. Despite being scheduled for bathing three times a week, R10's care plan lacked specific guidance on fingernail care, including preferences for nail length or frequency of checks and trimming. Observations and interviews revealed that R10 had long fingernails with debris under the nail bed, and R10 expressed a desire for his nails to be clipped. The facility's Point of Care (POC) Response History recorded 12 episodes of bathing assistance, but each episode noted that fingernails were not cut, with no refusals recorded. Progress notes also indicated that R10's fingernails were not trimmed on multiple occasions, and there was no documentation of re-approach efforts after a refusal on one occasion. Staff interviews confirmed that nail care was typically completed by nursing assistants during scheduled bath days, but R10's nails remained long, indicating a lapse in routine care. The facility's policies on nail trimming and ADL care lacked specific documentation requirements and frequency guidelines for nail care. Staff members acknowledged the need for routine nail care to prevent bacterial growth and reduce the risk of infection or injury. The deficiency was identified through observations, interviews, and document reviews, highlighting a failure to ensure consistent and adequate nail care for R10, who was reliant on staff assistance due to his medical condition.
Failure to Address Resident's Behavioral Needs and History of Trauma
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to comprehensively assess and reassess a resident's history of abuse and trauma, behavioral symptoms, triggers, and interventions to minimize physical and verbal aggression during care. The resident, identified as R18, was admitted with severe cognitive impairment and a history of trauma and abuse. Despite being dependent on staff for all activities of daily living, R18 exhibited daily verbal and frequent physical behavioral symptoms, which were not effectively managed by the facility's interventions. R18's care plan, which had not been updated since admission, included interventions that were ineffective in reducing the resident's aggressive behaviors. The care plan noted R18's agitation and anxiety during care, characterized by yelling, swearing, and physical aggression towards staff. Despite these documented behaviors, the facility's records lacked evidence of non-pharmacological interventions or as-needed medication to address R18's continued verbal and physical behaviors. The facility's documentation also failed to provide a comprehensive reassessment of specific triggers and interventions that had been attempted and their effectiveness. Interviews with staff revealed a lack of awareness and understanding of R18's history of abuse and trauma, which contributed to the ineffective management of the resident's behaviors. The social services director acknowledged the absence of a formal reassessment process to track effective interventions, and the director of nursing confirmed the lack of a comprehensive assessment and reassessment of R18's history of abuse and trauma. The facility's policy on behavioral health services emphasized the importance of providing necessary care to maintain residents' well-being, yet the facility did not adhere to this policy in R18's case.
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 84 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 1 immediate-jeopardy cases — 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 Blooming Prairie
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Field Crest Care Center | 10.7 mi | ★★★★★ | 11 | 0 |
| Good Samaritan Society - Comforcare | 14.5 mi | ★★★★★ | 6 | 0 |
| Fairview Care Center | 14.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 7 | 0 |
| Sacred Heart Care Center | 15.1 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| St Marks Living | 15.5 mi | ★★★★★ | 6 | 1 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Prairie Manor Care Center.
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.