Woodland Manor Nursing Center
100 Woodland Court, Arnold, MO 63010 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 178 certified beds · (636) 296-1400 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0570)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (39) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (63%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- about 20% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 1 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 1 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 2 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 1 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 2 to 1 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 11.7% | 18.1% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 7.2% | 5.3% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 3.1% | 1.1% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 3.7% | 2.3% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 4.6% | 18.5% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.5% | 4.1% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 13.2% | 17.4% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 19.3% | 25.6% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.0% | 90.9% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.2% | 4.5% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 9.6% | 17.8% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 14.6% | 23.5% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.7% | 2.2% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 75.3% | 63.5% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 29.3% | 26.0% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 11.7% | 13.7% | 12.0% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.62 | 2.11 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.06 | 2.33 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
36.1% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 137 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 28.6% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 56 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.18 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 18% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 3% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 36.1%CMS range 27.2–42.0 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | worse than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.4%CMS range 7.2–13.8 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 28.6% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 41.1% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 23.2% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 67.2% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 45.5% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 8.1%CMS range 5.0–12.9 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.81 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 178 beds and averages 124.1 residents a day — about 70% occupied, or roughly 54 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.76 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.27 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.86 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.47 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.87 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.31 to 0.18 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 63% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
39 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 29 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-27 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff treated residents with dignity and in a respectful manner by leaving one resident (Resident #134) out of five sampled residents exposed during wound care. The census was 126. Review of the facility's policy titled, Resident Privacy/Dignity/Customer Service, not dated, showed:- Staff will knock on doors before entering a resident's room or ask permission before entering behind curtains and wait for a reply before opening the curtains;- Staff will close curtains completely, window and doors fully during care;- Residents will not be exposed in an embarrassing manner. 1. Review of Resident #134's medical record showed:- An admission date of 11/17/25;- Diagnoses of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD - a lung disease), diabetes mellitus (DM - a condition that affects the way the body processes blood sugar ), chronic kidney disease (gradual loss of kidney function over time), anxiety disorder (feelings of worry, anxiety, or fear that are strong enough to interfere with one's daily activities),…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-27 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to inform residents and/or their responsible parties, in advance of the risks and benefits of proposed care, before beginning psychotropic (medications that affect the mind, emotions, and behavior) medications for nine residents (Residents #2, #6, #7, #10, #24, #37, #67, #104, and #123) out of nine sampled residents. The facility census was 126. Review of the facility policy titled, Medication Policy and Procedure, dated 02/15/18, showed: - Psychotropic medications include antianxiety, hypnotic (induces sleep), and antipsychotic (medications used to treat psychosis symptoms such as delusions, hallucinations, and paranoia, by regulating brain chemicals) medications; - The physician or psychiatrist will document the discussion with the resident and/or responsible party regarding the risk versus the benefit of the use of medication, including off label use of the medication. 1. Review of Resident #2's medical record showed: - An admission date of 07/14/24; - Diagnoses of major depressive disorder (MDD - a serious mental health…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-27 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to issue a Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice (SNF ABN) to the resident and/or the resident's representative in writing at least two calendar days before discharge from skilled services. This notice informs the beneficiary about potential non-coverage and the option to continue services with the beneficiary accepting the financial liability for those services. This practice affected one resident (Resident #13) out of three sampled residents. The facility census was 126. Review of the facility's policy titled, Medicare Coverage Notification, revised 01/17/18, showed:- When resident's Medicare coverage is coming to an end, the social services designee (SSD) is required to give at least a 72-hour notice of non-coverage to the resident and/or responsible party;- A SNF ABN is provided at least three days prior to discharge and signed by the resident and/or responsible party upon notice of non-coverage if the resident is discharging from Medicare services and remain in facility. 1. Review of Resident #13's medical…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-27 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment. The deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents. The facility's census was 126.Review of the facility's policy titled, Homelike Environment, revised 02/13/21, showed:- Residents are provided with a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment and encouraged to use their personal belongings to the extent possible;- The facility staff and management shall maximize, to the extent possible, the characteristics of the facility that reflect a personalized homelike setting to include a clean, sanitary and orderly environment. Observation on 03/24/26 at 12:30 P.M., of the shower room located at the end of the 100 Hall showed:- The door propped open;- A 4 inch (in.) by 12 in. piece of tile trim missing at the base of the door entry;- A white, plastic shower curtain with a 2 in. by 2 in. brown stain near the top, torn in half, and the bottom half lay in the shower room floor and three hooks missing at the top which caused it to droop;- A…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-27 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify the resident and/or the resident's representative in writing of a transfer and/or discharge to a hospital, including the reason for the transfer for seven residents (Residents #2, #4, #6, #8, #27, #68, and #73) out of 12 sampled residents. The facility's census was 126. Review of the facility policy titled, Discharge Procedures, undated, showed: - Before transfer or discharge, the facility shall send written notification to the resident in a language and manner reasonable calculated to be understood by the resident; - The notice must also be sent to any legally authorized representative of the resident and to at least one family member; - A copy of the notice will be forwarded to the Department of Health and Senior Services regional office and the regional coordinator of the Missouri State Ombudsman's (advocate for the resident in nursing facilities) office; - The written notice should include the reason for transfer or discharge, the effective…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-27 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to document a complete and accurate Minimum Data Set (MDS - a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by the facility staff) for four residents (Residents #10, #24, #67, and #104) out of 25 sampled residents. The facility's census was 126. Review of the facility policy titled, MDS Policy and Procedure, dated 02/22/22, showed: - The resident interview must be completed by the MDS coordinator or other specialized disciplines; - A comprehensive review of the resident's medical record will be completed; - Once the resident and staff interviews are completed and the medical record is reviewed, the MDS assessment section may be completed as detailed in the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual (the official, comprehensive guide for nursing homes on how to use the RAI system to assess resident care needs). Review of the RAI Manual, Version 3.0, dated October 2024, showed: - Section A1500: Preadmission Screening and Resident Review…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-27 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement an individualized comprehensive care plan with specific interventions to meet the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for four residents (Residents #6, #37, #67, and #104) out of 25 sampled residents. The facility's census was 126.Review of the facility policy titled, Care Plan Section Responsibility, undated, showed:- Objective was to ensure individualized completion of the care plan, and family /resident participation in the resident's plan of care with admission, quarterly, annual update, and if there is a significant change of condition;- The care plan must be based upon the resident assessment, choices and advancedirectives, if any. As the resident's status changes, the facility, attending practitionerand the resident representative, to the extent possible, must review and/or revise care plan goals and treatment choices. 1. Review of Resident #6's medical record showed:- An admission date of 07/31/25;- Diagnosis of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH - an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-27 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a physician's order for oxygen use and oxygen tubing care was obtained for two residents (Residents #27 and #40) and the facility also failed to follow physician's orders for oxygen use for three residents (Residents #8, #81, and #123) out of 12 sampled residents. The facility census was 126.Review of the facility policy titled, Physician's Orders, undated, showed: - Orders received by the physician are to be followed as prescribed. Review of the facility policy titled, Oxygen Storage/Use, undated, showed: - Oxygen tubing is to be bagged when not in use; - Did not address when to change the oxygen tubing. 1. Review of Resident #8's medical record showed: - admitted on [DATE]; - Diagnoses of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD – a lung disease) and malignant neoplasm (cancerous tumor) of the upper right and left lung and of the lower right and left lung. Review of the resident's March 2026 physician order sheet (POS),…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-27 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to establish a system of records for the receipt and disposition of all controlled medications in sufficient detail to enable an accurate reconciliation of the controlled medications and to ensure nursing staff counted and signed the narcotic count sheet at the beginning and at the end of each shift for four out of four sampled medication carts. The facility census was 126.The facility did not provide a policy regarding the receipt and disposition of controlled medications or reconciliation of controlled medications. 1. Review of the 100 Hall Certified Medication Technician (CMT) Cart Change of Shift Narcotic Count sheet, dated 03/01/26 - 03/26/26, showed:- No signature and/or initials by the nurse or CMT for 63 out of 151 opportunities. During an interview on 03/26/26 at 12:02 P.M., CMT F said all narcotics should be counted at the beginning and end of each shift and the count sheet should be signed verifying the count was completed and accurate. 2. Review of the 100 Hall Nurse Cart Change of Shift Narcotic Count Sheet,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-27 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications and biologicals were stored in accordance with currently accepted practices when refrigerator temperatures were not completed for the Certified Medication Technician (CMT) and Nurse refrigerators, located on the 100 Hall. The facility also failed to ensure one resident (Resident #24) out of 25 sampled residents had a physician's order to keep an inhaler (hand-held portable device that delivers medication to the lungs) at the bedside. This had the potential to affect all residents. The facility census was 126. Review of the facility's policy titled, Storage of Medications, revised 07/22/24, showed: - Drugs and biologicals shall be stored in the packaging, containers or other dispensing systems in which they are received; - Medications requiring refrigeration must be stored in a refrigerator located in the drug room at the nurses' station or other secured location. Medications must be stored separately from food and must be labeled accordingly; - Did not address checking and the appropriate…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 29 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-27 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow infection control precautions by not changing gloves or washing hands during resident care for four residents (Residents #7, #11, #103, and #134) out of six sampled residents, by not following enhanced barrier precautions (EBP - precautions for use during high-contact resident care activities for residents infected with a multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO - microorganisms that are resistant to one or more classes of antimicrobial agents) or any resident who has a chronic wound and/or indwelling medical device) for five residents (Residents #7, #41, #103, #104, and #134) out of five sampled residents, and during medication administration for three residents (Residents #38, #104 and #141) out of seven sampled residents. The facility census was 126.Review of the facility's policy titled, Policy and Procedure - Enhanced Barrier Precautions, dated 04/01/24, showed: - Whenever a resident has an infection regardless of their MDRO status, the community will utilize EBP for any time that physical contact is…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-31 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide showers for three residents (Resident #1, #2, and #5) out of six sampled residents. The facility's census was 124.Review of the facility's policy, Showers, dated January 5, 2017, showed:- It is the policy of the facility to provide showers on a bi-weekly basis;- Requests for more frequent showers will be granted and addressed via the plan of care;- Shower sheets will be reviewed by the charge nurse;- The charge nurse will forward all completed shower sheets to the clinical nurse managers;- Clinical nurse managers will ensure a shower sheet is received for each shower and ensure interventions are in place for any areas identified during showers and track the area weekly on the weekly skin or pressure report;- Shower sheets will be kept in the clinical managers' office for a period of two weeks.Review of the Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) Meeting notes, dated November 25, 2025, showed:- Showers need to be completed in a timely manner, not at the end of a shift. Day shift - after breakfast and Evening…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-05 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify the physician and resident representative of a fall for one resident (Resident #1) out of five sampled residents. The facility census was 122. 1. Review of the facility policy titled, Following a Resident Fall, dated 04/29/25, showed: - The licensed nurse assess the resident for injuries (including neuro checks if indicated) and provides necessary treatment and initiates the Situation, Background, Assessment, Recommendation (SBAR - a structured communication tool used to improve the clarity and efficiency of information exchange between healthcare professionals, especially when reporting a change in a resident's condition); - The physician and resident's representatives are notified; 2. Review of Resident #1's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment instrument required to be completed by the facility staff, dated 03/05/2025, showed: - admitted to facility on 02/21/23; - Cognition impaired; - Diagnoses of dementia (a general term for a decline in mental ability severe enough to interfere with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-15 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide their final investigation in a timely manner after a report of sexual abuse for one resident (Resident #1) of three sampled residents. On 4/5/2025, Resident #1 reported Registered Nurse (RN) A had sexually assaulted him/her on 04/3/25. As of 04/15/25, the facility had not completed the investigation. The census was 130. Review of the facility's Abuse Policy and Procedures/Investigation Protocols dated 12/14/18 showed: - Employees are required to report any occurrences of potential mistreatment they observe, hear about, or suspect to a supervisor, the Administrator (ADM) or the Director of Nurses (DON); - Once the ADM/DON determine that there is possible mistreatment, the ADM or DON will appoint a person to take charge of the investigation. The person in charge of the investigation will obtain a copy of any documentation relative to the incident; - The person in charge of the investigation will report the conclusions of the investigation to the ADM or DON designee within five working days of the reported incident.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-12-06 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a code status was consistently documented throughout the medical record for two residents (Residents #17 and #92) out of 21 sampled residents and for two residents (Residents #33 and #53) outside the sample. The facility census was 127. Review of the facility's policy titled, Advance Directives, not dated, showed: - Upon admission, every resident or resident representative is asked to determine code status; - Full Code - cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR - an emergency procedure consisting of chest compressions if the heart stops beating or the person stops breathing) performed when the resident experiences a catastrophic event such as cardiac/respiratory arrest or Do Not Resuscitate (DNR - does not want CPR); - The resident's code status will be reviewed with the resident and/or the resident representative annually; - The resident has the right to change their code status at any time. Review of facility's Code Status book (a book that gives…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-12-06 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify the resident and/or the resident's representative in writing of a facility-initiated transfer when 13 residents (Residents #7, #17, #30, #34, #37, #39, #48, #50, #92, #101, #105, #121, and #126) out of 13 sampled residents transferred to the hospital. The facility's census was 127. Review of the facility policy titled, Hospital Transfer and Bed Hold Policy, undated, showed: - If the attending physician orders his/her patient to be transferred to the hospital, the family or responsible party will be notified and arrangements will be made; - Before there is a transfer of a resident to a hospital or a resident goes on a therapeutic leave, the resident and family or Durable Power of Attorney (DPOA) will be notified twice. The first will be during the admission process by the reading of the Bed Hold Policy. The second notice will be provided to the resident and family or DPOA at the time of the transfer to the hospital. A copy of this policy will be…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-12-06 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to inform the resident and/or legal representative in writing of their bed hold policy at the time of transfer to the hospital for 12 residents (Resident #7, #17, #30, #34, #37, #48, #50, #92, #101, #105, #121, and #126) out of 13 sampled residents. The facility's census was 127. Review of the facility policy titled, Hospital Transfer and Bed Hold Policy, undated, showed: - In the event that you are transferred to a hospital, a copy of the bed hold policy will be sent with you. If you are a Medicaid recipient, you have access to Therapeutic Leave. You have 12 days leave between January and June and 12 days between July and December of each year; - Before there is a transfer of a resident to a hospital or a resident goes on a therapeutic leave, the resident and family or Durable Power of Attorney (DPOA) will be notified twice. The first will be during the admission process by the reading of the Bed Hold Policy. The second notice will be provided to the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-12-06 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to update and revise care plans with specific interventions tailored to meet individual needs for two residents (Residents #3 and #17) out of 21 sampled residents. The facility census was 127. Review of the facility's policy titled, Care Plan Section Responsibility, March 2024, showed: - A care plan will be developed upon admission per Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) guidelines. It will be updated quarterly, and annually per CMS guidelines to ensure that there is a continuity of care, and is in accordance with the individual's needs. Care plan will also be updated with a significant change of condition; - The care plan must be based upon the resident assessment, choices and advance directives, if any. As the resident's status changes, the facility, attending practitioner, and the resident representative, to the extent possible, must review and/or revise care plan goals and treatment choices. 1. Review of Resident #3's medical record showed: - An admission date of 09/27/24; - Diagnoses of urinary tract…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-12-06 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to monitor and consistently implement interventions, including adequate supervision consistent with resident needs, goals and current professional standards of practice, in order to eliminate or reduce the risk of falls and accidents and failed to update the care plan with new interventions to prevent additional falls for two residents (Residents #3 and #39) out of two sampled residents. The facility also failed to prevent resident access to liquor in an unlocked office. This had the potential to affect all residents who were able to move freely around the facility. The facility census was 127. Review of the facility policy titled, Falls, dated 09/22/21, showed: - The Minimum Data Set (MDS - a federally mandatory assessment completed by facility staff) defines a fall as unintentionally coming to rest on the ground, floor, or other lower level but not as a result of an overwhelming external force; - Procedure following a fall includes…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-12-06 · tag F0700 — isolatedTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to assess residents for the use of side rails prior to installation or use, the facility failed to obtain informed consent from the resident or if applicable, the resident representative, and the facility also failed to provide on-going monitoring, supervision, and routine maintenance of the beds with side rails in use for eight residents (Residents #3, #7, #48, #50, #105, #111, #127, and #389) out of eight sampled residents. The facility's census was 127. The facility did not provide a policy for side rails. 1. Review of Resident #3's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS - a federally mandated assessment completed by the facility), dated 10/04/24, showed: - Intact cognition; - Dependent with bed mobility; - Diagnoses of falls, difficulty walking, morbid obesity (overweight), pain, heart failure (the heart does not pump blood as well as it should), and atrial fibrillation (abnormal heart beat). Review of the resident's care plan, revised…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-12-06 · tag F0744 — failed to care for residents with dementia — isolatedProvide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with dementia.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents diagnosed with dementia (a decline in memory or other thinking skills severe enough to reduce a person's ability to perform everyday activities) had a personalized plan of care to ensure appropriate services to promote the resident's highest level of functioning and psychosocial needs were provided for two residents (Residents #108 and #115) out of three sampled residents. The facility census was 127. The facility did not provide a policy regarding dementia care. 1. Review of Resident #108's medical record showed: - An admission date of 08/13/24; - Diagnosis of unspecified dementia (a condition characterized by progressive or persistent loss of intellectual functioning, especially with impairment of memory and abstract thinking). Review of the resident's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federally mandated assessment instrument completed by the facility staff, dated 09/16/24, showed: - Diagnosis of dementia; - Able to understand others and to be understood. Review of the resident's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-12-06 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an error rate of less than five percent (%) during medication administration. There were 31 opportunities with two errors made, for an error rate of 6.45%, which affected two residents (Residents #48 and #71) out of two sampled residents. The facility census was 127. Review of the facility's policy titled, Medication Administration General Guidelines, revised May 2021, showed: - Medications are administered as prescribed in accordance with manufacturers' specifications; - Personnel authorized to administer medications do so only after having familiarized themselves with the medication. Review of the insulin lispro (a rapid acting insulin injected just below the skin that helps lower mealtime blood sugar spikes) KwikPen (insulin in a pen-type device) Manufacturer Instructions for use, revised July 2023, showed: - Priming the pen means removing the air from the needle and cartridge that may collect during normal use and ensures that the pen is working correctly; - Not priming before each injection may…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-12-06 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure four vials of Tubersol (a solution used during a tuberculosis (a serious bacterial infection that mainly affects the lungs) test were dated when opened. This had the potential to affect all residents. The facility's census was 127. Review of the facility's policy titled, Storage of Medications, revised 07/22/24, showed: - The facility shall not use discontinued, outdated, or deteriorated drugs or biologicals, all such drugs should be returned to the dispensing pharmacy or destroyed; - Did not address dating vials when opened. Review of the manufacturer's recommendations for Tubersol, revised 03/18/24, showed the solution should discarded 30 days after date opened. Observation on 12/06/24 at 8:51 A.M., of the medication refrigerator in the Terrace medication room showed: - Two opened vials of Tubersol solution not dated. Observation on 12/06/24 at 9:15 A.M., of the medication refrigerator in the Pavilion medication room showed: - Two opened vials of Tubersol solution not dated. During an interview on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-12-06 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow infection prevention precautions for one resident (Resident #48) out of six sampled residents by not performing proper hand hygiene and glove changing techniques during care and failed to provide infection prevention precautions by not following enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) for two residents (Residents #71 and #389) out of two sampled residents. The facility census was 127. Review of the facility policy titled, Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Usage (Glove Policy), undated, showed: - Wash hands in between glove changes. Review of the facility policy titled, EBP, dated 04/01/24, showed: - EBP will be utilized by the staff for any residents with chronic wounds or indwelling medical devices during any high-contact with that resident. 1. Review of Resident #48's medical record showed: - Resident on contact precautions (wear a gown and gloves to prevent the spread of a bacteria or virus when entering the resident's room) for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-12-06 · tag F0909 — failed to maintain a comfortable temperature — isolatedRegularly inspect all bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails (if any) for safety; and all bed rails and mattresses must attach safely to the bed frame.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, facility staff failed to conduct regular inspections of all bed frames, mattresses, side rails, and enabler bars as part of a regular maintenance program for eight residents (Residents #3, #7, #48, #50, #105, #111, #127, and #389) out of eight sampled residents. The facility's census was 127. The facility did not provide a policy on inspections of side rails. 1. Review of Resident #3's medical record showed no maintenance inspection for the side rails. Observations of the resident showed: - On 12/03/24 at 11:10 A.M., the resident rolled side to side holding on to the bilateral quarter side rails in the upright position while staff performed incontinence care; - On 12/06/24 at 10:30 A.M., the resident lay in bed with the bilateral quarter side rails in the upright position. 2. Review of Resident #7's medical record showed no maintenance inspection for the side rails. Observations of the resident showed: - On 12/03/24 at 11:30 A.M., and 12/05/24 at 9:30 A.M., the resident lay in bed with the bilateral quarter side rails in the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-12-06 · tag F0947 — failed to train nurse aides adequately — isolatedEnsure nurse aides have the skills they need to care for residents, and give nurse aides education in dementia care and abuse prevention.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to conduct at least twelve hours of nurse aide in-service education per year for two certified nurse aides (CNA R and CNA S) and failed to provide the required annual competencies of Dementia Care (care of a resident with an impaired ability to remember, think, or make decisions) for one CNA S out of two CNA's sampled. The facility census was 127. The facility did not provide a CNA in-service training policy. Review of the facility assessment, dated October 31, 2017, showed: - Required in-service training for nurse's aides must: 1. Be sufficient to ensure the continuing competence of nurse aides, but must be no less than 12 hours per year; 2. Include dementia management training and resident abuse prevention training; 3. Address areas of weakness as determined in nurse aides' performance reviews and facility assessment and may address the special needs of residents to as determined by the facility staff; 4. For nurse aides providing services to individuals with cognitive impairments, also address the care of the cognitively…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-09-15 · tag F0570 — patternAssure the security of all personal funds of residents deposited with the facility.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain the surety bond (a purchased bond for the security of the residents' personal funds) for at least one and one half times the average monthly balance of the residents' personal funds for the last 12 consecutive months from September 2022 through August 2023. The facility census was 138. The facility did not provide a surety bond policy. Review on 09/13/23 of the residents' personal funds account for the last 12 consecutive months from September 2022 through August 2023 showed: - The facility's approved bond amount equaled $100,000.00; - The average monthly balance of the residents' personal funds equaled $97,043.77; - An average monthly balance of $97,043.77 rounded to the nearest thousand equaled $97,000.00, at one and one half times would equal the required bond amount of at least $145,500.00. During an interview on 09/13/23 at 4:06 P.M., the Business Office Manager (BOM) said the surety bond was not sufficient for the residents' personal funds. The surety bond had recently been increased from $50,000.00 to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-09-15 · tag F0809 — failed to serve meals on a reasonable schedule — patternEnsure meals and snacks are served at times in accordance with resident’s needs, preferences, and requests. Suitable and nourishing alternative meals and snacks must be provided for residents who want to eat at non-traditional times or outside of scheduled meal times.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff offered residents a bedtime snack (HS) for two residents (Resident #81 and #90) out of 27 sampled residents and seven residents (Resident #2, #,15, #23, #38, #58, #64, and #69) outside of the sample. This practice had the potential to affect all residents in the facility. The facility's census was 138. Review of the facility's policy titled, Snacks, not dated, showed the facility's meals were based on the natural awakening and snacks will be available throughout the day and staff will offer snacks at HS to all resident unless the resident could have nothing by mouth or the physician orders state otherwise. During a resident group interview on 09/14/23 at 2:00 P.M., Resident #2, #15, #23, #38, #58, #64, #69, #81, and #90 collectively said HS snacks were not offered by the staff. Sometimes there was a tray of sweet snacks at the nurses' stations, but not always. If a resident could physically get to the nurses' stations when there were snacks there, then that resident might get something, if not,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-09-15 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — patternMake sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program to control the fly population in the facility. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents in the facility. The facility census was 138. The facility did not provide a pest control policy. Observations on 09/12/23 at 12:20 P.M., 2:38 P.M., 09/12/23 and 4:38 P.M.; 09/13/23 at 7:59 A.M., and 1:22 P.M.; and 09/14/23 at 8:02 A.M., and 10:52 A.M., of the Oak Hall shower, located across from the biohazard room, showed: - Several flies flew outside the biohazard room door; - Two flies on a shower curtain that lay on the floor located next to the shower stall; - Three flies on a shower chair located against the wall by the shower stall; - No fly control devices on Oak Hall. Observations on 09/12/23 at 2:36 P.M., and 4:38 P.M., of Oak Hall showed: - Three flies flew throughout the nurse's station; - Two flies on the nurse's station counter; - No fly control devices on Oak Hall. Observations on 09/12/23 at 2:36 P.M., 09/13/23 at 2:08 P.M., and 09/14/23 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-15 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a code status was consistently documented throughout the medical record for three residents (Resident #27, #82 and #115) out of 27 sampled residents. The facility census was 138. Review of the facility's policy titled, Advance Directives, not dated, showed: - Upon admission, every resident or resident representative is asked to determine code status; - Full Code - cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) (an emergency procedure consisting of chest compressions if the heart stops beating or the person stops breathing) performed when the resident experiences a catastrophic event such as cardiac/respiratory arrest or Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) (does not want CPR); - The resident's code status will be reviewed with the resident and/or the resident representative annually; - The resident has the right to change their code status at any time. 1. Review of Resident #27's medical record showed: - An admission date of [DATE]; - A hospice admission date of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-15 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable homelike environment. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents in the facility. The facility census was 138. Review of the facility's policy titled, Housekeeping, revised 03/30/19, showed: - Daily cleaning and supplying resident rooms, nursing stations, lounges, bathrooms, offices and any other areas assigned in accordance with standard procedures of the housekeeping department and in accordance with nursing home objectives; - Perform duties in assigned areas following established schedules and using prescribed methods; - Empty waste baskets; - Clean and wipe sinks; - Clean and dry toilets; - Dry and wet mop floors of rooms and offices; - Clean up urine where needed; - Wipe off chairs; - Perform any other tasks which may be assigned. Observations on 09/12/23 at 12:20 P.M., 2:38 P.M., and 4:38 P.M.; 09/13/23 at 7:59 A.M., and 1:22 P.M.; and 09/14/23 at 8:02 A.M., and 10:52 A.M., of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-15 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify the resident and/or the resident's representative in writing of a facility-initiated transfer when seven residents (Resident #14, #30, #45, #51, #63, #93 and #100) out of seven sampled residents transferred to the hospital. The facility census was 138. The facility did not provide a policy regarding hospital transfer notifications. 1. Review of Resident #14's medical record showed: - Resident transferred to the hospital for medical evaluation on 06/19/23 and readmitted to the facility on [DATE]; - Resident transferred to the hospital for medical evaluation on 07/29/23 and readmitted to the facility on [DATE]; - Resident transferred to the hospital for medical evaluation on 08/12/23 and readmitted to the facility on [DATE]; - No documentation of the written notifications to the resident and/or the resident's representative of the resident's transfers to the hospital on [DATE], 07/29/23, and 08/12/23. Review of Resident #30's medical record…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-15 · tag F0637 — isolatedAssess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete a significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS), a federal mandated assessment to be filled out by the facility staff, within 14 days of a resident's admission to hospice. This affected one resident (Resident #113) out of five sampled residents. The facility census was 138. The facility did not provide a MDS significant change policy. 1. Review of Resident #113's medical record showed the resident admitted to hospice on 05/19/23. Review of the resident's MDS assessments showed: - No significant change completed on or after 14 days of the resident's admission to hospice on 05/19/23; - The facility failed to complete and submit a significant change MDS assessment within 14 days after the resident admitted to hospice. During an interview 09/14/23 at 3:38 P.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) said she would expect a significant change to be completed within 14 days of when a resident was admitted to hospice. During an interview on 09/15/23 at 10:52 P.M., the MDS Coordinator said he/she would expect a significant change MDS…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-15 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) (a federally mandated preliminary assessment to determine whether a resident may have a mental illness or an intellectual disorder, to determine the level of care needed)for two resident (Resident #30 and #90) out of 27 sampled residents. The facility census was 138. The facility did not provide a policy for PASARR. 1. Review of Resident #30's medical record showed: - admitted to the facility on [DATE]; - Diagnoses of Asperger's syndrome (development disorder affecting socialization and communication), Alzheimer's disease (disease that destroys memory and other mental functions), and major depressive disorder (a mood disorder that causes persistent feelings of sadness and loss of interest); - No documentation of the Level I/II screening completed. During an interview on 09/14/23 at 4:07 P.M., the Social Services Director (SSD) said Resident #30 was transferred to the facility from another…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-15 · tag F0660 — isolatedPlan the resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and closed record review, the facility failed to ensure a discharge planning process was in place which addressed goals and needs and involved the resident and/or the resident's legal guardian and the interdisciplinary team (IDT) (a group of health care professionals from diverse fields who work in a coordinated effort toward a common goal for a resident) in developing a discharge plan for one resident (Resident #50) out of three sampled discharged residents. The facility census was 138. The facility did not provide a discharge planning policy. Review of Resident #50's closed medical record showed: - admission date of 07/26/23; - Diagnoses of hypertension (high blood pressure), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (a chronic inflammatory lung disease that causes obstructed airflow from the lungs), gastroesophageal reflux disease (stomach acid being forced back into the throat region), and osteoarthritis (a type of arthritis marked by cartilage deterioration of joints and vertebrae); - A family member as the legal guardian; - No documentation which addressed the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-15 · tag F0661 — isolatedEnsure necessary information is communicated to the resident, and receiving health care provider at the time of a planned discharge.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and closed record review, the facility failed to complete a comprehensive discharge summary for one resident (Resident #50) out of three sampled discharged residents. The facility census was 138. The facility did not provide a discharge summary policy. Review of Resident #50's closed medical record showed: - The resident discharged to another facility on 09/06/23; - No documentation of a comprehensive discharge summary. During an interview on 09/14/23 at 3:33 P.M., Medical Records said there should be a comprehensive discharge summary completed when a resident was discharged . The facility needed to be more proactive with the discharge summary process. During an interview on 09/14/23 at 3:47 P.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) said there should be a comprehensive discharge summary completed when a resident was discharged . The facility needed to do a better job with the discharge summary process. During an interview on 09/15/23 at 8:13 A.M., the Social Service Director (SSD) said a comprehensive discharge summary including a recapitulation of the resident's stay,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-15 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide resident care for activities of daily living (ADL's) when the residents did not receive a minimum of two showers per week for two residents (Resident #15 and #64) outside the sampled 27 residents. The facility census was 138. Review of the facility's policy, titled, Showers, dated January 2017, showed: - It is the policy to offer showers on a bi-weekly basis; - Requests for more frequent showers will be granted and addressed via the plan of care; - A shower schedule will be maintained at each nurse's station for each division reflecting days for each resident's shower to be completed. Review of the Resident Shower List showed: - Resident #15 scheduled for showers two times weekly on Tuesdays and Thursdays; - Resident #64 scheduled for showers two times weekly on Mondays and Thursdays; 1. Review of Resident #15's medical record showed: - An admission date of 02/09/23; - Diagnoses of hypertension (high blood pressure), and heart…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-15 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement an infection control program and a risk management process specific to Legionella disease (a serious type of pneumonia caused by Legionella bacteria) which had the potential to affect all residents, staff, and the public. The facility also failed to provide a safe and sanitary environment by failing to wash or sanitize hands prior to medication administration and disinfect the glucometer (a device used to measure blood sugar) per the manufacturer's instructions and failed to sanitize hands for six sampled residents (#10, #56, #59, #81, #97, and #117). The facility's census was 138. Review of the facility's policy titled, Water Management Program, undated, showed: - The water management team consists of owners, administration, the local water department, maintenance director, and a local plumbing service; - The water management program consists of the water management team, a detailed description of the water system in the facility, identification of areas that could encourage the growth and spread…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-15 · tag F0947 — failed to train nurse aides adequately — isolatedEnsure nurse aides have the skills they need to care for residents, and give nurse aides education in dementia care and abuse prevention.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide the required annual competencies of dementia care (care of a resident with an impaired ability to remember, think, or make decisions), and Abuse and Neglect of a resident to two Certified Nurse Aides (CNA) (CNA M and CNA N) out of two sampled CNAs, which had the potential to affect all residents. The facility's census was 138. The facility did not provide a policy in regards to the required annual competencies for CNAs. 1. Review of CNA M's in-service record showed: - A hire date of 12/18/18; - No documentation of the annual Dementia Care training provided for September 2022 through September 2023; - No documentation of the annual Abuse and Neglect training provided for September 2022 through September 2023. Review of CNA N's in-service record showed: - A hire date of 07/18/17; - No documentation of the annual Dementia Care training provided for September 2022 through September 2023; - No documentation of the annual Abuse and Neglect training provided for September 2022 through September 2023. During an interview…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to RILEY SPENCE SENIOR LIVING — 5 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 1.6 | +0.4 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 2.8 | +1.2 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 1.6 | -0.6 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 1 of 5 | 1.4 | -0.4 vs chain |
The other 4 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.6★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MID AMERICA HEALTH CARE LP | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 01/01/2007 |
| AMIN, IQBAL | Individual | CONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/03/2025 |
| SPENCE, DANIEL | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/03/2025 |
| RILEY, CHARLES | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/01/2007 |
| SPENCE, GREGORY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/01/2007 |
| RILEY SPENCE MANAGEMENT COMPANY, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/03/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 9 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $2.5M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 20% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in MO
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Missouri Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 265324. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-27, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.