Not rated by CMS — ratings are suppressed for new or low-volume facilities.
The next survey window likely opens around January 2027
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of June 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Maple Manor Village during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
The facility inaccurately coded MDS assessments for two residents, documenting insulin administration when only Ozempic was given for type 2 diabetes. Staff interviews confirmed the error, as the TARs lacked insulin orders, highlighting a documentation deficiency.
A resident with severe intellectual disabilities and other diagnoses exhibited picking behavior at a recliner's footrest, which was not addressed in their care plan. Despite staff presence, no interventions were made to redirect the behavior. The facility lacked a specific policy for managing such behaviors, and the care plan did not document or include measures to prevent the behavior.
A resident with intact cognition reported that staff broke his bottom denture during cleaning, and the facility failed to arrange for repair or replacement. Despite the resident's request for a dental appointment, staff were unaware of the issue's duration and faced challenges finding a dentist who accepted the resident's insurance. The facility did not follow its policy to promptly refer the resident for dental services, leading to the deficiency.
The facility failed to ensure that a dietary aide completed dependent adult abuse training within 6 months of hire. The aide, hired 7 months prior, had not previously taken the training and was completing it for the first time. The facility's policy requires this training within 6 months, which was confirmed by Human Resources and the administrator.
Inaccurate MDS Coding for Diabetes Management
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments for two residents, leading to a deficiency. Resident #8 and Resident #16 were both documented as having received insulin injections during the lookback period of their MDS assessments. However, a review of their Treatment Administration Records (TAR) revealed no orders for insulin. Instead, both residents had orders for Ozempic, a medication used to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus, which is not classified as insulin. Interviews with facility staff confirmed the discrepancy. Staff A, an LPN, acknowledged that both residents had a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes mellitus and received Ozempic, not insulin. Staff B, an RN and Assistant Director of Nursing, along with Staff C, an RN and MDS Coordinator, confirmed that the MDS assessments incorrectly documented the administration of insulin. The facility's Administrator acknowledged that the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) manual was followed for MDS completion, yet the error in documentation persisted.
Failure to Address Behavioral Health Concerns in Resident Care Plan
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop and implement a care plan addressing the behavioral health concerns of a resident with severe intellectual disabilities and other diagnoses, including epilepsy and a psychotic disorder. The resident exhibited behaviors such as picking at a hole in the footrest of a recliner, which was observed multiple times without staff intervention. Despite the presence of staff and other residents in the common area, no attempts were made to redirect the resident or provide alternative activities to mitigate the behavior. The resident's care plan did not document the picking behavior or include interventions to prevent it. Although the care plan included general strategies for managing anxiety and behaviors, such as offering snacks or engaging in activities, it lacked specific measures to address the observed behavior. Interviews with the Director of Nursing and the Administrator revealed that the facility did not have a policy specific to managing such behaviors, and there was uncertainty about whether the behavior was due to unmet needs or simply a characteristic of the resident's condition.
Failure to Provide Dental Services for Resident with Broken Dentures
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide or ensure dental services for a resident who had broken dentures. The resident, who had intact cognition, reported that the staff dropped and broke his bottom denture during cleaning. Despite the resident's request for a dental appointment, the facility did not arrange for the repair or replacement of the dentures. Staff interviews revealed a lack of awareness about the duration of the issue and difficulties in finding a dentist who accepted the resident's insurance. The facility's policy required prompt referral for damaged dentures within three days and documentation of actions taken to ensure the resident could eat and drink while waiting for dental services. However, the facility did not adhere to this policy, as the resident continued to experience issues with chewing due to the broken dentures. The facility's failure to address the resident's dental needs in a timely manner led to the deficiency identified in the report.
Failure to Complete Dependent Adult Abuse Training Within Required Timeframe
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that staff completed dependent adult abuse training within 6 months of hire for one of the five employees reviewed. The employee file for a dietary aide, hired on 9/1/23, contained a training certificate dated 4/2/24, which is 7 months post-hire. The facility's policy requires new employees to complete the mandatory reporter training within 6 months if they have not previously taken a state-approved curriculum. During interviews, the Human Resources staff confirmed the hire date and acknowledged the delay in training completion. The dietary aide confirmed that he was taking the training for the first time on 4/2/24, and the administrator stated that the training is expected to be completed within the required timeframe.
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 73 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 Aplington
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Village Of Ackley | 9.2 mi | — | 8 | 0 |
| Rehabilitation Center Of Allison | 12.5 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Grundy Care Center | 16.5 mi | — | 15 | 0 |
| Creekside | 16.6 mi | — | 6 | 0 |
| Clarksville Skilled Nursing & Rehab Center | 17.2 mi | — | 2 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Maple Manor Village.
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 August 2026) and official state health department websites.